Hello Paul,
Perhaps the answer to a question might illuminate your journey into the Superstitions.
Why is it that the earth sign that I mentioned references the third dot from the sun burst and the pattern continues on the second stone map.
On the second trail map the earth sign appears beside the third dot from the beginning of the trail and again beside the third dot from the top of the trail map.
The answer is the trail maps also give you a glimpse at a star chart with the earth shown in multiple positions across the heavens.
Yes the trail maps are full of stars.
Happy Trails,
Ben
Yellow Jackets
Re: Yellow Jackets
I've never been a student of astronomy Ben unfortunately. I'll have a lot of extra work to do to get up to speed enough to make sense of stars, planets and their positions in the sky - not to mention what their appearance looked like many years ago.
Not to say I won't look into it and try to figure it out, but sadly it's not an area I have ANY experience in whatsoever.
Not to say I won't look into it and try to figure it out, but sadly it's not an area I have ANY experience in whatsoever.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
klondike wrote:Mr. Ribaudo,
Having shared too much there is no real danger in going a bit further.
Determining what the ancients knew of the stars is a crap shoot. I would not underestimate the capacity of early man to understand far more than he is generally thought to have known.
Having stood in the other and seen the planets of our solar system engraved on a wall and knowing as dog pointed out, "my god it is full of stars" is the simple truth. Those engravings preceded the settlers of Calalus by thousands of years. How they knew what they knew is well beyound me but they did.
This is one of the reasons the destruction of Oz, while necessary, was a total tragedy. While photos have captured the pictures nothing replaces simply touching the stars.
Have a good life and goodbye Joe.
Ben
Ben,
Since there is nothing left in OZ, and you have photographs, what's the harm in posting them here. You have worked hard over the years to convince us that OZ exists, and that it is beyond comprehension, why let your efforts go to waste?
I, for one, would like to see what it once was. I assume the inside of a cave would not give away the sacred location. Seems like you did a tremendous amount of paddling your boat to end up.......nowhere.
Take care,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
I take it my last post fell on deaf ears.
Just wondering if you could tell us anything about a man named George M. B. Hawley? He's someone I ran across in my Tucson Artifact research.
Thanks in advance,
Joe
I take it my last post fell on deaf ears.
Just wondering if you could tell us anything about a man named George M. B. Hawley? He's someone I ran across in my Tucson Artifact research.
Thanks in advance,
Joe
Re: Yellow Jackets
Hello Paul,
1. Tycho Monolith
2. "My God it is full of Stars"
3. "Something is going to happen. Something wonderful".
Hello Mr. Ribaudo,
Sorry I did not see your post until today. I attend the air races up here and as you know we had a real tragedy yesterday. Great group of folks run the event. Mike and his people put on a great show. Don`t mean to brag but I believe it was 1998 that I was fortunate to be awarded the Chairman`s Award for some help I afforded the group. Klondike and Dog, well it really doesn`t matter. If you folks have a moment say a prayer for the folks involved in all of this. Really is a terrible time.
I think you understand why presenting conclusive proof of Oz on this public website would not be wise. Too many folks in the hunt.
The fellow you mention seem to suggest folks involved in all of this created the artifacts.
No disagreement the artifacts are a fraud. And since the folks there just enjoy pointing that out why disagree. We all have what is important to us.
Now that Oz is gone none of this really matters.
Have to run.
Ben
1. Tycho Monolith
2. "My God it is full of Stars"
3. "Something is going to happen. Something wonderful".
Hello Mr. Ribaudo,
Sorry I did not see your post until today. I attend the air races up here and as you know we had a real tragedy yesterday. Great group of folks run the event. Mike and his people put on a great show. Don`t mean to brag but I believe it was 1998 that I was fortunate to be awarded the Chairman`s Award for some help I afforded the group. Klondike and Dog, well it really doesn`t matter. If you folks have a moment say a prayer for the folks involved in all of this. Really is a terrible time.
I think you understand why presenting conclusive proof of Oz on this public website would not be wise. Too many folks in the hunt.
The fellow you mention seem to suggest folks involved in all of this created the artifacts.
No disagreement the artifacts are a fraud. And since the folks there just enjoy pointing that out why disagree. We all have what is important to us.
Now that Oz is gone none of this really matters.
Have to run.
Ben
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
Yes it was a tragic accident. There was another one in West Virginia today. The only casuality was the pilot who died in the fiery crash.
I'm not a big fan of those kinds of shows. I have seen enough violence and death to make me want to avoid places where it can get up close and personal.
It makes little sense that you can't offer a single picture to back up your claims for the existence of OZ. It's much like your current assertion that the artifacts were a hoax. If you remove the Tucson artifacts from your story........What's left? The only proof you have ever posted is of a tourist mine in Nevada, and a number of well known and visited locations in the Superstitions.
From your first post as, Late, you have slowly moved from possible, to implausible, to obvious fiction. You have said goodbye more times than "The Blind Bowman".
Having talked to you on the phone, I know you are a pleasant, highly intelligent man. You also came across as very sincere in your beliefs. We have many such people in the LDM community, and some of them simply don't have all their dogs in the harness. That being said, they are all made from the same mold as you are. Reality seems to be on a back burner.
We humor all of you, because you are entertaining and nice folks. If you can't provide some evidence of substance, it's all just another story, much like the Silverbell Rd. "dig".
Good luck,
Joe
Yes it was a tragic accident. There was another one in West Virginia today. The only casuality was the pilot who died in the fiery crash.
I'm not a big fan of those kinds of shows. I have seen enough violence and death to make me want to avoid places where it can get up close and personal.
It makes little sense that you can't offer a single picture to back up your claims for the existence of OZ. It's much like your current assertion that the artifacts were a hoax. If you remove the Tucson artifacts from your story........What's left? The only proof you have ever posted is of a tourist mine in Nevada, and a number of well known and visited locations in the Superstitions.
From your first post as, Late, you have slowly moved from possible, to implausible, to obvious fiction. You have said goodbye more times than "The Blind Bowman".
Having talked to you on the phone, I know you are a pleasant, highly intelligent man. You also came across as very sincere in your beliefs. We have many such people in the LDM community, and some of them simply don't have all their dogs in the harness. That being said, they are all made from the same mold as you are. Reality seems to be on a back burner.
