Swordgate: The Lie that Won't Die

12/1/2016

We're coming up on the first anniversary of Swordgate, the can of worms that was opened up on December 16, 2015, by the announcement of the "100% confirmed Roman sword" from Nova Scotia. There's all kinds of celebration planning going on over at the Fake Hercules Swords group on Facebook. It should be a good time.

While reasonable people quickly accepted the mounting evidence that the sword was bogus, there are still a few that keep hanging on to the dream. I've been involved in an ongoing discussion in the Ancient Origins group with someone who still insists that Hutton Pulitzer's XRF data are in his "sword report" and still insists that there is an original sword in the "Naples Museum." I've seen evidence of neither of those things, but have been told for the umpteenth time that I'm wrong.

In case any of the purported XRF data ever do materialize, I want everyone to watch this short video again. This was posted by Pulitzer right after the St. Mary's University test results were aired on The Curse of Oak Island. In this video, he proclaims that his data were very different than those obtained by St. Mary's University (his results "do not show anywhere near that zinc").

Eventually, Pulitzer produced that mess of a "sword report" in a long-winded attempt to show that high-zinc brass could be Roman. No version of that report that I've seen contains the XRF data he talks about in the video. As I wrote at the time, the argument in the "sword report" is a sleight of hand to deflect from the issue that he has never released his own data: is the sword bronze or brass? is the metal low zinc or high zinc? Does he defend his own data, or is he interpreting the St. Mary's University results?

I don't think we'll ever see Pulitzer's XRF data because they can't be consistent with both storylines.

And the last I heard, he was claiming that the Italian eBay sword was actually a sword from the "Naples Museum." It's not, but thanks for playing.

Prove me wrong on either count, please.

128 Comments

JA Sterling

12/1/2016 11:17:08 am

Just one small number for the Naples Museum sword proof... that is all one needs to track the sword. Second best is level, case, even a photo with sword in place among other items from Museum. Does anyone have any proof? Me thinks not....

McFad

12/1/2016 01:04:46 pm

Andy, if he has not shown the data yet, it's just not going to happen. I have read on your other blogs in here where hutoon has asked for a 1 on 1 debate with you and you said yes under the conditions that you receive the XRF data and the "white paper report" that he has been claiming is out on the internet. I know he had made a pretty picture and audio files, with copied data not the XRF reading or the white paper results that he again claims to have been peered reviewed. I now recently see that bill kelly is asking for you to do a 1 on 1 sit down with hutoon and scott wolter but he has yet to come up with any of the details that hutoon claims to have. My question is since when did bill kelly become the twiddle dee and twiddle dum's manager? I had no idea that bill kelly has control of the material that scott wolter and hutton puts out in the social media!

ghettohillbilly1

12/1/2016 01:47:33 pm

do you remember how many times did he say the sword report was NOT the white paper at first?? he flat out said the data wasnt in the sword report, that it would be in the white paper(marchish 2015 i think) I'm sure theres a vid or an article stating that, I remember him stating that many times, then this summer does a total 180 and says the report is/was the white paper and the results were there? If the data was there and so important would you not distribute it by any and all means? why only in a shitty report? it truly makes no sense

Andy White

12/1/2016 02:38:47 pm

Anyone that hasn't figured out by now that he's just playing a shell game has the observational skills of a walnut.

Kill Bill

12/4/2016 04:06:46 pm

Great point. Where is the full white paper that was promised earlier this year?

Mike Morgan

12/4/2016 10:20:41 pm

This the info I know of & he never answered my question:

Hutton Pulitzer
8/8/2016 05:54:37 am

Mike actually we held the second report, ie white paper to present at two different conferences first to gain Thier input. Thus that is in process and it is normal procedure to present at conferences when you can as I am doing.
Mike Morgan
8/8/2016 07:07:13 am

Mr. Pulitzer,

Thank you for the update, so that means published after AAPS conference in October?

From exchange in comments @ http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/roman-sword-advocate-wants-me-to-debate-data-im-not-allowed-to-see#comments

Peter Geuzen

12/1/2016 05:50:46 pm

Maybe he's working on a new version of the data - Hooked XRF

Killbuck

12/1/2016 06:46:32 pm

Oh good one

Andy White

12/1/2016 06:50:46 pm

Or maybe Hooked XFR, as the case may be.

Kathleen

12/1/2016 06:31:03 pm

"...yes, it is a Catholic University..." What is under that particular shell?

Andy White

12/1/2016 06:39:05 pm

It's part of his scatological fantasy about the Catholic Church suppressing "true history." He has to play the conspiracy card to explain why nothing he says makes any sense.

Kathleen

12/1/2016 06:42:18 pm

The equivalent of saying "Smithsonian"?!

Andy White

12/1/2016 06:48:52 pm

More or less. If you want to see the kind of intellect the Wolter/Pulitzer show brings to the table, look up "Xplrr FOOKED" on YouTube. Just watch the short one. It's their brand now.

12/1/2016 06:49:54 pm

Thanks

Jim

12/1/2016 07:09:41 pm

It's a double whammy, the Catholic Church and Academia both are involved in this conspiracy.
If you are involved with the Catholic Church, you might be in on the conspiracy.
If you are an academic, you might be in on the conspiracy.
If you are a member of the Nova Scotia Government, you might be in on the conspiracy.
If you are a scientist, you might be in on the conspiracy.
If you married your cousin, you might be in on the conspiracy.
Or, no, wait ,,,, that's a redneck, sorry.

Kathleen

12/2/2016 09:30:59 am

I am stunned! I just watched the short clip. Stunned, and amused at how he played Mr. Potato Head with you and Jason. Hard to believe

Andy White

12/2/2016 09:33:21 am

Yup - that's apparently what passes for scholarship in the Pulitzer/Wolter world now.

It's also how you know that you've won the argument.

McFad

12/1/2016 07:25:23 pm

You would think that someone (hutoon) that holds patents would be able to keep his phone? computer? tablet plugged in?? Or even charged for that matter.......Really running out of battery!

Bob Jase

12/2/2016 07:51:47 am

Andy, as a lead inspector for almost thirty years using a wide variety of xrfs (PFT-3, Warrington, Niton, Sci-Tech, RMD) I can tell you that xrf data is very difficult to transmit when the results are written on the back of a used napkin from KFC.

Andy White

12/2/2016 08:36:34 am

I think you meant "KCF," but I understood you anyway.

Bob Jase

12/2/2016 09:57:12 am

First - that should have been PGT instead of PFT.

Second - KFC still is great even though the Colonel is no longer with us.

Joe Scales

12/2/2016 10:57:21 am

By the looks of him, I'm sure Pulitzer is no stranger to a bucket of KFC.

Phillip

12/2/2016 09:52:37 pm

Andy, just admit it. You are part of a global conspiracy to suppress the "truth", now get a fedora and a bull whip and do some real archaeology!
...Ha! All in jest man, love your blog. Please keep up the good work

Kill Bill

12/4/2016 03:30:10 pm

Hey Andy,

Did you ever locate any of the original swords that Hutton has claimed were part of the same casting with the sword found on Oak Island - the one from Naples Museum which is no longer there (apparently it was moved out in the 70s or 80s, but to whom or where?) or the one held by the private ancient artifact collector in Florida (what did he say?) Surely after a year something has come up from these items. Yes we all know the modern ones were replicates from something older, but where is the orginal item(s)? The rationale given by Hutton for the difference in metal properties is that the orginal authentic sword's are all casted from a little well known, recently discovered ancient Roman mine in northern Germany near a village that is known for making ceromonial votives (the swords supposely has navigational features and were given to legoniares for special missions as votives). These mines are puported to have high zinc brass properties, which of course makes them rare for ancient Rome metalurgy. Have you found anything on any of this?

Bill

Andy White

12/4/2016 03:58:52 pm

High zinc huh? That would mean that the Nova Scotia sword wasn't from there, since Pulitzer says it has very low zinc.

Oh wait, you can't actually mine brass since it's a man-made alloy.

Oh wait, nothing else you said made any sense either.

Want to buy a bridge?

Kill Bill

12/4/2016 04:14:37 pm

Andy,

Wow Im not sure why you are suddenly mocking a new blog reader for asking a question you invited. I was referring to media articles I've read that point to the difference in metallurgy to properties similar to those found at this ancient site. I'm not exactly sure of the metals composition but the point is the same. Can you please address the merits of my inquiry instead of insulting remarks?

