THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Moderator: Jim_b

Post Reply
User avatar
Guz
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:32 pm
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4
Location: On a sand dune
Contact:

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by Guz »

What kind of stone are they made from?
i-tsarl-tsu- i
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:58 am
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by i-tsarl-tsu- i »

Jim,

That's an excellent suggestion, but since the original crosses have never been examined by an expert to determine exactly what they are made of, and are no longer available, that would seem to be an exercise in futility.

I should rephrase the original question. Could you make such crosses with concrete, or some other material........such as you yourself have done, and never allowing them to be tested for authentication, claim they were made of stone? Who could say otherwise?

You should keep in mind that Michael Bilbrey's major concern, was selling the crosses to someone and getting some cash in hand. You should probably also remember he was a very good con-artist and a criminal, to boot. Do you know how many Dutch Hunters he tried to sell those crosses to?

Getting back to the "Latin Heart"....... As you know, it's no great labor to create copies of that heart. You have made them yourself. Do you know where the original "Latin Heart" is today? Has any professional archaeologist examined it? If it has been examined, did they sign their name to the bottom of a report?

I think those are all reasonable questions, and you are the man to ask. I don't know of a single Dutch Hunter who knows more about the subject than you do. In fact, I would say you are the resident expert on the Stone Crosses and the Latin Heart. I can understand why you might not want to share all you know or have learned about the meaning in these artifacts, but I believe my questions avoid crossing that personal line.

Perhaps some of the other members here will join in and tell us what they know about this fascinating subject. It may be that someone has seen such reports.

Thanks again,

Joe
Jim Hatt

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by Jim Hatt »

Joe,

You are starting right out on the wrong foot.


re:"since the original crosses have never been examined by an expert to determine exactly what they are made of".

You assume that since you are not aware of the crosses ever having been examined by any experts, that it never happened. When in fact the opposite is true. Estee Conatser had the crosses in her possession for a time, during which she had them examined at a University in calif. UCLA if I remember correctly. (You can confirm that with Greg Davis, he is the one that told me about it) I am sure that if they had been made of concrete, someone there would have noticed.

Score: Joe -1

You cover a lot of territory in your post. Let's break it down and discuss one item at a time and see what shakes out as truth and what else is fiction.

Beginning with your statement...
"You should probably also remember he was a very good con-artist and a criminal, to boot. Do you know how many Dutch Hunters he tried to sell those crosses to?"


In all the years I have been following the subject of the stone crosses, I have never heard anything about Bilbrey offering to sell them to anybody. It "Could" have happened, I'm not saying it didn't. I am just saying I have never heard of an instance.

My answer to your question is NO. I have no idea of how many people he tried to sell them to. (I am assuming that you have a list of names of people that are willing to come forward, and say that he tried to sell the crosses to them?)

Please enlighten me, and then everyone will know.

Then we will move on to the next item.

Jim Hatt
Jim Hatt

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by Jim Hatt »

Guz wrote:What kind of stone are they made from?
Everyone appears to be be in agreement that they are some kind of sandstone Guz. They use different geological terms, but it all boils down to sandstone of one type or another.

Jim
i-tsarl-tsu- i
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:58 am
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by i-tsarl-tsu- i »

Jim,

Actually, I have no list of names. As I recall, he tried to sell them to Greg Davis and Clay Worst, but my memory ain't so good anymore. It may have been Bob Corbin, but they were convinced that the crosses were fake.

In his own words, Michael told Estee Conatser that the crosses were for sale to anyone who had the cash.

In 1978, while Bilbrey was trying to get Estee to become a partner with himself and Ed Farr, she asked him to get the crosses authenticated. She mentioned that more than once. Each time, Bilbrey refused. She explained that it would be much easier to find someone with the funds, if the crosses were authenticated. He was not interested in that, and just wanted to sell them outright.

Sounds like a con to me. No need to muddy the waters with an expert opinion on the authenticity of the artifacts. Basically, you bring the cash, you carry the crosses out the door. End of sale.

"You assume that since you are not aware of the crosses ever having been examined by any experts, that it never happened. When in fact the opposite is true. Estee Conatser had the crosses in her possession for a time, during which she had them examined at a University in calif. UCLA if I remember correctly. (You can confirm that with Greg Davis, he is the one that told me about it) I am sure that if they had been made of concrete, someone there would have noticed."

As soon as someone, anyone, can produce that report from UCLA, I will have a different view. I would not take Conatser's word that she had the crosses examined at UCLA. As I said, in 1978 Bilbrey refused, a number of times, to have that done.

My guess is that the UCLA story was never confirmed. We have the same story for the Stone Maps...........No document, ever.

Some of what I have written here is my personal opinion. The Bilbrey/Conatser information is fact.

Take care,

Joe
Jim Hatt

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by Jim Hatt »

Joe,

I didn't think you would be able to produce any names of people that would come forward and state that Bilbrey tried to sell the maps to them.

Not even one solitary person Joe?

I have known the people you mentioned as "possibilities" for many years and have discussed the stone crosses with them many times. I will agree that they are all highly skeptical about the authenticity of them, none of them concluded that they were fakes. Not in my presence anyway. Furthermore, none of them ever mentioned that Bilbrey had offered to sell them either.

Your continued insistence about the need to have them authenticated, is absurd. They are rocks Joe. Just like the Peralta Stone Maps. THERE IS NO WAY TO AUTHENTICATE WHEN THEY WERE CARVED! (Once they have been handled and cleaned) NONE PERIOD!