We humor all of you, because you are entertaining and nice folks. If you can't provide some evidence of substance, it's all just another story, much like the Silverbell Rd. "dig".
Good luck,
Joe
Re: Yellow Jackets
Hello Mr. Ribaudo,
Circlestone, The Testamont Stone and surroundings encampments, The real and forged Calalus artifacts, the Stone Maps and hidden Star Charts therein. Seems that dismissing all of this as silliness is a bit premature.
But maybe you would be more comfortable considering the words of Sims Ely in the "Lost Dutchman Mine", pages 27 and 28.
"You are awake, and overhead the brightest constellations have begun to rise and take their way across the incomparable Arizona sky. Impressed by the beauty of the night and the silence, you become communicative."
"If you object that the evidence is circumstantial, let me say that, for most of us, evidence of the existence of the city of Calcutta is also circumstantial. We have not had direct experience of it, yet we believe it exists because the circumstantial evidence is convincing. So also with the Lost Dutchman".
What is significant in Mr. Ely`s comments is not only his reference to believing something you do not have direct knowledge of. What is important is the reference to the City of Calcutta as the ground. The city is the basis of the Lost Dutchman. But what has the city of Calcutta to do with the LDM. To understand this you have to observe the two words directly after Calcutta, is and also. Using letters from those two words along with the first three letters of Calcutta you have Calalus.
Calalus is the foundation of the LDM. The hidden statement is intentional.
Now so long Mr. Ribaudo and enjoy the valley of illusions that have been created for you. A lot of folks helped create the illusion.
Ben
Circlestone, The Testamont Stone and surroundings encampments, The real and forged Calalus artifacts, the Stone Maps and hidden Star Charts therein. Seems that dismissing all of this as silliness is a bit premature.
But maybe you would be more comfortable considering the words of Sims Ely in the "Lost Dutchman Mine", pages 27 and 28.
"You are awake, and overhead the brightest constellations have begun to rise and take their way across the incomparable Arizona sky. Impressed by the beauty of the night and the silence, you become communicative."
"If you object that the evidence is circumstantial, let me say that, for most of us, evidence of the existence of the city of Calcutta is also circumstantial. We have not had direct experience of it, yet we believe it exists because the circumstantial evidence is convincing. So also with the Lost Dutchman".
What is significant in Mr. Ely`s comments is not only his reference to believing something you do not have direct knowledge of. What is important is the reference to the City of Calcutta as the ground. The city is the basis of the Lost Dutchman. But what has the city of Calcutta to do with the LDM. To understand this you have to observe the two words directly after Calcutta, is and also. Using letters from those two words along with the first three letters of Calcutta you have Calalus.
Calalus is the foundation of the LDM. The hidden statement is intentional.
Now so long Mr. Ribaudo and enjoy the valley of illusions that have been created for you. A lot of folks helped create the illusion.
Ben
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
["You are awake, and overhead the brightest constellations have begun to rise and take their way across the incomparable Arizona sky. Impressed by the beauty of the night and the silence, you become communicative."
"If you object that the evidence is circumstantial, let me say that, for most of us, evidence of the existence of the city of Calcutta is also circumstantial. We have not had direct experience of it, yet we believe it exists because the circumstantial evidence is convincing. So also with the Lost Dutchman".
What is significant in Mr. Ely`s comments is not only his reference to believing something you do not have direct knowledge of. What is important is the reference to the City of Calcutta as the ground. The city is the basis of the Lost Dutchman. But what has the city of Calcutta to do with the LDM. To understand this you have to observe the two words directly after Calcutta, is and also. Using letters from those two words along with the first three letters of Calcutta you have Calalus.
Calalus is the foundation of the LDM. The hidden statement is intentional.]
Wow! What an imaginative stretch of meaning for a casual comparison statement by Ely. I can see now why you call your "sacred place" OZ. What's next, flying monkeys? Talk about living an illusion.
Even Simon Singh could not follow your convoluted logic. It's well beyond Quantum Cryptography. Using that logic(?) you could read any message into any book ever written.
___________________________________
"Recently I was in Downieville, California and came across a hardback book by a gentlemen named Sims Ely. The book and a number of letters from the Pheonix area were being sold at a yard sale by an elderly lady who was cleaning out her garage. Seems her husband had passed away recently. Her family was from the Pheonix area and the material had belonged to her husband. Anyway I bought the books and letters, for five dollars. I have read a bit of the book and have to admit it is quite good. Haven`t looked at the letters yet but they seem to be addressed to Mr. Ely.
I have prospected for gold in california for many years. Moved here 10 years ago from georgia. My grandad use to prospect a lot in the Dahlonega area of n georgia. Anyway we have our share of lost mines up here and i have never done much but just look for gold never lost mines. I am curious is Mr. Ely a reliable source and is the lost dutchman mine still being looked for.
Also is there any museum, etc., in the Pheonix area that might be interested in this material. I would be happy to donate it once I finish reading the material.
I just stumbled across this website today.
regards,
Late49er"
_________________________________
Your first post from Sat. Feb. 12, 2005, remains your most believable, and it was full of lies from start to finish. In truth, you have just gone downhill from there. Your last post is, pretty much, the cherry on top of the whole mess. It's been, pretty much, obvious that you have paid close attention to the posters on this forum, and used their information to "flesh out" your own fictional stories. That would include many of my own posts. That's always a mistake, because the information you plagiarize, makes it obvious to the original poster, that you are making up your story as you go along.
I have known it was an "illusion" almost from the start.
One last thing......Phoenix is not spelled "Pheonix".
Take care,
Joe
["You are awake, and overhead the brightest constellations have begun to rise and take their way across the incomparable Arizona sky. Impressed by the beauty of the night and the silence, you become communicative."
"If you object that the evidence is circumstantial, let me say that, for most of us, evidence of the existence of the city of Calcutta is also circumstantial. We have not had direct experience of it, yet we believe it exists because the circumstantial evidence is convincing. So also with the Lost Dutchman".
What is significant in Mr. Ely`s comments is not only his reference to believing something you do not have direct knowledge of. What is important is the reference to the City of Calcutta as the ground. The city is the basis of the Lost Dutchman. But what has the city of Calcutta to do with the LDM. To understand this you have to observe the two words directly after Calcutta, is and also. Using letters from those two words along with the first three letters of Calcutta you have Calalus.
