waltz covered his mine??
covered mines
I think we all can believe that Waltz told Helen and Petrash that he covered his mine when he went back to look at it for the last time!! Even 2 idiot,s could remember that. He said someone had been messing around with it, the mine; SO he said he covered it up the best he could. He scolded the 2 idiot,s and told them that it is hard to find even when you knew where to look for it.. This leads me to beleive that it wasn,t a very big digging so, he could cover it to a certain degree. Remember he was an old man who I think had a bad ticker or heart. Undoughtly a doctor must have told him this due to his earlyer deal with his belonging,s and property. SO, I think he could not do much heavey labor due to his health. He did tell them it was hard to find even if you knew where to look. So he did manage to cover it good to a certain degree so it would blend with the surrounding terraine to a certain degree. When he was last there had to be after the soldiers and deering because they are the only ones that are known to have been there about that time period. Bill
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Sources
Bill,
Sorry, I can't add myself to your "we all". Have to consider the source for that story. While you say it was Julia Thomas, there is no evidence that she was the source. I have no faith in any "facts" that came from Waltz, through the Holmes family.
When someone like Sims Ely writes that the Waltz and Wieser familys
"settled in St. Louis" and that Jacob Waltz spoke English "with only a trace of accent.", I am inclined to believe he had some pretty good information.
His assessment of the character of Jacob Waltz is so far from what Holmes wrote, that one or the other is making up the story as they went along. Holmes has Waltz killing everyone, except of course, his daddy.
Waltz was not adverse to filing a legal claim on a gold mine. Why not just file the damn claim. End of story.
Respectfully,
Joe
Sorry, I can't add myself to your "we all". Have to consider the source for that story. While you say it was Julia Thomas, there is no evidence that she was the source. I have no faith in any "facts" that came from Waltz, through the Holmes family.
When someone like Sims Ely writes that the Waltz and Wieser familys
"settled in St. Louis" and that Jacob Waltz spoke English "with only a trace of accent.", I am inclined to believe he had some pretty good information.
His assessment of the character of Jacob Waltz is so far from what Holmes wrote, that one or the other is making up the story as they went along. Holmes has Waltz killing everyone, except of course, his daddy.
Waltz was not adverse to filing a legal claim on a gold mine. Why not just file the damn claim. End of story.
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Interesting Sidebar
Peter,
While this has nothing to do with the LDM, I thought you might find it interesting.
Around 1800 a fellow by the name of John Reed was born in Vergennes, VT (maybe). He may have been Mormon.
Now for the interesting part: John married Catherine Spangler Sept. 29, 1841. They had five children. Only a slightly interesting coincidence, I agree. The plot thickens a little here. It appears that Catherine died (?)sometime prior to 1849, because on Apr. 19, 1849 John married Catherine's sister, Matilda. They were the daughters of Samuel Spangler and Catharine Neff. John and Matilda had six children, the fifth being John Jr.
Just thought you might find this little piece of history interesting.
For those who don't know, there are many, many thousands of Spanglers in the history (especially Mormon) of the United States. One of them was named, John Reed Spangler.
Respectfully,
Joe
While this has nothing to do with the LDM, I thought you might find it interesting.
Around 1800 a fellow by the name of John Reed was born in Vergennes, VT (maybe). He may have been Mormon.
Now for the interesting part: John married Catherine Spangler Sept. 29, 1841. They had five children. Only a slightly interesting coincidence, I agree. The plot thickens a little here. It appears that Catherine died (?)sometime prior to 1849, because on Apr. 19, 1849 John married Catherine's sister, Matilda. They were the daughters of Samuel Spangler and Catharine Neff. John and Matilda had six children, the fifth being John Jr.
Just thought you might find this little piece of history interesting.
For those who don't know, there are many, many thousands of Spanglers in the history (especially Mormon) of the United States. One of them was named, John Reed Spangler.