Bill

Andy White

12/4/2016 04:21:25 pm

What "ancient site" are we talking about and what is the composition of the metal of the Nova Scotia sword?

There are no known ancient Roman swords that look anything like these swords, nor are there any other independent data to suggest any of them is ancient. We have developed a lot of good evidence that suggests they're all modern. There appear to be several generations of copies, the most recent of which are cast iron. All the copper-alloy swords were probably made to sell as tourist souvenirs.

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 12:15:45 pm

Andy, how did you miss this fact on the ancient site?

It's purported the originals were made from a recently discovered ancient calamine ore mine in Breinigerberg, Germany, which has naturally occurring zinc. The metal is considered "brass like alloy".

From the Epoch Times 1/20/2016:

"Pulitzer believes the bronze used in the sword may have come from a mine in Breinigerberg, Germany. Two Roman swords of the same model were found near an ancient Roman settlement at this location, and this mine has zinc naturally occurring in its ores. He said this may account for the zinc content, that the zinc wasn’t added in as it is with modern brass. Dr. Brosseau had characterized it as brass. Brass and bronze are both copper alloys and both were used by ancient Romans. Pulitzer maintains, however, that it should be classified as bronze because the zinc is naturally occurring rather than added."

Andy White

12/5/2016 12:31:48 pm

All published analysis done on the Nova Scotia sword so far has identified its metal as modern brass with about 30-35% zinc. Pulitzer has provided no evidence for his claim that the sword is some kind of "naturally occurring" brass, and has still not plainly stated the percentage of zinc that his XRF test returned.

The point of this post is that he has made contradictory statements, insisting right after Brosseau's results were released that his tests results "do not show anywhere near that zinc." If that's the case, why he is worried about finding a mine that contains zinc ore? He's already claimed that his "superior" tests didn't show much zinc? All this flip-flopping is a shell game to try to disguise the fact that his methods and results (the whole basis of his claim) are unreliable. By admitting that the artifact has a lot of zinc in it (contrary to his previous statements), he is basically admitting that his results are garbage.

The sword is a dull, clumsy tourist trinket made from modern brass. It doesn't look anything like a Roman ceremonial item. All the stories about "sister swords" are meant to try to explain the (anticipated) profusion of other Fake Hercules Swords after he made his claim. Analysis of those swords strongly suggests the Nova Scotia sword is somewhere in the middle of a copy chain of swords produced for the modern tourist market. There is zero credible evidence to suggest an ancient Roman origin.

Peter Geuzen

12/4/2016 05:33:53 pm

"Did you ever locate any of the original swords that Hutton has claimed were part of the same casting with the sword found on Oak Island - the one from Naples Museum...."

Over a dozen matches have been found to the Nova Scotia sword and have been collated in a data base of fakes that describes all the matching physical features and group types that thus makes them fakes. You obviously haven’t been following along.

There is zero evidence of an original from any museum. Jovan has a problem providing any factual evidence of anything but he has the gift of gab in his self serving ability to claim just about anything. Facts matter.

"..... or the one held by the private ancient artifact collector in Florida"

The Florida sword is on the internet – look it up – it has the same matching features of now 6 confirmed fakes.

"....but where is the orginal item"

You spelled original wrong. To repeat, there is no original; Jovan has never produced any evidence of an original. Facts matter. If you are referring to the first one ever to come out of a bivalve mold around 1970, well then that's different, so good for you.

"..... recently discovered ancient Roman mine in northern Germany near a village that is known for making ceromonial votives "

You spelled ceremonial wrong. Please point to where this is in his sword report, or please point to where he has published any evidence whatsoever of this. As noted above, and to repeat, Jovan has a problem providing any factual evidence of anything but he has the gift of gab in his self serving ability to claim just about anything. Facts matter, or did I say that already.

"These mines are puported to have high zinc brass properties, which of course makes them rare for ancient Rome metalurgy"

You spelled purported and metallurgy wrong. Again with the facts and evidence stuff. Have you read or followed Jovan at all? Have you specifically read the plagiarised article from David Duckworth in his sword report? Have you read or followed Andy at all? Have you read Dr. Brosseau’s report at all? You do realize that Jovan is trying to argue that literally thousands of Roman artifacts have high zinc content – do you? If you did realize that Jovan is trying to argue that literally thousands of Roman artifacts have high zinc content, then why would you say this makes them rare, because that would be a dumb thing to say?

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 11:05:48 am

Hey Peter/Andy,

Peter - thank you for your grammar clarifications, however I'm not sure why you're attacking me for raising questions that Andy invited us to do on his original post here. This story was widely reported around the world last year, so perhaps the researchers, academic group, and the journalists have seen and been given access to more evidence then was shared with the public. Andy my questions still remain the same. I'm referring to the material in the public domain. The researchers have made it very clear that the swords you point to are all replicas from the originals, so lets focus on those claims. This has to make some sense for you as interesting historical items are usually replicated and sold, even as forgeries. Since you have investigated this story deeply can you enlighten us on your research into the following specifics?

1) It's purported one of the original swords came from a museum in Naples, Italy. Who did you talk to there and what have they told you?

2) It's purported one of the other original swords came from a private artifact dealer in Florida. Who did you talk to and what did you learn?

3) It's purported this was part of a research collection that is going to be in a white paper by the Ancient Artifact Preservation Society. Who did you speak to, what did they tell you, did they share the summary data?

4) It's purported the original sword's share a lode stone. The current custodian is either Oak Island Tours (Lagina Brothers) or Prometheus Entertainment (show's producers). Did you contact them to review the sword independently? Who did you speak to and what did they say?

5) It's purported the originals were made from a recently discovered ancient German calamine ore mine in Breinigerberg, Germany, which has naturally occurring zinc. Who have you spoken to relating to this?

From the Epoch Times 1/20/2016:

"Pulitzer believes the bronze used in the sword may have come from a mine in Breinigerberg, Germany. Two Roman swords of the same model were found near an ancient Roman settlement at this location, and this mine has zinc naturally occurring in its ores. He said this may account for the zinc content, that the zinc wasn’t added in as it is with modern brass. Dr. Brosseau had characterized it as brass. Brass and bronze are both copper alloys and both were used by ancient Romans. Pulitzer maintains, however, that it should be classified as bronze because the zinc is naturally occurring rather than added."

The above questions are those that we have yet to see answered definitively to set the record straight. Have you thought about hosting a debate between Dr. Brosseau and Mr. Pulitzer to resolve this saga?

- Bill

Bob Jase

12/5/2016 11:43:54 am

"1) It's purported one of the original swords came from a museum in Naples, Italy. Who did you talk to there and what have they told you?"

Its not up to Andy to chase items down through every museum in the world, its' up to Hutton to say which museum its' from and he hasn't even donw that.

"2) It's purported one of the other original swords came from a private artifact dealer in Florida. Who did you talk to and what did you learn?"

Read the back posts on this, its all there.

"3) It's purported this was part of a research collection that is going to be in a white paper by the Ancient Artifact Preservation Society. Who did you speak to, what did they tell you, did they share the summary data?"

Same thing, read the history of this.

"4) It's purported the original sword's share a lode stone. The current custodian is either Oak Island Tours (Lagina Brothers) or Prometheus Entertainment (show's producers). Did you contact them to review the sword independently? Who did you speak to and what did they say?"

Same thing again.

"5) It's purported the originals were made from a recently discovered ancient German calamine ore mine in Breinigerberg, Germany, which has naturally occurring zinc. Who have you spoken to relating to this?"

Brass is not a naturally occurring alloy. READ already.

Mark L

12/14/2016 02:44:44 am

Kill Bill, what's the name of the museum in Naples that apparently has the sword? Feel free to go through Pulitzer's work on the subject with as fine a tooth-comb as you like. For such an evidential smoking gun, one would think he'd be trumpeting this information loudly from the rooftops, but as yet he's been unable to tell us the name of the place. Just a simple bit of information. As soon as he lets us know which museum it's in, we can do our research on that claim. Fair enough?

GEE

12/7/2016 05:07:23 pm

Hey Bill Kelly.. bite me. You don't know shit. You are releasing retarded facts Hutton told you.. take that to the bank dude. What? Did your master send you here because he is blocked?