Calalus is the foundation of the LDM. The hidden statement is intentional.]
Wow! What an imaginative stretch of meaning for a casual comparison statement by Ely. I can see now why you call your "sacred place" OZ. What's next, flying monkeys? Talk about living an illusion.
Even Simon Singh could not follow your convoluted logic. It's well beyond Quantum Cryptography. Using that logic(?) you could read any message into any book ever written.
___________________________________
"Recently I was in Downieville, California and came across a hardback book by a gentlemen named Sims Ely. The book and a number of letters from the Pheonix area were being sold at a yard sale by an elderly lady who was cleaning out her garage. Seems her husband had passed away recently. Her family was from the Pheonix area and the material had belonged to her husband. Anyway I bought the books and letters, for five dollars. I have read a bit of the book and have to admit it is quite good. Haven`t looked at the letters yet but they seem to be addressed to Mr. Ely.
I have prospected for gold in california for many years. Moved here 10 years ago from georgia. My grandad use to prospect a lot in the Dahlonega area of n georgia. Anyway we have our share of lost mines up here and i have never done much but just look for gold never lost mines. I am curious is Mr. Ely a reliable source and is the lost dutchman mine still being looked for.
Also is there any museum, etc., in the Pheonix area that might be interested in this material. I would be happy to donate it once I finish reading the material.
I just stumbled across this website today.
regards,
Late49er"
_________________________________
Your first post from Sat. Feb. 12, 2005, remains your most believable, and it was full of lies from start to finish. In truth, you have just gone downhill from there. Your last post is, pretty much, the cherry on top of the whole mess. It's been, pretty much, obvious that you have paid close attention to the posters on this forum, and used their information to "flesh out" your own fictional stories. That would include many of my own posts. That's always a mistake, because the information you plagiarize, makes it obvious to the original poster, that you are making up your story as you go along.
I have known it was an "illusion" almost from the start.
One last thing......Phoenix is not spelled "Pheonix".
Take care,
Joe
Re: Yellow Jackets
A big Dakota howdy to my friend Joe and to everyone reading the discussion,
I see that Ben has again bid us all adieu; as I no longer respond to his posts I won't address his continuing messages. I do have to grant that attempt to link Sims Ely's poetic reference to the beauty of a southwestern night sky to Calalus and the highly questionable artifacts as quite the leap though.
What I do not understand is the point of presenting such a far-fetched set of theories, apparently expecting to amass a following of true believers, without much of anything to support those theories. We see this fairly often in any discussion of the LDM, and very often when the Peralta stones are the topic. I would think the logic is flawed; if the desire is for widespread recognition, then it seems the logical contacts should be the news media or magazines at least. Why present detailed or highly suggestive hints to locate the lost city of Oz or the LDM to a group of self-confessed treasure hunters? This approach makes no sense to me at all. It is like broadcasting to everyone interested in valuable coins (including the not-so-honorable types) that you have a huge collection of extremely rare and valuable coins, and give the location as well as the fact that no one is guarding the collection. The only logical conclusion seems to be that the whole approach being used is not to help protect some ancient lost city or lost gold mine but to try to make fools of treasure hunters by getting them to go in search of totally false leads and false stories.
Unfortunately for those presenting these wild theories, treasure hunters as a group are a fairly intelligent bunch, with more than the usual level of historic knowledge; the number of true believers collected from treasure hunters has never been a large number. Ben seems to have no good excuse for failing to present even photos of the underground workings or caverns, which only helps to push his credibility even farther off the edge when it has never seemed to have been on solid ground.
So the score looks like treasure hunters 1, theorist 0 again. Ben has spun quite a fantastic tale in the many posts (and several threads) so I do hope he will choose to put it into book form, I think it would definitely sell well and who knows, may even attract a few true believers too. Don't expect to see many treasure hunters become believers however.
As an aside here Joe, the fact that Covey could not convince Dr Fell of the authenticity of those Calalus artifacts should help improve Fell's standing as one not willing to simply accept every and any sort of "evidence" that he sees. With that in mind, his books (with their flaws and errors) should not be dismissed as so much pap. I wish that I had found his work sooner, <while he was still alive> for I think he could have benefited by a few simple suggestions like the proper dictionaries for interpreting some inscriptions. Several new discoveries of inscriptions and artifacts since his passing would have been of interest to him too.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, and to Ben I hope you will reconsider your decision to leave us for you seem to enjoy the banter and despite our wide differences the discussions do tend to get us going back to the books which is always a good thing. I hope you all find the treasures that you seek.
Roy ~ Oroblanco
I see that Ben has again bid us all adieu; as I no longer respond to his posts I won't address his continuing messages. I do have to grant that attempt to link Sims Ely's poetic reference to the beauty of a southwestern night sky to Calalus and the highly questionable artifacts as quite the leap though.
What I do not understand is the point of presenting such a far-fetched set of theories, apparently expecting to amass a following of true believers, without much of anything to support those theories. We see this fairly often in any discussion of the LDM, and very often when the Peralta stones are the topic. I would think the logic is flawed; if the desire is for widespread recognition, then it seems the logical contacts should be the news media or magazines at least. Why present detailed or highly suggestive hints to locate the lost city of Oz or the LDM to a group of self-confessed treasure hunters? This approach makes no sense to me at all. It is like broadcasting to everyone interested in valuable coins (including the not-so-honorable types) that you have a huge collection of extremely rare and valuable coins, and give the location as well as the fact that no one is guarding the collection. The only logical conclusion seems to be that the whole approach being used is not to help protect some ancient lost city or lost gold mine but to try to make fools of treasure hunters by getting them to go in search of totally false leads and false stories.
Unfortunately for those presenting these wild theories, treasure hunters as a group are a fairly intelligent bunch, with more than the usual level of historic knowledge; the number of true believers collected from treasure hunters has never been a large number. Ben seems to have no good excuse for failing to present even photos of the underground workings or caverns, which only helps to push his credibility even farther off the edge when it has never seemed to have been on solid ground.
So the score looks like treasure hunters 1, theorist 0 again. Ben has spun quite a fantastic tale in the many posts (and several threads) so I do hope he will choose to put it into book form, I think it would definitely sell well and who knows, may even attract a few true believers too. Don't expect to see many treasure hunters become believers however.