Respectfully,
Joe
mine covering
OK JOW; I would have thought that YU of all people would know better than to take a bite of my rearend... First off I have never lowered myself to reading the holmes crap. I read some of holmes quotes and claimes about Waltz so that I never felt like I could put any faith in anything he ever said except about waltz calling him 'holmes' out in the middle of the street about following him. 2nd place the mine never belonged to Wiezer/waltz they just had the use of mining it'the mine' from Paralta. He sold the use of the mine to them BUT not the mine itself. WALTZ was an honest man and would not take advantage of the Paralta. The mine only became his when Paralta wrote the letter giving it to him when he 'Paralta' was dying. BY this time he was too old and not much interested in wealth or mining. NOW JOW; I beleive the book that I read stated that this was from Helen and the boy. I do not know where you got holmes in there? JOW are yu saying that my book is lying to me and your book is telling yu the truth?? Bill 
Joe
Interesting connection there.
Bill
>>First off I have never lowered myself to reading the holmes crap. <<
Why not? And why would you need to "lower" yourself to read it? I have read every scrap of info I can get on every aspect of the LDM. Whatever you might think of the Holmes', I believe they had some pretty solid info on Waltz's mine...but had a problem putting that info to work for them in the field.
Interesting connection there.
Bill
>>First off I have never lowered myself to reading the holmes crap. <<
Why not? And why would you need to "lower" yourself to read it? I have read every scrap of info I can get on every aspect of the LDM. Whatever you might think of the Holmes', I believe they had some pretty solid info on Waltz's mine...but had a problem putting that info to work for them in the field.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Waltzing Thru Minefields
Bill,
Having a conversation with you is like waltzing thru a minefield. Everything seem to be going fine, and then you put your foot down in the wrong place.
Since you have admited your shortcomings in reading the history of the LDM, you should not be offended if someone gives you more credit than you deserve.
When Waltz mentions to Thomas and Petrasch, how hard it is to find his mine, he says nothing about it being covered. He says: "Besides, the mine is in awful rough country, away from water-so rough that you can be right at the mine without seeing it."
Other than Mitchell's brief comment, "Waltz, now an old man and left alone, made his last trip to the mine in 1877. After filling his sacks with the fabulously rich ore the old Dutchman covered the entrance to the shaft with timbers and rocks, loaded down his burros and then headed down the canyon never to return.", he does not tell the elaborate tale that is now an entire winter's worth of work.
I believe that Brownie Holmes made up most of the Waltz information in his manuscript, and with good reason. That is not to say that he, along with all of the other searchers of his day, did not have some really good clues. I think all of that information came from Thomas and Petrasch. How many of the searchers, including the Holmes family, do you think were following close in their footsteps? If you were there, and did not have a clue where the "richest goldmine in the world" was, who would you follow? Your choices would be, the guy who everyone knew stole the gold from under a dead man's bed, and made up a story to explain how he came by that gold, or the gal who sold her business and hit the mountains?
Brownie started his own search from (almost) the exact same place that Julia Thomas started hers. After that start, he was completely lost and had no clue where to continue his search. That's why he covered the entire range. It is unlikely the LDM is covered, other than by nature.
If you are really a Dutch Hunter, you must read the Holmes yarn. It will tell you where to search and where you would be wasting your time. One of the very best clues that you can use to find the LDM, is knowing where it isn't. To get that information, you must search every inch of the Superstitions, or you might try reading the accounts of those who have spent decades finding out, "where it isn't".
I don't know if your book is lying to you or not. What is the name of "your book"?
Respectfully,
Joe
Having a conversation with you is like waltzing thru a minefield. Everything seem to be going fine, and then you put your foot down in the wrong place.
Since you have admited your shortcomings in reading the history of the LDM, you should not be offended if someone gives you more credit than you deserve.
When Waltz mentions to Thomas and Petrasch, how hard it is to find his mine, he says nothing about it being covered. He says: "Besides, the mine is in awful rough country, away from water-so rough that you can be right at the mine without seeing it."
Other than Mitchell's brief comment, "Waltz, now an old man and left alone, made his last trip to the mine in 1877. After filling his sacks with the fabulously rich ore the old Dutchman covered the entrance to the shaft with timbers and rocks, loaded down his burros and then headed down the canyon never to return.", he does not tell the elaborate tale that is now an entire winter's worth of work.
I believe that Brownie Holmes made up most of the Waltz information in his manuscript, and with good reason. That is not to say that he, along with all of the other searchers of his day, did not have some really good clues. I think all of that information came from Thomas and Petrasch. How many of the searchers, including the Holmes family, do you think were following close in their footsteps? If you were there, and did not have a clue where the "richest goldmine in the world" was, who would you follow? Your choices would be, the guy who everyone knew stole the gold from under a dead man's bed, and made up a story to explain how he came by that gold, or the gal who sold her business and hit the mountains?