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 12:13:21 pm

Bob,

No you READ already. No one is saying its Brass, but a brass-like alloy. It's not very common and perhaps Dr. Brosseau would be unfamiliar of this fact given her limited scope of study in ancient metallurgy and thus her equipment would catagorize it as modern brass. Here is a recent article of ancient "brass like alloy" found with high zinc compound off the coast of greek. If this was as rare as gold then surely it would be used for very special items. I'm curious what Andy thinks of all this.

http://www.seeker.com/atlantis-legendary-metal-found-in-shipwreck-1769435405.html

"Today most scholars agree orichalcum is a brass-like alloy, which was made in antiquity by cementation. This process was achieved with the reaction of zinc ore, charcoal and copper metal in a crucible. Analyzed with X-ray fluorescence by Dario Panetta, of TQ - Tecnologies for Quality, the 39 ingots turned to be an alloy made with 75-80 percent copper, 15-20 percent zinc and small percentages of nickel, lead and iron."

- Bill

Andy White

12/5/2016 12:37:15 pm

That's still not high enough to account for the amount of zinc (30-35%) in the Nova Scotia sword.

Again, if you looked at one of these actual swords you would immediately dismiss the idea that it's a "very special item." They're cheaply cast, roughly finished, and coated with a fake patina.

The patina was rubbed off on the knees of the Nova Scotia sword, revealing the shiny brass undernearth. Pulitzer identified that exposed brass as gold. How is there gold left on the highest spot OVER the patina on a brass artifact? It's ridiculous.

Christa Brosseau has forgotten more about metal than Pulitzer will ever know. If you want to pick one to trust, I'd go with the one who hasn't tried to make a career out of lying about fake artifacts.

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 02:02:38 pm

Andy,

Thanks for your proper response. This particular mine seems to be crticial to this investigation. I'm surprised you were unaware. I read previously that this mine produced naturally occurring zinc exceeding 30% so this would qualify (can't locate the translated German report). We learn every day in science that new findings and observations will challenge prior assertions. Perhaps this is the case or its a fabrication? I'm sure you have better research tools then us so i'm curious what you are able to discover for us on these ancient Roman brass-like alloys.

- Bill

Mark L

12/14/2016 02:50:28 am

Kill Bill, I'd think on this information only coming to light when evidence refuting his original claim came up. "Moving the goalposts", is the term for this sort of argument. If I wanted to prove something rather unlikely, as Pulitzer seems to want to do here, I'd have done all this work before loudly shouting "it's 100% confirmed that this is an ancient Roman sword".

He says something, experts in those fields tell him he's wrong, and the goalposts move. If we had a Kickstarter to raise money for an exhaustive search of this mine in Germany, all that'd happen is he'd say the ore in question is all gone, or perhaps it's a different mine, or something like that. My evidence for this is decades of watching people like Pulitzer try and make their name with a claim similar to this one. Over and over again, and they always manage to find some patsy willing to fall for their poorly applied patina of legitimacy.

Peter Geuzen

12/5/2016 01:39:53 pm

Bill, some questions for you:

1) It's purported one of the original swords came from a museum in Naples, Italy. Who did you talk to there and what have they told you?

2) It's purported one of the other original swords came from a private artifact dealer in Florida. Who did you talk to and what did you learn?

3) It's purported this was part of a research collection that is going to be in a white paper by the Ancient Artifact Preservation Society. Who did you speak to, what did they tell you, did they share the summary data?

4) It's purported the original sword's share a lode stone. The current custodian is either Oak Island Tours (Lagina Brothers) or Prometheus Entertainment (show's producers). Did you contact them to review the sword independently? Who did you speak to and what did they say?

5) It's purported the originals were made from a recently discovered ancient German calamine ore mine in Breinigerberg, Germany, which has naturally occurring zinc. Who have you spoken to relating to this?

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 02:08:41 pm

Peter,

I'm not the one conducting the investigation and neither are you. These questions were meant to be answered by Andy to better understand his research efforts. It's not helpful for you to just attack someone who is authentically interested in seeking the truth. Let's be more helpful.

Bill

Mark L

12/14/2016 02:52:25 am

If you're interested in "seeking the truth", why haven't you done so? Why limit this seeking to asking questions (which have already been answered, ad nauseam) on this site? Why expect someone else to spend time and money disproving every random thought that wanders through some charlatan's head?

SDO

12/7/2016 04:04:17 am

Bill,
To answer question #2, on Andy's behalf, I personally knocked on the door of every resident in Florida and none of the people I talked to had the sword in question.

GEE

12/7/2016 05:11:30 pm

Hey Bill Kelly you learned some big words - pretty impressive dude.

Peter Geuzen

12/5/2016 02:37:06 pm

Bill,

Only a couple more questions for you:

1) Explain your understanding of 'burden of proof'

2) Explain your understanding of 'falsifiable hypothesis'

3) Tell us again who claims the sword is Roman.

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 03:47:29 pm

Peter,

Just trying to get to the bottom of this. Doesn't sound like you have anything helpful to contribute. Many people question the History Channel as purely entertainment narrative so you should always be skeptical. There is a growing body of evidence by researchers supporting ancient brass like alloy metallurgy. Unless we have all the facts it's anyone's guess where these if real swords are from and why they were in Nova Scotia. The question we need to understand for such investigation is it possible that this metal compound could be ancient Roman, are there historical features, and of course the providence of the discovery. We can't always dismiss something right off the bat because it's unual and doesn't conform to our current understanding of the world. Why doesn't anyone want to show us raw testing data and investigate these mines? There is absolutely no discussion about this major point. In fact Andy was totally unaware of this. Doesnt appear he made a real effort to contact all the sources sited in the story, so unless those are validated, who do we turn to for the truth, the history channel?

Bill

Only Me

12/5/2016 05:16:38 pm

Bill, here are some facts that will shed some light on the subject.

>>> recently discovered ancient Roman mine in northern Germany near a village that is known for making ceromonial votives<<<

It has been known since the 18th and 19th centuries such ore could be found near Breinigerberg. The remains of a Roman settlement have been found in the village itself, with the buildings showing the Romans worked in the region between 100-400 BCE. This is not new information.

>>>These mines are puported to have high zinc brass properties<<<

No. Calamine was the historic name for zinc ore. It's no longer used because there are two types of zinc ore: smithsonite (zinc carbonate) and hemimorphite (zinc silicate). Hemimorphite is the rarer of the two, but both are very similar in appearance, requiring chemical analysis to distinguish them.

Here is why the second quote is wrong: until the 18th century, calamine was essential for the production of brass since metallic zinc does not exist in nature and no technique was known to produce it. The ore has naturally occurring zinc content, but brass is a man-made alloy.

>>>Pulitzer believes the bronze used in the sword may have come from a mine in Breinigerberg, Germany.<<<

Only chemical analysis could determine that.

>>>He said this may account for the zinc content, that the zinc wasn’t added in as it is with modern brass.<<<

Again, I repeat this important detail: until the 18th century, calamine was essential for the production of brass since metallic zinc does not exist in nature and no technique was known to produce it.

GEE

12/7/2016 05:14:43 pm

Bill Kelly, who are you really? Rumor is your Hutton but your writing skills have really advanced.. not sure know.

Peter Geuzen

12/5/2016 04:02:01 pm

Bill,

Do you think those that want to rewrite history should be held to lower, the same, or higher standards of scholarship than academia? Pick one.

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 06:01:38 pm

Peter,

Higher standards of course! The point is that I've read that calamine and other ancient metal processes for creating this brass-like alloy would show up on modern testing equipment as brass since its not a standard composition and only those trained in this unique area of ancient metallurgy would know the difference. So let's have higher standards and involve a professor who is trained in ancient metallurgy techniques, one most likely with experience from European sites.

Bill

Peter Geuzen

12/5/2016 06:12:12 pm

Do you believe that Hutton Pulitzer is qualified to academic standards to report on Roman metallurgy? Do you believe that Hutton Pulitzer’s sword report satisfies the criteria of falsifiable hypothesis and the presentation of burden of proof using scholarly standards of academia? Please explain why it does or why it does not.

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 10:43:19 pm

Peter,

I'm not in a position to qualify Hutton's metallurgy qualifications. I do know that he is a smithsonian laureate and one of the leading inventors of his generation, is working with a team accedemics and highly qualified scientists from major universities, and his business partner Scott Wolter is one of the most well known and highly respected form breaking new historical research and inventing an entire new dispcline. They both have been featured on or advsior to major televison shows, have been published in journals, authors of numerous books, have been vetted by show producers and journalists, have received world wide media acclaim for their discoveries, and are keynote speakers at numerous prestigious historical conferences and forums. They also together have massive fan communities. These guys are like the Tesla of historical research next to the old line Ford Motors. At least they are presenting new ideas and challenging conventional thinking. We should give them credit for that. But their claims will and should past muster with fair and unbiased academic review process.