As an aside here Joe, the fact that Covey could not convince Dr Fell of the authenticity of those Calalus artifacts should help improve Fell's standing as one not willing to simply accept every and any sort of "evidence" that he sees. With that in mind, his books (with their flaws and errors) should not be dismissed as so much pap. I wish that I had found his work sooner, <while he was still alive> for I think he could have benefited by a few simple suggestions like the proper dictionaries for interpreting some inscriptions. Several new discoveries of inscriptions and artifacts since his passing would have been of interest to him too.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, and to Ben I hope you will reconsider your decision to leave us for you seem to enjoy the banter and despite our wide differences the discussions do tend to get us going back to the books which is always a good thing. I hope you all find the treasures that you seek.
Roy ~ Oroblanco
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Roy,
Logic?......Logic? He don't got to show no stinken logic
What you see is what you get.
Take care,
Joe
Logic?......Logic? He don't got to show no stinken logic
What you see is what you get.
Take care,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
"Just wondering if you could tell us anything about a man named George M. B. Hawley? He's someone I ran across in my Tucson Artifact research."
"The fellow you mention seem to suggest folks involved in all of this created the artifacts.
No disagreement the artifacts are a fraud. And since the folks there just enjoy pointing that out why disagree. We all have what is important to us."
"Circlestone, The Testamont Stone and surroundings encampments, The real and forged Calalus artifacts, the Stone Maps and hidden Star Charts therein. Seems that dismissing all of this as silliness is a bit premature."
It was interesting to see your reaction to my mentioning George Hawley. Suddenly we have "The real and forged Calalus artifacts". You really only have that kind of a rebuttal for the serious problems with the Tucson Artifacts that Hawley has pointed out.
Anyone who has done any (semi-serious) research into the Calalus Artifacts, will be laughing at your lame excuse as to why the factual evidence points to fraud.
Funny how that has been your MO here as well.
Good luck,
Joe Ribaudo
"Just wondering if you could tell us anything about a man named George M. B. Hawley? He's someone I ran across in my Tucson Artifact research."
"The fellow you mention seem to suggest folks involved in all of this created the artifacts.
No disagreement the artifacts are a fraud. And since the folks there just enjoy pointing that out why disagree. We all have what is important to us."
"Circlestone, The Testamont Stone and surroundings encampments, The real and forged Calalus artifacts, the Stone Maps and hidden Star Charts therein. Seems that dismissing all of this as silliness is a bit premature."
It was interesting to see your reaction to my mentioning George Hawley. Suddenly we have "The real and forged Calalus artifacts". You really only have that kind of a rebuttal for the serious problems with the Tucson Artifacts that Hawley has pointed out.
Anyone who has done any (semi-serious) research into the Calalus Artifacts, will be laughing at your lame excuse as to why the factual evidence points to fraud.
Funny how that has been your MO here as well.
Good luck,
Joe Ribaudo
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
One last thing, as I may be talking to myself here.
Are you aware of the connection between Jack and Bernice McGee and the Bent's?
Take care,
Joe Ribaudo
One last thing, as I may be talking to myself here.
Are you aware of the connection between Jack and Bernice McGee and the Bent's?
Take care,
Joe Ribaudo
Re: Yellow Jackets
Cactusjumper wrote
I am not aware of the linkage between the McGees and the Bents, if you could expand on this a bit I would appreciate it.
Side note here but there are some odd synchronicities in life; your personal online nickname of "cactusjumper" is the same nickname as my best friend here, and his last name just happens to be McGee. Coincidences? I think so.
I bet some were expecting me to say NOT! (heh heh) But interesting anyway. There are a bunch more but that would be really drifting very far off topic, and not of interest to anyone.
I look forward to your reply, hope all is well with you and yours, and wish you a very pleasant evening - and that goes for all who read our discussions.
Roy
You are not amigo, though we may not all be piping in very often, some of us are still reading the discussion, or lack of it. I have not been replying to Ben's posts as it is clearly quite distressing to him when I do, and I don't care to be causing anyone any distress; we get enough stress in life as it is.I may be talking to myself here.
I am not aware of the linkage between the McGees and the Bents, if you could expand on this a bit I would appreciate it.
Side note here but there are some odd synchronicities in life; your personal online nickname of "cactusjumper" is the same nickname as my best friend here, and his last name just happens to be McGee. Coincidences? I think so.
I bet some were expecting me to say NOT! (heh heh) But interesting anyway. There are a bunch more but that would be really drifting very far off topic, and not of interest to anyone.I look forward to your reply, hope all is well with you and yours, and wish you a very pleasant evening - and that goes for all who read our discussions.
Roy
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Roy,
It may be that those of higher than normal intelligence, as well as higher levels of education, find it insulting that they are unable to convince idiots, like me, that every wild story they tell isn't the gospel truth.
I can't help but wonder if they haven't convinced themselves, over the years, that it is all true. There are many instances for this kind of self-deception. On the other hand, it may be the belief that "Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur". (The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived.)
Whatever the case, Ben remains entertaining, while bb has just become tiresome. My old friend Brad is another such case. He became convinced of many things that had no basis in reality. Many of those crazy theories can be found on this Forum. Do a search for "Lazarus". Highly intelligent man who just may have fried his brain beyond repair.
My moniker (Cactus Jumper) comes from my CB handle and is over 40 years old. I had purchased a chrome yellow Ford 4X4 pickup, and did a lot of desert off-road camping and prospecting.
I will get back the the McGee's next week. In the meantime, you can find them on Garry's site:
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.anc ... eralta.htm
Take care,
Joe
It may be that those of higher than normal intelligence, as well as higher levels of education, find it insulting that they are unable to convince idiots, like me, that every wild story they tell isn't the gospel truth.
I can't help but wonder if they haven't convinced themselves, over the years, that it is all true. There are many instances for this kind of self-deception. On the other hand, it may be the belief that "Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur". (The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived.)
Whatever the case, Ben remains entertaining, while bb has just become tiresome. My old friend Brad is another such case. He became convinced of many things that had no basis in reality. Many of those crazy theories can be found on this Forum. Do a search for "Lazarus". Highly intelligent man who just may have fried his brain beyond repair.