Brownie started his own search from (almost) the exact same place that Julia Thomas started hers. After that start, he was completely lost and had no clue where to continue his search. That's why he covered the entire range. It is unlikely the LDM is covered, other than by nature.
If you are really a Dutch Hunter, you must read the Holmes yarn. It will tell you where to search and where you would be wasting your time. One of the very best clues that you can use to find the LDM, is knowing where it isn't.
To get that information, you must search every inch of the Superstitions, or you might try reading the accounts of those who have spent decades finding out, "where it isn't".I don't know if your book is lying to you or not. What is the name of "your book"?
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Family Ties
Peter,
Actually, the family ties get much more complicated than that. The John Reed line also crosses another famous Arizona pioneer family. One that is a member of this forum.
Holmes was only missing one piece of information, and had he possessed it.....
Respectfully,
Joe
Actually, the family ties get much more complicated than that. The John Reed line also crosses another famous Arizona pioneer family. One that is a member of this forum.
Holmes was only missing one piece of information, and had he possessed it.....
Respectfully,
Joe
covered mines
Pete; I honestly beleive that you could sum up what the HOLME,S knew about the Waltz mine was that it was somewhere in the sup,s. SO I would only read their story for the intertainment value only then lafe my rear end off over their greed. They got all they deserved out of it. I really don,t think they would have known what it was if they had found it. NOW JOW; I have to say that I have gotten my source from several tales and not just 1. JOW the most important thing is to know what yu have found when yu find it. YOU and Pete need to remember this little tid bit. I don,t have my book,s handy but I am sure that Helen and petrash stated the waltz said he did cover and clean up the mine after he found where someone had been messing with it. Now maybe they were wrong I do not know. BUT I put more faith in the 2 soldier,s story than most of the other,s. All for now Bill
-
Thomas Glover
- Part Timer
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Mon May 26, 2003 7:33 pm
- Contact:
One is reminded of a saying I have seen posted in a classroom: "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." Enough education philosophy.
My basic take on the Thomas/Petrash material is that most of what we have general access to came from Ely/Bark. Bark's manuscript was written for publication when he and his family were still hunting the mine. Ely used several sources for his book, but a main one was Bark's manuscript. Ely worked with an editor/ghost writter at William Morrow & Co. Ely's book was for Morrow a commercial venture. Thus, much of the material in Ely's book came via a manuscript altered for public consumption (Bark Manuscript) and then worked over by an editor and ghost writter to make a better story. There are other sources for Thomas and Petrasch information, but the most dominate ones (Ely and Bark) should be viewed with the above in mind.
Also, remember that Thomas seems to have started having visions soon after Waltz's death in 1891. Brownie says these included the Mine. Whether one takes Brownie's statement as accurate or not probably depends on one's point of view. However, it is generally accepted that Julia was selling maps to the mine that Waltz never drew, and that she would go into the mountains with groups for a price. Against this back ground "new" infomration (such as from visions) would not be out of place.
Just a thought or two....
My basic take on the Thomas/Petrash material is that most of what we have general access to came from Ely/Bark. Bark's manuscript was written for publication when he and his family were still hunting the mine. Ely used several sources for his book, but a main one was Bark's manuscript. Ely worked with an editor/ghost writter at William Morrow & Co. Ely's book was for Morrow a commercial venture. Thus, much of the material in Ely's book came via a manuscript altered for public consumption (Bark Manuscript) and then worked over by an editor and ghost writter to make a better story. There are other sources for Thomas and Petrasch information, but the most dominate ones (Ely and Bark) should be viewed with the above in mind.
Also, remember that Thomas seems to have started having visions soon after Waltz's death in 1891. Brownie says these included the Mine. Whether one takes Brownie's statement as accurate or not probably depends on one's point of view. However, it is generally accepted that Julia was selling maps to the mine that Waltz never drew, and that she would go into the mountains with groups for a price. Against this back ground "new" infomration (such as from visions) would not be out of place.
Just a thought or two....
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Pig Smart
Tom,
Pigs are pretty smart animals, so I don't really mind being thrown into their lot.
