Beth I appreciate you long definition of scams. But we all know that scams exist, and nobody is disputing that. What is being disputed is the way the author has worked the stone maps, into his story about scammer's, and the argument he presents for why the cannot be authentic. I could name probably a half dozen scams I have seen take place, just in the time I have been living in Apache Junction, and chasing the Legends of Superstition Mountain.Mrs.Oroblanco wrote:First, let me say, up front - I've been reading Tom K's stuff for as long as I can remember (which gets shorter every year).
Secondly - I am a DEVIOUS person, in a sense. I have also, for as long as I can remember, been able to take both sides of a discussion. (I think they call that "split-brained"). I have been able to do that so well, I always got "stuck" in the un-conventional side of debates when I was in school. Some people can do that very well, others, not so well. It is a most difficult task when you have to argue the exact opposite of what you may personally believe.
However, our country depends on people being able to do that. We call it jury duty. You have to be able to hear the arguements made by both parties, and make a decision based on ONLY that - not what you have seen in other matters, or what you believed before you got there. It's an important quality - and terribly difficult.
However, it can also make it seem like you have two opposing views - when in fact, you are just taking the information available. I could argue the virtues of anything, pretty much - and I could also debate the other side, probably just as well.
A writer can either editoralize - or, they can write simply - events. I see nothing in Tom K's writing that does anything different than presenting two sides of a "story". I emphasize the word "story" only because each writing is a part - not the whole, therefore, there is always more to add - so, a continuing story.
There is absolutely no doubt that people have been swindled. Arizona is THE top state for swindling, when it comes to land ownership. But, even then, there are two sides (at least) to every story, and every event - usually there are many more sides to every story. Add to that, each individual has done their own homework, in most cases, and has drawn conclusions.
I am sure that there are people who have done many more investigations, and work, on the Peralta Stones - more than I, certainly, and definitely more than Tom K - and some folks who have spent year upon year, putting the pieces together.
They all have their reasons for what they believe - but that doesn't mean that some other people have not gone a different path - right or wrong - there are folks who will take your money and give you nothing in return, and there are people who will not. There are people who are misinformed - who think a check to someone will get them a goldmine - we call them victims. Geesh, I have a friend who loves a good treasurehunt - but his idea of a good treasure hunt is to read a little info, make a conclusion, and then wants to drive wherever, open the door to the SUV and pick it up --- in other words, very unrealistic - but, not unusual. There are so many scams out there for one reason, and one reason only - they work. Not just about the Stones - its the "you have won" scams, and the "partnership scams" and the "all I need is 2000 dollars" scams etc. They work because people fall prey to them. And there will always be people who fall victim to scams, so it will continue.
You can ask Roy about the scam that concerned us - one day someone came and put a sheriff's sale sign on our property.
We caught the woman before she left - to make a long story short, a bank had lent money on a piece of property, to a person who didn't own the property. The bank was from out of state, and, apparently, the scammers used a couple of pictures taken from the road, to give to the bank, as collateral, for their loan. Then they skipped town, of course. The bank foreclosed on them, and put the sheriff's sale up on the collateral - but - not the right person. It didn't take too long to figure it out, and find out who it was, but, the bank lost out to the scam. Identity theft is rampant - because there are people out there who prey on other people.
Everything in the world is subject to some kind of scam. That does not make the item "untrue" or "unreal", it just makes the item a tool for the scammer.
To write about these things is not a change in attitude or person ideas - it is simply a telling of an event.
Fiction is what it is, and there are really not any ground rules for fiction writers to abide by. But... The Kollenborn Chronicles are presented as a well known "Historian's" account of the history he lived through, and observed himself. When that history is presented incorrectly, it needs to be challenged, and corrected, before it is repeated so many times that it actually becomes accepted as history.
From my point of view, and knowledge of the history, (part of which I lived through also) this "story" appears to lead the reader to form incorrect conclusions.
I have pointed out, what I believe to be the most obvious errors in this story, and am still waiting for the author's response.
As most people who are familiar with the history of the stone maps already know. Contrary to what appears in the article. The stone maps WERE confiscated by the authorities, and taken away from Clarence Mitchell. That one fact alone is indisputable, and could have a major effect on the conclusions readers may come to if they had been told the truth.
Does this not automatically make the assumption that the story was told completely and correctly?Mrs.Oroblanco wrote: To write about these things is not a change in attitude or person ideas - it is simply a telling of an event.