My moniker (Cactus Jumper) comes from my CB handle and is over 40 years old. I had purchased a chrome yellow Ford 4X4 pickup, and did a lot of desert off-road camping and prospecting.
I will get back the the McGee's next week. In the meantime, you can find them on Garry's site:
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.anc ... eralta.htm
Take care,
Joe
Re: Yellow Jackets
Not speaking about baseball (which was actually what this thread was originally about) My draft will be Saturday at the rendezvous, Hope my assistants do as I say......
Looking forward to the fall season, We went out in an ugly fashion last spring. First I agreed to delay the game rather than have the other team forfeit.......then the umpire decided to call the game early instead of allowing us the 6 innings he told me. I saved my best pitcher to finish out and we had the game in the bag with 2 innings left and only 1 run down. I can only let my guy go 3 innings a game, so I left my starter in to finish strong. Xavier gott a nice goose egg for us to start the fourth.......Cest La Vie
Looking forward to the fall season, We went out in an ugly fashion last spring. First I agreed to delay the game rather than have the other team forfeit.......then the umpire decided to call the game early instead of allowing us the 6 innings he told me. I saved my best pitcher to finish out and we had the game in the bag with 2 innings left and only 1 run down. I can only let my guy go 3 innings a game, so I left my starter in to finish strong. Xavier gott a nice goose egg for us to start the fourth.......Cest La Vie
"Be Careful of What You Do Before A Lie Becomes The Truth"
Re: Yellow Jackets
Mr. Ribaudo,
If you really want to understand the Tucson Artifacts you will have to acquaint yourself with Bent`s work, "The Tucson Artifacts". This is the only work that gets to the level of detail that can create in you a sense of awe and wonder surrounding the discoveries, and make it possible for you to turn on for the lack of a better word the bullshit detector when encountering other authors.
Simply put Bent is to the Tucson Artifacts what Ely and Bark are to the LDM. He is the foundation. In reading some of your arguments it seems you are really not acquainted with Bent`s work and are simply parroting the opinion of folks who themselves are not familiar with what went on.
Let`s first start with the character issue. You seem to be totally confused about Mr. Bent and his role in all of this. Let`s turn to Bent`s own words on page 80.
"When the discovery was first made forty years ago, as a young man, I wished for nothing but the establishment of ancient origin. This, I believed, would result in fame and some limited degree of fortune. Now that many years have slipped by, my burning desire is that the artifacts will be identified for what they are and their place established in history, if this is where they belong."
At the end of the day Bent was ultimately interested in one thing and one thing only, the truth. But to see this you will have to read his book, and come to understand it. You are now pretty much lost in the forest and seem to be trying to understand the artifacts in the same way one would understand the Superstitions if the only information they had was the Holmes account.
This can be seen in you adulation of Haury and you opinion that Haury proved the artifacts were planted. Haury only played a small role in the artifacts discovery. Haury was involved in the discovery of artifact 29 and artifact 30. These artifacts were discovered on February 9 and February 11, 1928. These two artifacts were discovered a full 3+years after the initial discoveries in 09/13/24. At the time Haury was a graduate student and while his observations bear consideration others involved in the dig should also be given well a lot more weight. Dr. Butler, Dean of the College of Mines and Engineering at the University of Arizona stated, "that there was no evidence of the earth having been disturbed. He further states that "Planting"was an impossibility. Bent page 73, "The Tucson Artifacts".
Furthermore you should heed the words of Covey on page 117 of his work Calalus.
"Not until 1956 did Emil Haury, who was a graduate student at the university in 1930, publicly disclose his "planting" theory, which it is surprising he still would have maintained after his own experience with caliche at Snaketown in the 30`s. He had the grace to admit in January 1957 that he had no specialized knowledge of caliche formation and that the whole problem ouught to be refererred to a competent geologist".
Likewise Covey makes an even more importent observation on page 118.
" Bent pointed out that the inch hole extension of artifact 31 could have made in the digging, also that Cummings raised no question about the other thirty articles unearthed"
What we have is a young graduate student making a singular observation about one artifact. When no one ever raised a concern about the other thirty articles.
So Mr. Ribaudo do you consider Mr. Haury`s role in all of this significant? Haury is simply a footnote in all of this and not a very big one. Let's see if you really have ever read Mr. Bent`s work. On page 70 are pictures of artifacts that bear directly on all of this. Can you describe what is on that page?
I suspect if you ever read Bent`s accounts you can see how many subsequent authors are simply lost in the woods. To understand why the letter attributed to Mrs. Manier is simply wrong you have to dig down and understand the assay reports on several of the artifacts provided by Pellgrin and Son of Tucson. You have to understand the politics in all of this and you have to come to grips with the awe and mystery of all of this. I remember the first time I saw the artifacts and knowing their true history all I could do was well cry. Those artifacts are the heart and soul of a people. As Ely puts it you have to be communicative.
One final point. If you ever read Bent`s work pay particular attention to page 278 of, "The Tucson Artifacts", where Bent talks about the possibility of previous discoveries at the site. Bent states.
"A story was related to us(Dr.Cummings) by one of the older Mexican laborers employed in our work in 1925 that two saws had been found at that spot(Approximately 40 years before). On careful questioning of this man, we ascertained that he was using the words saws" but actually describing two swords."
Mr. Bent`s work should be required reading for anyone interested in the Tucson Artifacts. He was a fine man, much better than many of his critics, and was an honorable man his entire life. Understanding Bent opens gates. Gates that were closed for many, many years by others.
Now that Oz has been destroyed Mr. Ribaudo you perhaps should open that gate. Who knows once you go through that gate Mr. Haury`s efforts in Snaketown will be understood and appreciated at a whole different level. All it takes is to go down a bit more and a whole world opens up.
Now I really have to go and you might want to consider spending less time berating folks and spend more time trying to find the truth. I suspect you will be far happier for it.
Take Care and may the stars keep you safe.
If you really want to understand the Tucson Artifacts you will have to acquaint yourself with Bent`s work, "The Tucson Artifacts". This is the only work that gets to the level of detail that can create in you a sense of awe and wonder surrounding the discoveries, and make it possible for you to turn on for the lack of a better word the bullshit detector when encountering other authors.