Who should we compare Hutton too?

You, Andy, profiteering history channel producers, the hobbyist Lagina bothers, chemical professors in Nova Scotia???

Bill

Only Me

12/6/2016 12:41:50 am

Sorry, "Bill", but that last comment was crammed so full of prepackaged J. Hutton Pulitzer brand BS, you should be supplying complimentary shovels. Both Pulitzer and Wolter are laughingstocks, perfect examples of what happens when ego and the promise of celebrity are more important than facts.

Joe Scales

12/5/2016 07:35:10 pm

Uh, fellas... Bill is Hutton.

Kill Bill

12/5/2016 08:18:32 pm

Joe,

Is that what you call valid inquiries on here? Nice try Lagina :)

Bill

Joe Scales

12/6/2016 08:11:15 am

Well, I suppose since you and your buddy Wolter can't claim I'm Dick Nielsen anymore, it's on to the Lagina family; as you tend to group those with whom you've burned bridges to any rational opposition to your chicanery in order to rally your minions. Oh, I miss the old days... when I was accused of being just an ordinary government disinformant by your imbecilic ilk.

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 01:01:54 pm

Hutton is a liar, a hypocrite, a non-academic wanna-be, a con, and a poor excuse for a human being. I find it amazing that their are people out there such as yourself that believe that lying piece of shit. But like Mr Barnum said, "there's a sucker born every minute".

Kill Bill

12/6/2016 12:41:46 am

Peter (Andy),

I'm not in a position to qualify Hutton's metallurgy qualifications. I do however know that he is a Smithsonian laureate and one of the leading inventors of his generation, who is working with a team of academics and highly qualified scientists from major universities, and his business partner, Scott Wolter, is one of the most well known and respected historical researcher who also invented an entire new archeological disincline. Both have been featured on, stared in, or advised major television series, have been published in journals, magazines, and authored of numerous books on historical subjects, have been vetted by networks producers and mainstream journalists, having received world wide media acclaim for their recent discoveries, and regularly keynote numerous prestigious historical conferences and forums. They also have massive communities of passionate fans. These guys are like the Tesla of historical research next to the old dog Ford Motors. At least they are presenting new ideas and challenging the conventional thinking. We should give them credit for that. But their claims will and should past muster within a fair and unbiased academic review process.

But again who should we compare him too?

Amateur blogger Andy, profiteering history channel producers, hobbyist Lagina bothers, or associate chemical professors in Nova Scotia???

Let's get to the bottom of this while not putting our heads in the sand.

Bill

Only Me

12/6/2016 12:44:06 am

Still waiting for the complimentary shovel, "Bill". Or is that also a pre-order item?

Kill Bill

12/7/2016 12:56:18 am

For you complementary of course!

Jim

12/7/2016 04:34:37 pm

Kill Bill,,,
," who is working with a team of academics and highly qualified scientists from major universities,"

No he is not, just more lies !,,, Name one please.

Andy White

12/6/2016 05:52:39 am

Hi Bill,

I'll tell you the same thing I used to tell Pulitzer when he was brave enough to comment here under his own name: I appreciate it every time you write something down, as it provides another opportunity to demonstrate the ridiculousness of both the sword claim and those who are still proponents of it. Thank you for that.

As for Pulitzer, what has he done? He has certainly demonstrated his knack for buffoonery and pretending to treasure hunt while wearing costumes, but that's about all I can think of. He has produced nothing scholarly (no publications other than copy-paste treasure hunting books and a "sword report" that is composed mostly of other people's work), and we've watched a parade of his silly claims go from bold proclamations about "rewriting history" to being forgotten on the garbage heap (remember the Spear of Destiny? remember the Minoans? remember the excavation of a giant?). The sword is just one more in that long line of failures: a bold assertion that quickly fell apart under scrutiny.

Pulitzer is a laughing stock among the "fringe," many of whom have communicated with me privately to tell me he is a joke. It is widely alleged that he purchases views/listens for his videos and Soundcloud performances to make it appear as though he has a following. Why anyone would hitch themselves to his wagon at this point I do not know.

But all of Pulitzer's silliness, lack of expertise, and history of promoting fake artifacts aside, we can still ask whether the sword is an ancient Roman artifact or not.

All the evidence at this point strongly suggests that all the swords, including the Nova Scotia sword, are modern creations. There is not one scrap of positive evidence that any of these swords, including all the ones made from copper alloys, date to ancient Rome. For information on the swords, I refer you to this page:

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/fake-hercules-swords.html

As Peter pointed out, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. Pulitzer has come nowhere close to meeting that burden. He initially proclaimed the sword to be a "100% confirmed Roman sword" but has back-tracked, changed his story, and lied so many times that it's clear he didn't do his homework. He still has not provided the basic data necessary to evaluate his claim (e.g. his XRF data, details about the supposed "Naples Museum" sword that would support his case, etc.), and at this point one can only conclude that those basic pieces of information either don't exist or don't actually support his case.

Sorry, Bill, but the sword is dead in the water. Pulitzer can't back of his "100% confirmed" statement now, of course, because he would then lose whatever credibility he still has with those few people who haven't been able to figure out his shell game. Maybe you should ask Pulitzer all of these questions and see what answers you get. Maybe Pulitzer should ask himself some of these questions. Maybe it's time to go back to selling rain water and magic crystals.

Jim

12/7/2016 12:50:00 am

Just for fun, I thought I would list all of Huttons discoveries and claims that have turned out to be true.

Start of list;

End of list.

Kill Bill, feel free to add to the list.

GEE

12/7/2016 05:16:47 pm

Hahaaa Jim !!

Kill Bill

12/7/2016 03:25:21 pm

Andy,

So it seems you rather be a blogger and commentator than actually doing the real investigative work of finding the truth. The fact you haven't made a concerted effort to reach any of the sources is very telling in your seriousiness. Hutton may be on to something or maybe not but at least he's pushing the boundary of many preconceived knowledge in history with his original ideas, thoughts, and approaches which has built his audience and expanded his personal brand influence. On the contrary he does not serve himself well in presenting his cases and assertions given he's not an academic, but an investor and entrepreneur. Perhaps that's where a lot of the personal animosity comes from, including yourself. It appears that his new partnership with Scott Wolter will only serve him well as he brings the academic rigger, scientific process, professional thoughtfulness to his energy, inventiveness, and showman enthusiasm. I for one am hopeful for their evolution, not their demise as other, including yourself, are advocating. Let's encourage new ideas and thoughts, embrace failure, and support them with constructive feedback and open inquiry.

Andy, when will you take the personal risk, invest the resources, and have the courage to explore unconventional ideas and present them to the public? Until then you are not in any position to mock Hutton personally, his work, or any other explorer for that matter.

Let the work and research stand on its own. If you are not prived to the research findings and data then conduct your own research!

Blogging must be really hard, isn't it?

Bill

Andy White

12/7/2016 03:40:46 pm

Blogging is pretty easy, actually. I find it relaxing. I was able to obliterate Pulitzer's ridiculous sword claim in my spare time, while still doing a real job.

You should go read some of the sword posts from the beginning. I did actually correspond with David Kenney, owner of the Florida sword (sword 2). It appears that Pulitzer pilfered the whole "Hercules the navigator" narrative directly from his website.

Many of us have spent a lot of time searching g for the purported "Naples Museum" sword, including contacting the museum directly. Nothing. If Pulitzer has proof that sich a sword exists (an assertion absolutely key to his claim) why does he not simply produce it? In fact he has lied about it, plain and simple, calling the Italian eBay sword (sword 4) the Naples Museum sword. Again, I encourage you to channel your interest into learning the facts of the story. Good luck.

Jim

12/7/2016 04:59:45 pm

Bill (hutton)

"Let the work and research stand on its own. If you are not prived to the research findings and data then conduct your own research!"

hahahaha,, the work and research doesn't "stand on it's own", thats the point. It's been proven to be garbage.
" then conduct your own research!" lol,, thats exactly what Andy did and showed the sword to be modern !

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 01:14:14 pm

Bill
Dude, your a lost cause. If you can't see the problems in your own arguments how can you possibly be critical of Andy or any others on this site? Many if not most of which are academics. You posted to start an argument. Sure does sound like Phylaw. But like others have pointed out, if it is you Phlyaw, your writing skills have improved even if your thinking process has not. It is entertaining to read.