Bilbrey learned that very early on, I am sure! If he would have bagged them immediately, and taken them straight to ASU. Someone there "May" have been able to "Roughly Estimate" how long they had been laying undisturbed in the ground, BUT THAT"S ALL! That small window of opportunity is long gone and will not return.

Forget it! Knowledgeable people put that thought behind them years ago.

I refer you, and anyone else who labors under the belief that the stone maps or crosses can be validated by modern scientific methods, to my article
Dating The Peralta Stone Maps where I discuss "Methods of Absolute Dating of Organic and Inorganic Materials" which is available on this website and has been for years at:

http://www.desertusa.com/mag06/oct/peralta.html

No "Expert" can offer you anything in the way of an "opinion" about the age of carvings on stone without some undisturbed organic material in the grooves. All they can give you without that is their opinion. Due to the amount of nonsense and deceit these people deal with in their careers, they are going to approach any evaluation with a large amount of skepticism, which will be obvious in their final opinion.

Everything else in your response is simply taken as a biased opinion, and everyone in the world of the LDM knows which way your bias slants.

Nobody to back up your claims that Bilbrey was trying to sell the crosses... Equals just a bunch of hot air and another -1 point for Joe.

Score: Joe -2

I will return with my reply to the next item in your post that I want to respond to.

Jim Hatt
Jim Hatt

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by Jim Hatt »

Joe,

I deleted your last post. (I am sure you have a saved copy) Not because I was offended by by it, but because we have not finished discussing your other one yet.

You are not scoring any points here and so far you are down 2.

I have observed that when you are lost for words, and losing ground in a discussion, you tend to walk away from it, and open several more cans of worms as a way weaseling out of tight spots.

Feel free to repost your new can of worms after the current discussion is finished. I have a meeting this afternoon with someone that knew Bill Hidden and claims that he was not the finder of the Latin Heart. He also claims to know who did find it, and know some specific details about the event.

I will be getting back to you with respect to our ongoing discussion later this evening.

Jim Hatt
i-tsarl-tsu- i
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:58 am
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by i-tsarl-tsu- i »

Jim,

[Joe,

I deleted your last post. (I am sure you have a saved copy) Not because I was offended by by it, but because we have not finished discussing your other one yet.

You are not scoring any points here and so far you are down 2.

I have observed that when you are lost for words, and losing ground in a discussion, you tend to walk away from it, and open several more cans of worms as a way weaseling out of tight spots.

Feel free to repost your new can of worms after the current discussion is finished. I have a meeting this afternoon with someone that knew Bill Hidden and claims that he was not the finder of the Latin Heart. He also claims to know who did find it, and know some specific details about the event.

I will be getting back to you with respect to our ongoing discussion later this evening.

Jim Hatt]

Jim,

Since you have deleted my post, the only one who can make a judgement on it......is you. You have made a habit of deleting my posts when they disagree with your conclusions. That puts you in the position of a censor, rather than a moderator. The only one keeping a score card here, is you. I assume you feel our conversation is a game, rather than the exchange of information.

If you want to delete this post, go right ahead. If stating the facts is too confrontational for you, I understand completely. I have copied both sides of this conversation. It will not be lost. It has been copied off site as well as hard copies.

I am not "walking away" from anything. If my post was not on point, let others make there own decision. If you are unable to put the post back in the topic, I will be happy to re-post it for you.

Joe Ribaudo
User avatar
cubfan64
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:00 am
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by cubfan64 »

I would think that once any stones that are marked in any way by humans have been cleaned, the only real expert analysis which could be done to authenticate their age would be to try to study how the markings were made.

I'm certainly no expert in stone carvings, but I work in a scientific analytical field and I would be very curious to have any original stones examined by no less than 3 "experts" - probably from different fields such as archaeologists, stone masons, stone artists, etc... just to see what their expert opinions are as to how they were made. I would think a few expert opinions as to whether the markings were made by more modern tools or by hammer and chisel could be useful. That's not to say that someone could "trick" an expert, but at least there may be some benefit to having them analyzed in that manner.

As you both have pointed out however, at this point I don't think anyone can say with 100% certainly which stone maps, hearts, crosses etc... are DEFINITELY the originals and which are copies.
i-tsarl-tsu- i
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:58 am
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: THE STORY OF THE STONE CROSSES

Post by i-tsarl-tsu- i »

Jim,

On the tape, Bilbrey and Farr state they would like Conatser to "promote" the Stone Crosses. She wants them authenticated first, they decline to have that done. Saying the crosses can't be authenticated, because they are stone, is a bit of a smokescreen. The material they are made from can be authenticated. The style of the writing can be dated to an era. There are a number of ways to date such artifacts, without dating the age of the stone. To date the stone, it must be in situ where it was found.

They are also trying to convince her that she needs a piece of the action. She declines.

Their primary concern, through out the recording, was selling the crosses. I would be happy to provide a copy of that tape to anyone who is interested. I won't be charging for that, trying to sell it on e-Bay or attempting to make money in any way. One huckster on fake artifacts is more than enough. Wouldn't want to be caught following in the footsteps of someone like Michael Bilbrey.

I believe these exchanges are of value to Dutch Hunters. That would include my side of the conversation, and anything you delete. If you end my participation here, I will post the entire thing elsewhere. Sometimes I am biased. Sometimes I feel that you are biased. In either case, someone without an axe to grind should have a chance to see (all) of our posts.

Deletions will not change the history of what has been posted here. As a fan of history, I'm sure that's not what you want.

Joe Ribaudo
Post Reply