Simply put Bent is to the Tucson Artifacts what Ely and Bark are to the LDM. He is the foundation. In reading some of your arguments it seems you are really not acquainted with Bent`s work and are simply parroting the opinion of folks who themselves are not familiar with what went on.
Let`s first start with the character issue. You seem to be totally confused about Mr. Bent and his role in all of this. Let`s turn to Bent`s own words on page 80.
"When the discovery was first made forty years ago, as a young man, I wished for nothing but the establishment of ancient origin. This, I believed, would result in fame and some limited degree of fortune. Now that many years have slipped by, my burning desire is that the artifacts will be identified for what they are and their place established in history, if this is where they belong."
At the end of the day Bent was ultimately interested in one thing and one thing only, the truth. But to see this you will have to read his book, and come to understand it. You are now pretty much lost in the forest and seem to be trying to understand the artifacts in the same way one would understand the Superstitions if the only information they had was the Holmes account.
This can be seen in you adulation of Haury and you opinion that Haury proved the artifacts were planted. Haury only played a small role in the artifacts discovery. Haury was involved in the discovery of artifact 29 and artifact 30. These artifacts were discovered on February 9 and February 11, 1928. These two artifacts were discovered a full 3+years after the initial discoveries in 09/13/24. At the time Haury was a graduate student and while his observations bear consideration others involved in the dig should also be given well a lot more weight. Dr. Butler, Dean of the College of Mines and Engineering at the University of Arizona stated, "that there was no evidence of the earth having been disturbed. He further states that "Planting"was an impossibility. Bent page 73, "The Tucson Artifacts".
Furthermore you should heed the words of Covey on page 117 of his work Calalus.
"Not until 1956 did Emil Haury, who was a graduate student at the university in 1930, publicly disclose his "planting" theory, which it is surprising he still would have maintained after his own experience with caliche at Snaketown in the 30`s. He had the grace to admit in January 1957 that he had no specialized knowledge of caliche formation and that the whole problem ouught to be refererred to a competent geologist".
Likewise Covey makes an even more importent observation on page 118.
" Bent pointed out that the inch hole extension of artifact 31 could have made in the digging, also that Cummings raised no question about the other thirty articles unearthed"
What we have is a young graduate student making a singular observation about one artifact. When no one ever raised a concern about the other thirty articles.
So Mr. Ribaudo do you consider Mr. Haury`s role in all of this significant? Haury is simply a footnote in all of this and not a very big one. Let's see if you really have ever read Mr. Bent`s work. On page 70 are pictures of artifacts that bear directly on all of this. Can you describe what is on that page?
I suspect if you ever read Bent`s accounts you can see how many subsequent authors are simply lost in the woods. To understand why the letter attributed to Mrs. Manier is simply wrong you have to dig down and understand the assay reports on several of the artifacts provided by Pellgrin and Son of Tucson. You have to understand the politics in all of this and you have to come to grips with the awe and mystery of all of this. I remember the first time I saw the artifacts and knowing their true history all I could do was well cry. Those artifacts are the heart and soul of a people. As Ely puts it you have to be communicative.
One final point. If you ever read Bent`s work pay particular attention to page 278 of, "The Tucson Artifacts", where Bent talks about the possibility of previous discoveries at the site. Bent states.
"A story was related to us(Dr.Cummings) by one of the older Mexican laborers employed in our work in 1925 that two saws had been found at that spot(Approximately 40 years before). On careful questioning of this man, we ascertained that he was using the words saws" but actually describing two swords."
Mr. Bent`s work should be required reading for anyone interested in the Tucson Artifacts. He was a fine man, much better than many of his critics, and was an honorable man his entire life. Understanding Bent opens gates. Gates that were closed for many, many years by others.
Now that Oz has been destroyed Mr. Ribaudo you perhaps should open that gate. Who knows once you go through that gate Mr. Haury`s efforts in Snaketown will be understood and appreciated at a whole different level. All it takes is to go down a bit more and a whole world opens up.
Now I really have to go and you might want to consider spending less time berating folks and spend more time trying to find the truth. I suspect you will be far happier for it.
Take Care and may the stars keep you safe.
Re: Yellow Jackets
Hello Mr. Ribaudo,
One final thought.
You should never underestimate the use of hidden meanings in books or other forms of communication. Do you remember what the main city of Calalus was?
Let`s assume the major city was Rhoda. Rhoda comes from an ancient greek word meaning the rose flower.
For years we have posted that we care for a rose garden in the Roger`s Canyon area. That rose garden in actuality is a holy place. A holy place of Rhoda.
Klondike
One final thought.
You should never underestimate the use of hidden meanings in books or other forms of communication. Do you remember what the main city of Calalus was?
Let`s assume the major city was Rhoda. Rhoda comes from an ancient greek word meaning the rose flower.
For years we have posted that we care for a rose garden in the Roger`s Canyon area. That rose garden in actuality is a holy place. A holy place of Rhoda.
Klondike
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
Believe I will address your last post first, as it's much shorter.
"You should never underestimate the use of hidden meanings in books or other forms of communication. Do you remember what the main city of Calalus was?
Let`s assume the major city was Rhoda. Rhoda comes from an ancient greek word meaning the rose flower.
For years we have posted that we care for a rose garden in the Roger`s Canyon area. That rose garden in actuality is a holy place. A holy place of Rhoda."
Let me see if I understand you correctly.
First, you ask us to believe the conclusions and work of Bent, over the opinion of someone like professor Haury, who Bent liked to call "Prof. of Prevarication". He also described his work at Snaketown in this way, "...Haury piddled around at Snaketown...".
From your previous post, I see that you hold professor Haury in the same esteem as Bent did. You never address the evidence against the Tucson Artifacts, just the personalities. Interesting, as that is also how you treat any disagreements with your story here.
I know what Professor Haury's qualifications are for his opinions. I don't believe you have ever enumerated Mr. Bents.
Now you ask us to disregard the opinion's of Mr. Bent and Professor Covey, and move the location of Rhoda from the ridge above the dig on Bent's homestead, all the way to Roger's Canyon in the Superstitions. I can see your adulation of Bent's qualifications in your writing's, but fail to see the evidence for any expertise in archaeology in Bent or yourself. The fact that you are a lawyer, and he was one, will not really fill the bill.