GEE

12/7/2016 05:18:26 pm

Jim you noticed he is only addressing Andy mostly, bill Kelly can not stay in a conversation like this one and be normal.. I'd say this is Hutton all day.

Jim

12/7/2016 05:43:00 pm

Gee, The spilling and use an Englash language as a dedd gaveaway.

"of many preconceived knowledge in history "
" If you are not prived to the research findings"
And my personal favorite " he brings the academic rigger,",, what's that ? associate professor of sail setting ?

McFad

12/7/2016 05:54:57 pm

Andy, I don't know why you constantly ask hutoon or researcher wannabe, bill kelly for the data that was taken from the sword shown on the Oak Island TV show that hutton claims was made when his handy dandy XRF scanned it. scandalous! Andy you have asked hutoon and bill many times just to produce the claims that hutoon had made with no prevail. Don't you know that Nova Scotians are the worst people that hutoon has ever met! I don't like seeing a grown man cry! Please don't hurt his feelings anymore, he (hutton) needs people to believe in him, how else could live if not for an audience! hutoon you are on in 5..4..3..2..1...CURTAIN CALL..........the show must go on!

Jim

12/7/2016 06:03:07 pm

Because the rest of you have nothing to say. I use my mobile so hence the grammar. Yes read the previous posts and Andys research is very ammatuer as their are some glaring holes in it. The sword was moved out of the muesum as was previously stated. No I'm not Hutton or Bill Kelly, sorry to disappoint you all. So this site is basically Andy and a handful of stooges. Andy are you going to break any big discoveries in the media any time soon? Are you planning to release any white papers on ground breaking research? I didn't think so and won't hold my breath. Go ahead guys, just attack me for raising honest questions here while refusing to answer the investigation source details.

- Bill

Jim

12/7/2016 06:31:23 pm

Hutton,, I'm not sure if you replying to me or pretending to be me.

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 10:05:51 am

Jim - That was meant to be a reply to you.

- Bill

passcode

12/7/2016 06:53:16 pm

you say "Andy are you going to break any big discoveries in the media any time soon? Are you planning to release any white papers on ground breaking research," does that mean your implying that HP has done either of those things to date, he gives no facts, no data just does a little song and dance of distraction never letting a question be answered

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 10:18:45 am

Passcode,

Yes he has presented his ideas. If you want to challenge him directly you can always attend one of the numerous conferences he goes to present his research. Andy doesn't present any new discoveries or research. How can you reasonable compare both of them?

Bill

Peter Geuzen

12/7/2016 06:03:20 pm

“I have always shared my information” - Scott Wolter

“Make sure people get unfiltered data” - Hutton Pulitzer

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 10:27:51 am

Peter,

Very cute Peter. Thats all you have to say? It's up to them who and how they share their data, just like any other researcher doing ground breaking work (this does not include Andy White). Most will opt to do peer reviewed, assuming there is not any institutional bias. Others will wait years to build a complete comprehensive case, especially if the research touches many cross disciplines, and yet others will explore and find the discoveries, letting academics to review and publish it.

Bill

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 01:22:58 pm

If there was any truth to the possibility of Roman visitations to the new world academics would be all over it. People like Philyaw like to make outrageous claims for personal fame. They could care less about facts as long as they get attention.

GEE

12/7/2016 07:26:14 pm

Jim.. of late..
You are a person who is either Hutton or someone who shovels hood poop behind him. Fact of the matter is. If Hutton has any real data to Jack up his claims, it would be out there for all to see. He thrives on attention, this would be the very thing to make people stand up and applause. Truth is he has nothing to give us. He has no data to share that would prove he was right and we are wrong. Until then I stand behind Andy. His research is amazing. His time spent is more than we all could ask for, he hides nothing and shared everything. Tell Hutton to get the data out there or this discussion is over.

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 11:24:21 am

GEE,

I'm not either of them. Because i am raising questions of which you are completely biased against, therefore I must be one of them. That is all your brain can rationalize i guess. Keep in mind the combined fan communities between Hutton and Wolter is 100,000 larger than the crickets who come in here. I don't know what research is amazing about Andy? He doesn't do any real research into anything. I was hopeful he actually looked into things from an investigative approach but his past posts are more about troll entertainment. For example he's done more work comparing the replica photos than tracking down the originals. He's done more work promoting the History Channel's propaganda than investigating the source mines as stated. I don't work with Hutton or his team, but I can tell you that they or any other researcher should not be pressured to release data until they feel they are ready to do so. Most will opt to do peer reviewed, assuming there is not any institutional bias. Others will wait years to build a complete comprehensive case, especially if the research touches many cross disciplines, and yet others will just explore and find the discoveries, letting academics to review the data and publish the scientific research.

Bill

Joe Scales

12/9/2016 02:44:14 pm

Combined fan base of 100,000? Wolter probably has a bunch, as he at least had a tv show, despite being a complete idiot who might even believe his own outrageous speculative nonsense. But you Hutton? You're only a wannabe. A conman. A joke.

Good people, why argue with this jackass. Just let him whimper his way to obscurity, as jumping on the coattails of other more successful in the fringe industry is obviously a futile endeavor for him given his current straights.

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 01:27:25 pm

Most don't open there mouths and make outrageous claims unless/untill they are certain of the accuracy of their facts.

Only Me

12/7/2016 08:04:17 pm

Here's the answer to your questions, Bill.

1) It's purported one of the original swords came from a museum in Naples, Italy. Who did you talk to there and what have they told you?

Andy: "Many of us have spent a lot of time searching for the purported 'Naples Museum' sword, including contacting the museum directly. Nothing."

2) It's purported one of the other original swords came from a private artifact dealer in Florida. Who did you talk to and what did you learn?

Andy: "I did actually correspond with David Kenney, owner of the Florida sword (sword 2). It appears that Pulitzer pilfered the whole 'Hercules the navigator' narrative directly from his website."

3) It's purported this was part of a research collection that is going to be in a white paper by the Ancient Artifact Preservation Society. Who did you speak to, what did they tell you, did they share the summary data?

Pulitzer: "Mike actually we held the second report, ie white paper to present at two different conferences first to gain Thier input. Thus that is in process and it is normal procedure to present at conferences when you can as I am doing."

4) It's purported the original sword's share a lode stone. The current custodian is either Oak Island Tours (Lagina Brothers) or Prometheus Entertainment (show's producers). Did you contact them to review the sword independently? Who did you speak to and what did they say?

Andy: "Myles McCallum sent me an email this morning with a list of the observations he made about the Nova Scotia sword while filming last night's episode of The Curse of Oak Island. He has given me permission to publish them here."

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/comments-of-myles-mccallum-about-the-nova-scotia-sword

Andy: "The 'sword' episode of The Curse of Oak Island aired in Canada last night, and Dr. Christa Brosseau is now free to discuss her analysis and results. I am very happy that Brosseau has agreed to let me publish this statement here."

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/summary-of-the-analysis-of-the-nova-scotia-sword-performed-by-christa-brosseau

5) It's purported the originals were made from a recently discovered ancient German calamine ore mine in Breinigerberg, Germany, which has naturally occurring zinc. Who have you spoken to relating to this?

Only Me: "It has been known since the 18th and 19th centuries such ore could be found near Breinigerberg. The remains of a Roman settlement have been found in the village itself, with the buildings showing the Romans worked in the region between 100-400 BCE. This is not new information."

For someone "authentically interested in seeking the truth", I hope you don't ignore the answers to the above questions you claimed "are those that we have yet to see answered definitively to set the record straight."

No more excuses, Bill. Where is Pulitzer's white paper?

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 11:56:58 am

Only Me,

I don't know where the full white paper is. Your guess is as good as mine. You might want to reach out to Hutton, his team, or the people at the AAPS who is apparently working with him on the project instead of huffing and puffing on here. Try to be resourceful. Have you tried doing that recently? I'm not here to defend his work as there is no way for me to do that as I have not read the white paper or seen any of their research data. All I can do is get you to see how this stuff really works and allow them do the process they need to do to prove their case and present when they are ready. This would be the most prudent thing to do. Perhaps people on here would stop bashing explorers if they knew what they have to go through each and every day. Its not something you all deal with including Andy. Let's commend them for their efforts and offer solutions that can assist in concluding their investigations.