People read stories in many different ways, and with many different takes on what they have read. I have always been able to understand what I have read, on a different level than most people. Doesn't mean I am any better at understanding what others have written, just (like the pig) different.
As an example, many have come away from reading the Bark account of meeting Julia and Rhiney camped outside the main range, with the impression that there were three people in the party. I came away from that reading with a conviction that there were only the two of them.
I have read everything I could find on the Holmes family, and don't come to the same conclusions that you, or any number of people on this forum
have. I don't mind admitting when I am wrong, but it requires a logical arguement to change my mind.
I believe, from what I have read, that it is unlikely that Waltz would give Dick Holmes a waybill to hiis mine. I believe, from what I have read, that Dick Holmes stole the box of gold ore from under Waltz's deathbed.
If he did, it seems likely that Gideon Roberts was part of that theft.
Gideon Roberts, as you wrote, was ill and "died within months of Waltz's death". Since Dick Holmes was "family" and Gideon was close to death, anything was possible concerning Gideon's possible rationalization for that act. Even though Gideon seems to have been a bit of a Gypsy, that does not mean that he was ever a thief. He did, however, have family ties to Dick Holmes, and few of us understand that bond as it existed in those days. The fact that, at the age of ten, he killed one of the Indians responsible for killing his five year old brother is an indication of what kind of grit the man had even at such a precocious age. Good people have been known to do bad things.
Your point about Julia Thomas is well taken, however, much of the information also came from Rhiney and matched the early story from Julia. Both Bark and Ely mention this fact. Is there somewhere in the Bark Manuscript or Ely's book where they mention Dick Holmes presense at Waltz's death? The missing gold is mentioned, without naming a perp'.
Respectfully,
Joe
Pigs are pretty smart animals, so I don't really mind being thrown into their lot.
People read stories in many different ways, and with many different takes on what they have read. I have always been able to understand what I have read, on a different level than most people. Doesn't mean I am any better at understanding what others have written, just (like the pig) different.
As an example, many have come away from reading the Bark account of meeting Julia and Rhiney camped outside the main range, with the impression that there were three people in the party. I came away from that reading with a conviction that there were only the two of them.
I have read everything I could find on the Holmes family, and don't come to the same conclusions that you, or any number of people on this forum
have. I don't mind admitting when I am wrong, but it requires a logical arguement to change my mind.
I believe, from what I have read, that it is unlikely that Waltz would give Dick Holmes a waybill to hiis mine. I believe, from what I have read, that Dick Holmes stole the box of gold ore from under Waltz's deathbed.
If he did, it seems likely that Gideon Roberts was part of that theft.
Gideon Roberts, as you wrote, was ill and "died within months of Waltz's death". Since Dick Holmes was "family" and Gideon was close to death, anything was possible concerning Gideon's possible rationalization for that act. Even though Gideon seems to have been a bit of a Gypsy, that does not mean that he was ever a thief. He did, however, have family ties to Dick Holmes, and few of us understand that bond as it existed in those days. The fact that, at the age of ten, he killed one of the Indians responsible for killing his five year old brother is an indication of what kind of grit the man had even at such a precocious age. Good people have been known to do bad things.
Your point about Julia Thomas is well taken, however, much of the information also came from Rhiney and matched the early story from Julia. Both Bark and Ely mention this fact. Is there somewhere in the Bark Manuscript or Ely's book where they mention Dick Holmes presense at Waltz's death? The missing gold is mentioned, without naming a perp'.
Respectfully,
Joe
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
covered mines
TOM; I recently listened to a pig sing on T.V. ,How good was he you say? I liked him better than the rap crap, they have on all the time. BUT you will never teach JOW anything. I have went as slow and been as pataint as I can be with him and he still doesn,t understand anything. I guess we could have his ears checked for defect,s. bill
bill-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Respect
Bill,
Your lack of respect in mispelling my name is unwarranted. I have not treated you badly on this forum, and find your childish behavior insulting.
What is "pataint"?
Respectfully,
Joe
Your lack of respect in mispelling my name is unwarranted. I have not treated you badly on this forum, and find your childish behavior insulting.
What is "pataint"?
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Party of Three?