You are wrong about what Bent wanted out of the Tucson Artifacts when he first got involved. From the start, he wanted "fame and fortune", his words not mine. I'm surprised that you did not know that fact.
Don't imagine that you know the extent of my knowledge on this matter. You assume too much. I have been researching the subject for a number of years now.
What evidence do you find so compelling in Bent's Manuscript?
Thanks for your reply,
Joe
Believe I will address your last post first, as it's much shorter.
"You should never underestimate the use of hidden meanings in books or other forms of communication. Do you remember what the main city of Calalus was?
Let`s assume the major city was Rhoda. Rhoda comes from an ancient greek word meaning the rose flower.
For years we have posted that we care for a rose garden in the Roger`s Canyon area. That rose garden in actuality is a holy place. A holy place of Rhoda."
Let me see if I understand you correctly.
First, you ask us to believe the conclusions and work of Bent, over the opinion of someone like professor Haury, who Bent liked to call "Prof. of Prevarication". He also described his work at Snaketown in this way, "...Haury piddled around at Snaketown...".
From your previous post, I see that you hold professor Haury in the same esteem as Bent did. You never address the evidence against the Tucson Artifacts, just the personalities. Interesting, as that is also how you treat any disagreements with your story here.
I know what Professor Haury's qualifications are for his opinions. I don't believe you have ever enumerated Mr. Bents.
Now you ask us to disregard the opinion's of Mr. Bent and Professor Covey, and move the location of Rhoda from the ridge above the dig on Bent's homestead, all the way to Roger's Canyon in the Superstitions. I can see your adulation of Bent's qualifications in your writing's, but fail to see the evidence for any expertise in archaeology in Bent or yourself. The fact that you are a lawyer, and he was one, will not really fill the bill.
You are wrong about what Bent wanted out of the Tucson Artifacts when he first got involved. From the start, he wanted "fame and fortune", his words not mine. I'm surprised that you did not know that fact.
Don't imagine that you know the extent of my knowledge on this matter. You assume too much. I have been researching the subject for a number of years now.
What evidence do you find so compelling in Bent's Manuscript?
Thanks for your reply,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
One other thing......Rhoda actually means "Rose" (female name) or "from Rhodes".
Take care,
Joe
One other thing......Rhoda actually means "Rose" (female name) or "from Rhodes".
Take care,
Joe
-
pippinwhitepaws
- Expert
- Posts: 831
- Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:30 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
"First, you ask us to believe the conclusions and work of Bent, over the opinion of someone like professor Haury, who Bent liked to call "Prof. of Prevarication". He also described his work at Snaketown in this way, "...Haury piddled around at Snaketown..."."
well..everyone has their closet full of skeletons.
i lost my job in jerome..when i approached the hopi tribe to come fetch the skull on display in the mine museum...seems this poor fellow was found by haury in the ancient salt mine in camp verde...the mine collapsed...the sinagua person was preserved intact...so haury flays the guy..sending parts all over the place..no record of the even other than a one line mention in a odd letter found in the jerome archives...
so while i have no idea of this conversation...or believe i need to invest the time to come up to speed...haury was no saint...even if he did establish southwest archeology an the anthropology department at U.of A.
take care.
well..everyone has their closet full of skeletons.
i lost my job in jerome..when i approached the hopi tribe to come fetch the skull on display in the mine museum...seems this poor fellow was found by haury in the ancient salt mine in camp verde...the mine collapsed...the sinagua person was preserved intact...so haury flays the guy..sending parts all over the place..no record of the even other than a one line mention in a odd letter found in the jerome archives...
so while i have no idea of this conversation...or believe i need to invest the time to come up to speed...haury was no saint...even if he did establish southwest archeology an the anthropology department at U.of A.
take care.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
pip,
I have no doubts that Professor Haury made some blunders in his long career. In that process he may (probably) have made some morally questionable decisions dealing with Native American remains and artifacts. There are few saints in the cutthroat world of archaeology. You are only as good as your last find.
Screw that up, and your peers will flay you.......alive. Few will hesitate to elevate themselves by lowering your stature in the field.......that applies to almost any professional endeavor. Others, apparently like you, will try to do the right/moral thing even though it will cost them their job.
Speaking of that, I hope you will find another position quickly. It's a bad time to be out of a job.
IMHO, the evidence against the authenticity of the Tucson Artifacts is prolific and convincing. The question becomes, have those who are proponents of the artifacts produced sufficient evidence to support the authenticity of the items?
Having studied both sides of the debate, it's an easy answer for me......NO! It's true that I am not qualified to give such an opinion but my qualifications, as far as I know, are at least as good as Bent's and Ben Davis'.
Most of the arguments (pro and con) are easily found on the Internet. After looking into the subject, I'm fairly certain that you will agree with what I have stated here. Needless to say, I have pursued the question much farther than the Internet.
Take care,
Joe
I have no doubts that Professor Haury made some blunders in his long career. In that process he may (probably) have made some morally questionable decisions dealing with Native American remains and artifacts. There are few saints in the cutthroat world of archaeology. You are only as good as your last find.
Screw that up, and your peers will flay you.......alive. Few will hesitate to elevate themselves by lowering your stature in the field.......that applies to almost any professional endeavor. Others, apparently like you, will try to do the right/moral thing even though it will cost them their job.
Speaking of that, I hope you will find another position quickly. It's a bad time to be out of a job.
IMHO, the evidence against the authenticity of the Tucson Artifacts is prolific and convincing. The question becomes, have those who are proponents of the artifacts produced sufficient evidence to support the authenticity of the items?
Having studied both sides of the debate, it's an easy answer for me......NO! It's true that I am not qualified to give such an opinion but my qualifications, as far as I know, are at least as good as Bent's and Ben Davis'.
Most of the arguments (pro and con) are easily found on the Internet. After looking into the subject, I'm fairly certain that you will agree with what I have stated here. Needless to say, I have pursued the question much farther than the Internet.
Take care,
Joe
Re: Yellow Jackets
Mr. Ribaudo,
From your silence I can only assume you have not read Mr. Bent`s book therefore you have no real first hand knowledge of the Tucson Artifacts or the events surrounding the dig. Therefore your ability is limited in seperating the truth from fiction.