I don't have the answers to your questions, but I can try to add some insight as how I would approach this as a case investigator:

1) It's purported one of the original swords came from a museum in Naples, Italy. Who did you talk to there and what have they told you?

Andy: "Many of us have spent a lot of time searching for the purported 'Naples Museum' sword, including contacting the museum directly. Nothing."

Me: This is very generic statement. Who did he speak with? Only the curators would know the custody history of the museum. Not all items are on display all the time. Perhaps it has a different historical name? Its really funny none of you don't call him out on any of these facts.

2) It's purported one of the other original swords came from a private artifact dealer in Florida. Who did you talk to and what did you learn?

Andy: "I did actually correspond with David Kennedy, owner of the Florida sword (sword 2). It appears that Pulitzer pilfered the whole 'Hercules the navigator' narrative directly from his website."

Me: This is not even a real response. The only piece of information that Andy got was that Hutton got info off his website? Can you expand on that Andy? What did David Kennedy actually say? Did you ask and were you provided the facts, chain of custody, test results, and authentication methods used to verify its an authentic original sword?

3) It's purported this was part of a research collection that is going to be in a white paper by the Ancient Artifact Preservation Society. Who did you speak to, what did they tell you, did they share the summary data?

Pulitzer: "Mike actually we held the second report, ie white paper to present at two different conferences first to gain Their input. Thus that is in process and it is normal procedure to present at conferences when you can as I am doing."

Me: So he's basically saying he wants more people to review it first before they release it. Did you follow that? That should be good thing if we can about solid research. Learn to be patient. Hows that an issue?

4) It's purported the original sword's share a lode stone. The current custodian is either Oak Island Tours (Lagina Brothers) or Prometheus Entertainment (show's producers). Did you contact them to review the sword independently? Who did you speak to and what did they say?

Andy: "Myles McCallum sent me an email this morning with a list of the observations he made about the Nova Scotia sword while filming last night's episode of The Curse of Oak Island. He has given me permission to publish them here."

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/comments-of-myles-mccallum-about-the-nova-scotia-sword

Me: He doesn't address the lode stone issue. It's possible the sword was buried in sand which would account for less wear. Myles is making a lot of bad assumptions, one of which that this was supposed to be a weapon. If this was a votive, something of an honor and even having a purpose like a compass you would not expect the sides to be sharp. So there still lots of unknowns on this that only future testing can reveal.

...continued...

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 12:07:41 pm

Part 2:

Andy: "The 'sword' episode of The Curse of Oak Island aired in Canada last night, and Dr. Christa Brosseau is now free to discuss her analysis and results. I am very happy that Brosseau has agreed to let me publish this statement here."

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/summary-of-the-analysis-of-the-nova-scotia-sword-performed-by-christa-brosseau

Me: Again this could have not been a real sword but a votive, and if came from a rare Roman mine with very high zinc then it would be out of the standardization that may have been used. XRF is very accurate and would be surprised if Hutton's data would vastly different than hers.

5) It's purported the originals were made from a recently discovered ancient German calamine ore mine in Breinigerberg, Germany, which has naturally occurring zinc. Who have you spoken to relating to this?

Only Me: "It has been known since the 18th and 19th centuries such ore could be found near Breinigerberg. The remains of a Roman settlement have been found in the village itself, with the buildings showing the Romans worked in the region between 100-400 BCE. This is not new information."

Me: True, but recent discoveries there and new research has showed its a place of votives that had very interesting metal properties. Why none of you have investigated this lead is really mind boggling to me.

There you go i didn't ignore the questions. Keep searching!

Bill

Only Me

12/9/2016 01:39:52 pm

I see you're making excuses to try and shift the burden of proof from Pulitzer to Andy. That's not how it works. Pulitzer made the claim; he's the one who has to provide the evidence that claim is true. Nice try, though.

1) Of course, it's a generic statement. Efforts were made to contact the museum with no success. That means the museum hasn't responded.

2) It is a real response that answers you're specific questions. You just don't like the answers.

3) It's an issue because Pulitzers has repeatedly said the white paper supports his claim, but, he won't release it to the public. Doesn't it seem odd to you, at all, that he chooses to keep his best evidence away from scrutiny? What is he hiding?

4) The lode stone is a non-issue, as there is no example of a sword from any past civilization/culture that included such a device in an instrument clearly meant for war. There are no known precedents for votives to possess this feature, either.

Also, how do you know Myles made bad assumptions? Are you an expert on ancient swords?

As to the XRF data, the analysis performed by Brosseau is far more comprehensive and accurate. To favor the XRF data above a far better test, tells me you're grasping at straws.

5) I did my own research and spelled out for you in plain language how three of Pulitzer's claims concerning the Breinigerberg mine don't hold water. To wit:

>>>These mines are puported to have high zinc brass properties<<<

No. Calamine was the historic name for zinc ore. It's no longer used because there are two types of zinc ore: smithsonite (zinc carbonate) and hemimorphite (zinc silicate). Hemimorphite is the rarer of the two, but both are very similar in appearance, requiring chemical analysis to distinguish them.

Here is why the second quote is wrong: until the 18th century, calamine was essential for the production of brass since metallic zinc does not exist in nature and no technique was known to produce it. The ore has naturally occurring zinc content, but brass is a man-made alloy.

>>>Pulitzer believes the bronze used in the sword may have come from a mine in Breinigerberg, Germany.<<<

Only chemical analysis could determine that.

>>>He said this may account for the zinc content, that the zinc wasn’t added in as it is with modern brass.<<<

Again, I repeat this important detail: until the 18th century, calamine was essential for the production of brass since metallic zinc does not exist in nature and no technique was known to produce it.

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 02:06:50 pm

Just like any good fringe believer, you can't deviate from your preconceived beliefs regardless of the facts. You have asked several questions, and have been answered. You have been given sources for more facts. You ignore the answers and move right in for the attack. If your not Phylaw then I feel sorry for you. I can understand him defending his BS but why on earth would any sane person buy into his nonsense?

Mike Morgan

12/8/2016 02:12:17 am

Kill Bill/Jim,

I do not believe you are Pulitzer or Bill Kelly, not enough spelling and grammatical errors or over use/misuse of punctuation marks and capitalization, however the "styling" of your comments is reminiscent of a past commenters "style" and your slip of commenting as Jim begs me to ask if you are not the "Jim Stella" found commenting in Andy's blog of 1/12/16, http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/innoculate-yourself-against-the-stupid-some-3d-scans-of-the-california-sword-for-tonights-episode-of-the-curse-of-oak-island#comments as well as a comment under the next days blog?

In your comment above, 12/5/2016 11:05:48 am, you asked: "3) It's purported this was part of a research collection that is going to be in a white paper by the Ancient Artifact Preservation Society. Who did you speak to, what did they tell you, did they share the summary data?" Although it was directed to Andy, allow me to point to my own inquiry experience involving AAPS.

On 6/17 I sent this on the AAPS contact page:

Re: “Multi-Discipline Forensic History Research Group Rewriting History of Pre-Columbian Contact in the Americas” report, aka "The White Paper" with Hutton Pulitzer as lead researcher and author.

Your article on your home page stated the report was scheduled to be released this spring, 2016. I am very interested in reading this report, but I have not been able to find it as of yet.

Would you please inform me of where I may read or obtain a copy of this report?

Thank you, Mike

I followed with another query each week for the next four weeks. The silence from them has been deafening.

In part, "Jim Stella" commented on 1/13/16 12:19:30 am under the aforementioned blog, "... I should disclose that I'm in academia at a major university in a highly relevant discipline (I'm not using my real name and its not the above mentioned). From what I gather it appears that this sword and artifacts have been independently authenticated by at least three separate groups and institutions, if not more, which has has the attention of myself and some colleagues. We will be making a formal request to AAPS to peer review the report. ..." If you are as I think, that "Jim Stella", how did you fair with the AAPS?

In your comment above of 12/4/2016 03:30:10 pm, you state "Did you ever locate any of the original swords that Hutton has claimed were part of the same casting with the sword found on Oak Island - the one from Naples Museum which is no longer there (apparently it was moved out in the 70s or 80s, but to whom or where?) ..." Would you please cite the source that states it is no longer at the Naples Museum and that it was "moved out in the 70's or 80's"?

