by thoughtographer » Fri May 12, 2006 11:56 am
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>ve seen it myself, got pics and everything. this was also the first time i had ever seen "real indian petroglyphs" as well, and even my amateur ass could tell the petroglyphs were much older and more worn looking than the stone.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Oh, I believe that it exists. I was just wondering if anyone ever identified the "guide" that directed Frank Hibben to the stone in the first place. It seems that not only did Hibben "discover" the stone, but he was also the first to put forth the speculation that Mormons were behind it. What I wonder is whether he thought those Mormons were of the late 1800s variety, or that of the early 1930s.<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Frank Hibben is involved in this story, as he is in so many of New Mexico's archeological mysteries. He said that the first time he saw the stone was in 1933 when he was taken there by an old man who had remembered the stone from his childhood in the 1880's. At the time, Hibben offered the opinion that the Mormons might have left it. Later in an interview in 1996 Hibben seemed to have changed his mind, and stated that the inscription was actually ancient.<br><br>From: <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.dukecityfix.com/index.php?itemid=1475">Ancient Wanderers and the Los Lunas Mystery Stone</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>I wonder what made him "change his mind" by 1996. Like ghost stories, UFOs and other "high weirdness", so much of this stuff drives the tourist trade in the U.S.A. and abroad that one often wonders how and why certain judgments are made regarding a place or thing's origins or "authenticity" -- and why people are willing to accept those judgments enough to make a pilgrimage to see the "evidence" for themselves. I mean, it's no secret as to why there are so many shows about ghosts on "The Travel Channel" on U.S. cable television.<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>as for the video, well, it basically tried to use photos of teotihuacan and maccu piccu and diffusionist barry fell type evidence of precolumbian contact...but of course, instead of letting this spectacular material rest on its own as a wondrous thing in itself, they are compelled to make it fit into their paradigm of lost tribes and the narrative in the BOM.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Hahaha, okay -- that's pretty much what I expected.<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>i was distracted by how lame it was so i dont recall much more than that. i used to really be into the whole diffusion "america BC" subject, to the point of hunting out the epigraphic evidence of such myself, so when someone comes along with this "yes its true--lemme show you how it proves the book of mormon to be true, brother!" i get a bad taste in my mouth.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>I'm all too familiar with that bad taste, though I tend to bask in how lame Mormon propaganda tends to be. I guess it's a defense mechanism to keep me from getting so angry about it.<br><br>Do you have anything more about these lead plates in Tucson? I'm interested in finding out more, if you've got anything. <p><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=thoughtographer>thoughtographer</A> at: 5/19/06 4:47 pm<br></i>
