The FIRST Set of STONE MAPS

[Mike McChesney]

Keeps telling me that my 188kb ile is too big and they only accept 256kb???????

[Mike McChesney]

One other difference I forgot to mention:

Look closely at the mathematical formulae at the bottom right. First look at the new pic. See how the outer ring of the donut is some distance from the engraved line? Now look at the old pic. The outer donut ring is clearly visible, AND IT ACTUALLY TOUCHES THE ENGRAVED LINE!

The differences are subtle, and cannot all be dismissed as photo damage.

Just a thought.

Mike

[novice]

Is anyone else experiencing an occasional glitch when viewing the forum posts? Every so often when someone posts a picture and someone responds, the responder’s post appears empty but the text is on the face of the previous photo. I just had that happen this morning when Mike’s last post window showed up blank but his text was up in the photos of the maps in the previous post. When I logged on to the site, everything appeared correctly. Is this a web site problem or a problem on my end? If it’s on my end, does anyone have a theory? Thanks.

Mike,

There seems to be literally hundreds of photos being posted on the internet that depict the stone maps. I guess I’m not sure what the clean looking photos you have posted above represent? They look like some of Richard Robinson’s original one sided castings or even later copies made from Richard’s copies by Hatt? At least that is my understanding of the provenance of the copies?

I believe you took pictures of the stones on display at the Superstitions Mountain Museum. Are the photos above, your personal photos taken of the actual stones? Are we trying to compare apples and apples?

Garry

[Mike McChesney]

Garry,

That is one of several hundred I took of the Stone Maps on display at SMHS Museum last Summer when they were made available for photographs (see below)

Greg and Phil were kind enough to let me use my digital microscope on them as well as photograph them under different lighting. That is not a cast, it is supposedly the real thing.

Mike

[Joe Ribaudo]

Mike,

The differences in the Stones that were on that car bumper and the stones we see today have always been noticeable, especially when you zoom them up as far as possible. Once I received the high definition photos from the Mining and Mineral Museum (Steve Decker), I started really going over every inch of the stones.
Those pictures can be blown up 400%. Pretty much see the nose hairs on the priest.

The copy of the original 8 X 10 photo on the bumper, which I received from Dr. Glover, can also be zoomed quite a bit to bring out more details.

Not saying this is what happened with the Stone Maps, but I have noticed that whenever questionable artifacts have turned up, the originals, more often than not, disappear leaving nothing but photos, photocopies and reproductions to be examined. Things like the Latin Heart, the Bilbrey Stone Crosses, the Calalus artifacts.....etc, and almost every treasure map that ever existed.

Can't help but notice the pattern.......

Take care,

Joe

[Cubfan64]

Garry, I've been noticing the same problem with photos overlaying text making it difficult if not impossible to read them - it doesn't happen all the time, but for the last 3-4 weeks it's been happening more often.

[Joe Ribaudo]

Mike,

The "break" at the bottom of the trail map is a crease in the original photo that was given to Thomas. It's something we discussed and that information is directly from him. I also thought it was a break in the stone, until he gave me the straight scoop.

I believe we discussed that crease on this forum in the past. I, eventually, passed along the information from Thomas.

Take care,

Joe

[Joe Ribaudo]

Garry, Paul and Mike,

It may be that Joe noticed the problem and fixed it. Obviously it's a glitch in the site.
If it shows back up, just send him a private message.

Take care,

Joe

[Mike McChesney]

Joe,

Could you send me a copy of that photo? With as high a resolution as I can set, that "crack" runs from edge to edge. It does not continue to the shadow on either side (see pic).

Mike

[Cubfan64]

I noticed that too Mike - it doesn't look like a photograph crease to me either.

[Mike McChesney]

I don't know. I made an animated gif that morphs the two pictures.

They are extremely close. There are just some things that can't be explained by dried dirt and pic damage.

Mike

[Mike McChesney]

HHHMMM, for some reason, the gif isn't working. Try again:

[novice]

Guys,

I’m just now got the glitch again but I did a refresh and everything looks fine? Not sure what’s going on.

BTW, I have never given much credence to the theory that someone made a second set of “stone” maps. I had trouble with the mechanics of fabricating duplicate stone maps without using something like a tracer milling machine. But maybe Mitchell did make duplicates? Not an easy task in my eyes!

I "am" having trouble with some of the items Mike is pointing out and, I have run across something else that gives me pause.

In the Hainer letters, Pat told Bernice McGee that she remembered the stone being “gray” (1959) and the same information (Gray stones) also appears in Travis Tumlinson’s manuscript (about 1960).

WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE!

I’m still quite a ways from believing that is what happened though. The simplest explanation is usually the best and that would be that the stone maps on display at the museum are the same ones Travis allegedly found. But, who knows?

Garry

[Mike McChesney]

I went back and reread that letter again. She did say "STONES" not "STONE". If she had said it in the singular, she might have been talking about the H/P Stone. In the plural, she meant the three big ones. It makes more sense to me that the Upper and Lower Trail Maps would be made out of the same stone as the H/P Stone. I WISH that the H/P Stone would have been in the picture with the other three. We could accurately compare the tones and see if they matched. The current stones being so dark, don't seem to match the lighter look of the stones in the old pic. Although, that could be due to many factors.

Mike

[alan m]

Hello Mike
I did some overlay work on the photo that you provided with one that I took of the stone tablets in 2009. I was particularly looking at the broken edges of the tablets and came to the conclusion that the ones in the photo with the oldsmobile are the same ones on display in the museum.
It is possible to duplicate the carvings exactly but it is very difficult to duplicate the edge.
Best regards
Alan

[andydejohn]

Hi Mike,

This blog is kind of old, but I was wondering if your photos of the peralta stones might be available to license for use in a tv documentary program I am helping produce for the History Channel. Please reply at your soonest convenience. You can contact me at [email protected].

Regards,

Andy