I have monitored Pulitzers claims very closely and I remember he himself only ever stating the sister original "Roman Sword" as being "in" or "at" the (unknown) Naples Museum. Also Bill Kelly, a Facebook friend of and staunch supporter of Pulitzer also must still believe the elusive sister sword is still in the hands of the (unknown) Naples Museum based on his comment just the other day, December 2 at 12:14pm, in reply to a request by Andy to show proof of said sister "Naples" sword under Andy's post of November 28 at 6:46 PM in the Facebook group "Ancient Origins Group", where he stated in part "...I've been in contact with curators of the archaeological Museum in Naples and ask them for the best documentation of the collection. It usually takes a couple days to hear back...." In fact, the only reference I have ever run across of it being moved from the (unknown) Naples Museum was hearsay from a one time poster in comments under Andy's blog of 1/17/16, http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/dear-ms-simons-pulitzer-lied-to-you-about-the-italian-ebay-sword#comments :
Javier Muniz 1/18/2016 12:04:37 am
"Hello Cleo from Spain! Yes my friend used did graduate research at the Naples National Archeological Museum for Roman classical studies. He was always very interested in this sword as its quite special and very rare, and he last heard it was moved to the British Museum for testing with others as part of an upcoming documentary series. He also said some Italian criminal group - probably the mafia? - tried to steal it at one point so they had to move to a secure location. He said it used to be very famous (I forgot why) and some casting was commissioned 50-60 years ago and that is probably what the Italian design firms base their casts off which are then in turn molded for Ebays, amazon, and others such as the California one....."

Food for thought Kill Bill/Jim, if the (unknown) Naples Museum sister sword was "apparently moved out in the 70's or 80's", then it begs the question(s):
1) How did Pulitzer even come know of a sister sword whose whereabouts became unknown 30 to 40 years before the appearance of the Oak Island Roman Sword?
2) Why did/does he and colleagues still refer to it being or think it is "in" or "at" the (unknown) Naples Museum?
3) Why d

Mike Morgan

12/8/2016 02:22:03 am

(Apparently I exceeded the number of characters quota, so to finish)

3) Why does Pulitzer or fan boy Bill Kelly find it so hard or are so reluctant to produce any evidence of the (unknown) Naples Museum sister sword?
4) (In my best imitation of the Oak Island narrator's voice) Could it be .... there is no (unknown) Naples museum sister sword?

Anxiously awaiting your response,

Mike

Kill Bill

12/9/2016 12:28:15 pm

Mike,

Wow you really have way too much time on your hands. I think by style you mean they didn't conform to the group think on here. Sounds like my company! For the record I've only been using the same name on this blog, - expect for in earlier thread i accidentally used a reply user name as my own. Anyway there is nothing wrong with raising a few questions and being open minded about possible discoveries that might change the order of things. That takes real guts and courage to do so.

I'll do my best to illuminate your questions and do Andy's job for him since he's not providing you the research you all are thirsting for here.

1) How did Pulitzer even come know of a sister sword whose whereabouts became unknown 30 to 40 years before the appearance of the Oak Island Roman Sword?

Me: It was apparently cataloged in few publications. I would first look into the historical records of the museum and archives in Naples - then translate them into english. Perhaps you should go on a trip out there?

2) Why did/does he and colleagues still refer to it being or think it is "in" or "at" the (unknown) Naples Museum?

Me: I'm not sure probably it was the last known and/or public custodian of the sword. Supposedly that is were it become famous years ago. I'm not sure this just my guess. Only way to find out is get boots on ground.

3) Why does Pulitzer or fan boy Bill Kelly find it so hard or are so reluctant to produce any evidence of the (unknown) Naples Museum sister sword?

ME: I have no idea, my guess is that they probably don't feel compelled to right now. Just because you want it is that reason enough? They probably are taking their time, doing their homework, and going to include it as part of a bigger body of research. That is just my guess.

4) (In my best imitation of the Oak Island narrator's voice) Could it be .... there is no (unknown) Naples museum sister sword?

ME: Who knows. Your guess is as good as mine. Another good place to start is the private art dealer in Florida. Seems like he didn't share much with Andy so he's going off some website Hercules thing to save face. I would pay him a visit too. His location should be public or find a way to reach him. Get the facts of the case or maybe he's participating in study with Hutton. There was also another named, can't remember.

Hope this helps. You guys don't need Andy to get to the truth. Maybe he's doing dis-information to get you off the pursuit. Happy hunting...

Bill

Kill Bill

12/12/2016 11:30:40 pm

Mike,

I answered your questions in full. I'll consider your lack of response as i did to your satisfaction. Thanks for being one of the few on here to be most substantive of your dialog. Look forward to future updates on this.

Bill

Mark L

12/14/2016 03:38:41 am

"I have answered your questions in full"

Your responses:

"I have no idea"
"Who knows"
"Your guess is as good as mine"

Come on!

Andy White

12/9/2016 12:47:33 pm

Hilarious!

Bob Jase

12/9/2016 01:21:22 pm

Like a train wreck.

Kill Bill

12/12/2016 11:26:15 pm

Andy,

Thats all you have apparently. It's too much for you to investigate the things that are not most convenient for you. You fail to do the real hard work and its really obvious. If you're going to attack history explorers and researchers prematurely you better do your homework (beyond comparing web photos). The burden is in fact on you alone Andy if you are too impatiently immature to wait until full reports are released. Stop fooling people Do the real investigative work. Its no wonder your career hasn't progressed much and they regulated you to the blogger sphere.

Just so you know i'm going to stand up for any explorer and researcher who is bold enough to present unconventional ideas. We're going to let them gather the facts first and present their body of evidence in full before we dissect their data and criticize their hard work prematurely.

You've been warned again Andy. Let's not repeat the past.

Bill

Bob Jase

12/13/2016 06:45:58 am

Oh Andy, you're in trouble now, you've been WARNED!

Bill may hold his breath til he turns blue or take his ball & go home if this keeps up.

Peter Geuzen

12/9/2016 01:37:36 pm

They win. We give up. Call the mothership and tell them you are ready to go home.

Jim

12/9/2016 01:52:27 pm

Kill Bill, Hutton, et al

So, in a nutshell, what you are saying is that you have nothing to contribute ? Excellent, I think we are all now finally in agreement.

Kill Bill

12/12/2016 11:53:30 pm

Only Me,

(from earlier chain)

Not making excuses. The burden is not on Hutton Pulitzer at this time since he has not released his full report. Only then it will fall on him. The burden is on Andy for criticizing his work prematurely, before he has all the facts. It would be one thing if he did a full investigation, but he's only inquiring in the subjects and sources that are most convenient for him. To be fair to Hutton he hasn't released all his finding yet, there must be a lot of strength to it given the new partners like Scott Wolter he has brought on, academics from major respected universities, and the reporters who have reviewed the summaries and decided to report on the findings. You have to wonder what here are the things you don't know that you don't know. For example the response from Naples is completely worthless - heard nothing back from Naples, boom thats it folks. Thats all you got? Who did you talk to? What if the people there are new and not familiar with it? Also the response you gave from the Florida art dealer is not even an actual investigative response. Please tell me you do realize that? Yes they said they haven't released it yet. Where is the news? Hutton hasn't stated he won't release the white paper, unless you have heard otherwise, he just gave a time frame and is probably waiting until he's ready. Perhaps he's got new information and has expanded the research with Scott Wolter and other academics. Yes there is evidence of lode stones being used going as far back as ancient Greece. Again this is not a weapon of war according to Hutton, but rather a votive - a symbol of navigation and such tool used for that purpose. Hence it should not be considered or compared to a weapon. Lastly you are incorrect on the mines. Spoke to ancient metal expert yesterday and gave me interesting details on this. I would love to share with you all here, but that would be really unfair to Andy. I'm going to defend explorers so they can present their case to the public when they are ready and prepared to do so. Keep hunting, be thirsty and hungry!

- Bill

Only Me

12/13/2016 05:21:00 am

Yes, you are making excuses.

"The burden is not on Hutton Pulitzer at this time since he has not released his full report."

It IS his burden, and has been, since he is the originator of the claim. The standard of burden of proof requires the claimant, not the skeptic, to substantiate the claim.

"The burden is on Andy for criticizing his work prematurely, before he has all the facts."

Wrong. Andy is well within his rights to criticize Pulitzer's claim, based on the information Pulitzer himself has released. If you're going to argue the criticism is premature, the claim is also premature for the same reason.

That white paper is a myth until it actually materializes.

You clearly don't understand the burden of proof since you're still demanding Andy disprove a claim when the claimant himself has provided no compelling evidence for it.

There is evidence for lodestones, but there is NO evidence of such stones being used in swords, ceremonial or otherwise.