Interesting how no one has said: I knew all along there were only two, or what are you talking about, of course there were three. Those of you who can be honest with yourself are shaking your heads thinking: I have read that story a dozen times, and have always thought there were three people on Julia's first trip to the mountains.
The point is, no matter who reads a story, there are always more versions of what is being said than the one version that contains the truth.
In this case, I will wager that you have all been fooled by the Bark wording. That is how history (legends) get changed. One word, one sentence, one phrase and one lie at a time. No matter how smart we think we are, or how much we think we know about this legend, we are all being guided by the tellers of this great story, and they are many.
Respectfully,
Joe
The point is, no matter who reads a story, there are always more versions of what is being said than the one version that contains the truth.
In this case, I will wager that you have all been fooled by the Bark wording. That is how history (legends) get changed. One word, one sentence, one phrase and one lie at a time. No matter how smart we think we are, or how much we think we know about this legend, we are all being guided by the tellers of this great story, and they are many.
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Spat?
Peter,
You need to pay attention. s mean we are making an attempt to be funny, not serious. The only spat between Bill and I, is in your mind. That's what I mean by people being unable to understand the meanings behind the words that they read.
It has been awhile since we have heard from DED. I think he has been a little put-off since you revealed his identity to the forum. Still contributes, but seems to have pared it back a bit.
How goes the new house? You are now getting a taste of how varied the weather can be in the Phoenix area.
Respectfully,
Joe
You need to pay attention.
s mean we are making an attempt to be funny, not serious. The only spat between Bill and I, is in your mind. That's what I mean by people being unable to understand the meanings behind the words that they read. It has been awhile since we have heard from DED. I think he has been a little put-off since you revealed his identity to the forum. Still contributes, but seems to have pared it back a bit.
How goes the new house? You are now getting a taste of how varied the weather can be in the Phoenix area.
Respectfully,
Joe
covered mines
Pete; I,m letting Joe stew and simmer before I give him his spanking right here on the tube. I will tend to him tomorrow. Bill 
-
dutch elm disease
- Part Timer
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:06 pm
joe... nooooooooooo im not pissed with peter over his "revelation",but i seem to be in minority here in that ive only got maybe a 1% belief in the truth of the "histories".but it seems too often if certain "truths" are questioned ...then confrontation ensues...its not worth it. lets face it...everyone on here has their own beliefs on everything "dutchman" and neither logic or argument will change those views, no matter how silly or ill thought out those beliefs are. so with a few minorexceptions im content to just listen now. but that aside,theres so much that cant and wontbe said on a public forum like this, things that wont lead anyone to treasure maybe, but nevertheless might clear up a few ofthe mysteries.plus bills cryptic contributions are far far too much for my fevered mind these days
John Reed
I have been meaning to reply to the dialog regarding John Reed. But, I have been busy and was only able to get to it today.
What Joe brings up is interesting. However, I do not think it applies to the John Reed in question. There are reasons for this. The main being the actual article itself written by Clay Worst – and the events of how the John Reed in question surfaced.
It is not probable that the John Reed that connected with Chuck Aylor and Clay Worst in 1950 was related to the Bark or Spangler family. The reason is that when the John Reed in questioned surfaced, in the mid-1930s, there was a “rivalry” – so to speak – between the Barks, Spanglers, and Elys on one side – and Erwin Ruth on the other. Ruth was the one first contacted by John Reed of St. Louis, MO. It was then that Northcut Ely and John Spangler got involved and tried to “cut a better deal” with Reed for his information (this was with Uncle Jim severing as mentor in the background). So, Erwin Ruth (who later claimed he had “little interest” in the LDM, was at the time VERY interested in the LDM and lost mines in the Superstitions in general…) was on one side and the Bark/Ely group on the other side – both vying for Reed’s information. Hardly a situation to develp with a family member.
A meeting was set up during this time frame in St. Louis in which either Northcut Ely – or John Spangler – I can’t remember which now – had a quasi-clandestine meeting with Reed. He was crossing the country by train - happened to be passing through St. Louis - and met Reed at the train station. There exists correspondence between these parties, Jim Bark, Spangler, and Northcut Ely – and Reed himself – to indicate that this John Reed was NOT related in any way to any of the above. Not to Spangler. Not to Bark. Otherwise, it would obviously have been mentioned. And the tone of the letters reveal that they felt Reed to be a stranger and they wondered if they could trust him. And later, when Reed spoke to Clay Worst, he obviously did not trust the Barks or Elys or Spanglers very much and did not hold them in good regard. Hardly a sentiment for a relative.