First off saying there is a holy place of Rhoda in the Roger`s Canyon area is not to say Rhoda is there. Much the same as saying there is a Catholic shrine in Naples does not mean the Catholic church is based in Naples. What is in Roger`s Canyon is special to a lot of folks ancient and present.
It seems you find some signifance in the difference between rose and rose flower. Good for you.
Actually Covey changed his mine later as to the location of Rhoda. He is still wrong but so what.
Unless you take the time to research primary source material you will never know what Mr. Bent was interested in. If you bother to you will find this was ultimately about finding the truth. Mr. Bent was a fine, fine gentleman. I would add some other folks were also you drug into all of this. Was I wrong about what Bent wanted out of all of this. Absolutely not. But you will have to do your homework to figure that out.
In terms of the Tucson Artifacts, Haury was a graduate student with limited involment in the dig. As far as the Tucson Artifacts go he was out of his league, which is not surprising, considering his age and education at the time. He dropped the ball and it is what it is. So do you believe one artifact was planted and the other 30 were not?
What is compelling about Bent`s work. His attention to detail. Detailing each step of the dig, his discussion of one artifact after the other, the pictures, the assays, did you know that one of the atifacts was made of Caliche? This particular artifact was very, very important but no one ever figured out why. Good, Good, Good. Bent` work will stand the test of time. Haury well there are a lot of other things that could be said but why bother. He was a young man and I am sure he did the best he could.
I will say Bent had the last laugh in all of this though. That is before his death he came to know the artifacts were real.
Klondike
From your silence I can only assume you have not read Mr. Bent`s book therefore you have no real first hand knowledge of the Tucson Artifacts or the events surrounding the dig. Therefore your ability is limited in seperating the truth from fiction.
First off saying there is a holy place of Rhoda in the Roger`s Canyon area is not to say Rhoda is there. Much the same as saying there is a Catholic shrine in Naples does not mean the Catholic church is based in Naples. What is in Roger`s Canyon is special to a lot of folks ancient and present.
It seems you find some signifance in the difference between rose and rose flower. Good for you.
Actually Covey changed his mine later as to the location of Rhoda. He is still wrong but so what.
Unless you take the time to research primary source material you will never know what Mr. Bent was interested in. If you bother to you will find this was ultimately about finding the truth. Mr. Bent was a fine, fine gentleman. I would add some other folks were also you drug into all of this. Was I wrong about what Bent wanted out of all of this. Absolutely not. But you will have to do your homework to figure that out.
In terms of the Tucson Artifacts, Haury was a graduate student with limited involment in the dig. As far as the Tucson Artifacts go he was out of his league, which is not surprising, considering his age and education at the time. He dropped the ball and it is what it is. So do you believe one artifact was planted and the other 30 were not?
What is compelling about Bent`s work. His attention to detail. Detailing each step of the dig, his discussion of one artifact after the other, the pictures, the assays, did you know that one of the atifacts was made of Caliche? This particular artifact was very, very important but no one ever figured out why. Good, Good, Good. Bent` work will stand the test of time. Haury well there are a lot of other things that could be said but why bother. He was a young man and I am sure he did the best he could.
I will say Bent had the last laugh in all of this though. That is before his death he came to know the artifacts were real.
Klondike
Re: Yellow Jackets
Mr. Ribaudo,
Sometimes age is a terrible thing but it is also very funny also. the Comment about Covey`s mine should have been Covey`s mind.
Take Care,
Klondike
Sometimes age is a terrible thing but it is also very funny also. the Comment about Covey`s mine should have been Covey`s mind.
Take Care,
Klondike
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
It should be obvious to you, that I am using some original material, when I quote Bent himself.
If you want to teach me the truth, I am willing. If you want to discuss the Bent manuscript, I am willing. At this time, you need only copy your copy and send it to me. I will be happy to pay the cost of copying and shipping.
The fact that I am willing to pay the cost, should make it obvious to you that I am interested in the truth. Not many people out here would go to that trouble and expense, just to find the truth on something so controversial.
As you well know, Tom Jr. left instructions when he donated the manuscript that it could only be copied with his written permission. Since he has passed away, the manuscript is in a sort of limbo.
I have done my best to find both sides of the issue, just as I always do, and have done fairly well without the actual manuscript. If I quote Tom Sr., it's reliable source material from Bent himself.
If you would like to have an intelligent discussion of the manuscript with me, I will, of course, need the manuscript. I am still working on that myself and have high hopes that I will be successful. If you would care to shortcut that process, I would appreciate it.
In saying that I need that manuscript to determine the facts, I agree. I am doing the best I can with what I have been able to get. The ball's in your court, Sir.
Joe Ribaudo
It should be obvious to you, that I am using some original material, when I quote Bent himself.
If you want to teach me the truth, I am willing. If you want to discuss the Bent manuscript, I am willing. At this time, you need only copy your copy and send it to me. I will be happy to pay the cost of copying and shipping.
The fact that I am willing to pay the cost, should make it obvious to you that I am interested in the truth. Not many people out here would go to that trouble and expense, just to find the truth on something so controversial.
As you well know, Tom Jr. left instructions when he donated the manuscript that it could only be copied with his written permission. Since he has passed away, the manuscript is in a sort of limbo.
I have done my best to find both sides of the issue, just as I always do, and have done fairly well without the actual manuscript. If I quote Tom Sr., it's reliable source material from Bent himself.
If you would like to have an intelligent discussion of the manuscript with me, I will, of course, need the manuscript. I am still working on that myself and have high hopes that I will be successful. If you would care to shortcut that process, I would appreciate it.
In saying that I need that manuscript to determine the facts, I agree. I am doing the best I can with what I have been able to get. The ball's in your court, Sir.
Joe Ribaudo
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: Yellow Jackets
Ben,
In case you were considering copying the Bent Manuscript, don't bother. I have a reliable source who has told me it will not be a problem for them. At that point, if you want to discuss the Tucson Artifacts, from the Bent perspective, I will be happy to accomadate you.
Take care,
Joe
In case you were considering copying the Bent Manuscript, don't bother. I have a reliable source who has told me it will not be a problem for them. At that point, if you want to discuss the Tucson Artifacts, from the Bent perspective, I will be happy to accomadate you.
Take care,
Joe