So, I feel the John Reed that Joe mentions is a different John Reed. I do not doubt that Joe’s John Reed is related to the Barks/Spanglers. But that individual is not the person who appeared in the mid-1930s and later in 1950 - and who told the tale of he and his dad finding Waltz’s mine.
What Joe brings up is interesting. However, I do not think it applies to the John Reed in question. There are reasons for this. The main being the actual article itself written by Clay Worst – and the events of how the John Reed in question surfaced.
It is not probable that the John Reed that connected with Chuck Aylor and Clay Worst in 1950 was related to the Bark or Spangler family. The reason is that when the John Reed in questioned surfaced, in the mid-1930s, there was a “rivalry” – so to speak – between the Barks, Spanglers, and Elys on one side – and Erwin Ruth on the other. Ruth was the one first contacted by John Reed of St. Louis, MO. It was then that Northcut Ely and John Spangler got involved and tried to “cut a better deal” with Reed for his information (this was with Uncle Jim severing as mentor in the background). So, Erwin Ruth (who later claimed he had “little interest” in the LDM, was at the time VERY interested in the LDM and lost mines in the Superstitions in general…) was on one side and the Bark/Ely group on the other side – both vying for Reed’s information. Hardly a situation to develp with a family member.
A meeting was set up during this time frame in St. Louis in which either Northcut Ely – or John Spangler – I can’t remember which now – had a quasi-clandestine meeting with Reed. He was crossing the country by train - happened to be passing through St. Louis - and met Reed at the train station. There exists correspondence between these parties, Jim Bark, Spangler, and Northcut Ely – and Reed himself – to indicate that this John Reed was NOT related in any way to any of the above. Not to Spangler. Not to Bark. Otherwise, it would obviously have been mentioned. And the tone of the letters reveal that they felt Reed to be a stranger and they wondered if they could trust him. And later, when Reed spoke to Clay Worst, he obviously did not trust the Barks or Elys or Spanglers very much and did not hold them in good regard. Hardly a sentiment for a relative.
So, I feel the John Reed that Joe mentions is a different John Reed. I do not doubt that Joe’s John Reed is related to the Barks/Spanglers. But that individual is not the person who appeared in the mid-1930s and later in 1950 - and who told the tale of he and his dad finding Waltz’s mine.
covered mines
Mr. TOM; I sat and listened to those amazing animals last nite. They had a pig that sang to the piano tune, He also did tricks too. SO You see even Joe can be taught alittle something if you apply yourself enough. PETE; I have been thinking the "maybe" timbers at the ldm. Here,s what I come up with; dry rot set in and they will crumble when touched or they could be dried out and as hard as a iron or if in a mineralized area they "could be" mineralize and turned to stone. A friend recently showed me a split ceder fence post that he had found while hunting air head,s on a creek. The post really looked fresh and not over five year old the red and the white wood looked newly split BUT the bottom of the post where it was in the ground was mineralized to solied ROCK...DED well You are still above ground, I was wondering where you got off to?? Bill
>>Wow!
You're good!<<
Dam right I am.
SC:
Good post and logic on the Reed thing.
Bill:
Interesting tidbit about mineralized timbers. Thats, of course if 1) there were any timbers to begin with and 2) were the timbers dug up after Waltz placed them?
PS I would be interested in the origination of the singing pigs you are hearing. Do they live in your back yard? Do you see them on TV? Do you have records.albums.tapes.CDs of them? Or are they beamed directly to your brain from one of the outer planets...Pluto or Uranus (of course) comes immediately to mind....
You're good!<<
Dam right I am.
SC:
Good post and logic on the Reed thing.
Bill:
Interesting tidbit about mineralized timbers. Thats, of course if 1) there were any timbers to begin with and 2) were the timbers dug up after Waltz placed them?
PS I would be interested in the origination of the singing pigs you are hearing. Do they live in your back yard? Do you see them on TV? Do you have records.albums.tapes.CDs of them? Or are they beamed directly to your brain from one of the outer planets...Pluto or Uranus (of course) comes immediately to mind....