I'm not incorrect on the mines. The knowledge of them predates Pulitzer's claim. This is indisputable.

"I'm going to defend explorers so they can present their case to the public when they are ready and prepared to do so."

This is how I know you aren't really interested in the truth. If there is a case to be made, it should be presented to actual experts who will apply peer review and the scientific method to determine its validity.

Andy White

12/13/2016 05:26:14 am

Blah blah blah.

"Authenticating" a fake sword on a car hood in a parking lot and then lying about it for a year qualifies as neither "exploration" nor "discovery."

My career is just fine, but thanks for your concern.

Peter Geuzen

12/13/2016 05:52:02 am

2 years, 114 days, actually. Facts Matter.

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 02:34:46 pm

No. The burden is on Phylaw. He made the premature claims. Asking for proof is only natural. Your belief system is obviously fringe since you prefer to defend a conclusion without evidence, especially when the claimant (Phylaw) has already lied repeatedly. Take your ball and go home.

Joe Scales

12/13/2016 08:32:17 am

One thing that is certain in regard to the sword story from its inception, is that its provenance is wholly uncertain; thus rendering any value as an historical token entirely meaningless. It was dead on arrival, regardless of the overwhelming evidence produced so far further relegating it to hoax status.

This is nothing new for Oak Island. The current television show begins each episode with the "Spanish coin" found by the Laginas, lumping it along as proof of treasure with other such meaningless items from the past as the three "links from a gold chain" and bit of parchment, none of which even exist. The said coin even has an "8" on it, to infer pieces of eight, no doubt. It is however, made of copper and you can find one exactly like it on Ebay for about ten bucks. Even if it wasn't brought to the island at a later date to further the con (which is the more reliable notion), it still wouldn't be evidence of a great treasure. It may however, be evidence of someone's lost penny jar...

Kill Bill

12/13/2016 10:14:36 am

Hey guys,

Just found out some interesting info relating to this case from a good source connected to them. Theree are some legal issues they are resolving, working out licensing deal ( with National Geographic) and waiting to anyalize a few more items for study before releasing the full report. I'm told people will be very surprised who is involved when it comes out and that its actually much bigger than what was initially reported, hence the further delay. This actually didn't take me long to find out what is causing the delay. Thats all I know. The source is a person I would consider very crediable. Maybe I might have to start my own blog soon...

Bill

Jim

12/13/2016 02:20:04 pm

Hutton, your spelling is atrocious ! You spelled National Lampoon, "National Geographic". Try harder.

Kill Bill

12/13/2016 03:34:12 pm

Jim,

Spelling is all you got now! Hilarious. It would be great if he came on here but I'm sure he's got better things to do. He seems to be a unifying force for you all.

Bill

Jim

12/13/2016 05:48:51 pm

Oh, I'm sorry Hutton, should we discuss your statements ?
You know, like "the report" (what happened to the white paper?) , the report that has been delayed yet again, so we can't actually discuss it ?
Should we discuss your unnamed source who you " would consider very crediable" , tell us who it is, let us judge credibility.
" I'm told people will be very surprised who is involved when it comes out",,,,,, again, who ???? look up name dropping, you are doing it wrong.
" working out licensing deal ( with National Geographic) ",,, who at National Geographic ? You whine and whine at Andy with stuff like " Who did you talk to? " well, who at National Geographic are we talking here ???
" To be fair to Hutton he hasn't released all his finding yet, there must be a lot of strength to it given the new partners like Scott Wolter he has brought on, academics from major respected universities,",,,,,,,name me one academic from a major respected university that has aligned with you,, you cannot do this because they do not exist !!!!!
" Spoke to ancient metal expert yesterday " who ? who ? who ? who ?,,,,(I'm feeling like an owl today)
Still waiting for you to explain how the lodestone points to true north rather than magnetic north. This is impossible as you well know!

Hutton, here is how you started your responses on some previous questions (Me being you Hutton);
Me: I'm not sure
ME: I have no idea, my guess is that
ME: Who knows. Your guess is as good as mine.
after all those great answers you said
"Hope this helps.",,,,lolololol
Then you said
"I answered your questions in full"

So Hutton, ya spelling is all I need. You have given us absolutely nothing to discuss ! As usual the sum total of your information consists of a bag full of BS and double talk.

Only Me

12/14/2016 08:11:29 am

"I'm not here to defend his work as there is no way for me to do that as I have not read the white paper or seen any of their research data."

"I'm going to defend explorers so they can present their case to the public when they are ready and prepared to do so."

Let's apply your demands for answers from Andy to you, Bill. For the sake of truth.

"academics from major respected universities"

Names of the academics and universities, please.

"the reporters who have reviewed the summaries and decided to report on the findings"

Names of the reporters and links to their reports, please.

"Spoke to ancient metal expert yesterday and gave me interesting details on this"

Name of the expert and his/her experience with the Breinigerberg mines, please.

"the original swords that Hutton has claimed were part of the same casting with the sword found on Oak Island - the one from Naples Museum which is no longer there"

What is the basis of this claim? Who did he talk to and what did they say?

I will not accept "I don't know" or "We have to wait for the white paper." If you can't answer these questions, then your complaint against Andy is rendered null.

Kill Bill

12/15/2016 12:57:17 pm

All,

You guys are really pathetic. Now you want me to do all the investigate work for you? It's pretty easy to get if you are willing to do the work - not rocket science. Any criminal or journalist with investigative background would do this, way better than me. But again if you already believe that anything from Hutton or any other explorer is false and bogus then of course you will only look at the things that confirm your preconceived bias. Everything I've suggested is quickly shot down - no this can't be true. Or tell me so I can crap on it before getting the facts.

Ps: Lode stones doesn't need to point true north. It's call triangulation using star maps, similar method used by GPS systems today.

Any way I wish you all the very best. Found other communities where people are more open, intellectual, and foster collaborative research environment. Have fun with Andy!

I'll be back when the bombshell is released, until then you are free to analyze replicas ;)

Bill

Andy White

12/15/2016 01:07:49 pm

All those words, Bill, and you didn't manage to prove me wrong by providing either of the two key pieces of information that were the subject of the original post: (1) the XRF data that Pulitzer based his original conclusions on; (2) an image of the purported "original sword in the Naples Museum." Those are both things that Pulitzer and his friends have been saying are available for months now, apparently to confuse those who will never bother to actually check.

Yes, please get back to us with the "bombshell." I won't hold my breath, though, and neither should you. If you've been paying attention, you know that Pulitzer's track record of following through on promises is very poor. Minoans? Spear of Destiny? Solomon's Secret? 90 Foot Stone? Excavation of a giant? White paper?

He recently also claimed he would be appearing on Good Morning America to discuss his book.

Good luck with all that!

Jim

12/15/2016 01:26:20 pm

So, no names, no answers, we should just trust you ?
Hutton is so psyched out by Andy now that any new claim ( National Geographic Documentary ) needs to be given by a fake identity so he can claim deniability. Jovan is running scared !

"Ps: Lode stones doesn't need to point true north. It's call triangulation using star maps, similar method used by GPS systems today."

But Hutton says the sword points to true north, so you agree with me that he is dead wrong ?

"I'll be back when the bombshell is released, until then you are free to analyze replicas ;)

Bombshell ? The last time it was a smoking gun, I almost got hit, but a string kept the cork from making contact.

Jim

12/15/2016 01:47:20 pm

PS,,Hutton,, perhaps you should dummy up on magnetic declination. Your star map, triangulation statement is completely lacking in common sense.
Not only that, if they spent the time to calculate magnetic north to true north using star maps, they would have used instrumentation that hadn't even been invented yet !!!
And to top it all off, why not just go by the north star ? Your lack of research and common sense knows no bounds.

Mike Morgan

12/16/2016 08:34:46 pm

Jim,

I find nothing in Pulitzers Facebook groups or in his tweets concerning a supposed "National Geographic Documentary". The only reference to a possible association between Pulitzer/AAPS that I find is in the hearsay in the comment made by Kill Bill 12/13/2016 10:14:36 am above, "...working out licensing deal ( with National Geographic)" which doesn't necessarily indicate a documentary.

Do you have more or different information that you could point us toward?

Andy White

12/15/2016 02:09:56 pm

One more thing, Bill, because I doubt you bothered to read this. This is what Pulitzer said about the "Naples Museum sword." It is a total lie, and he absolutely knew that when he said this:

"We have attempted to contact [the seller's of the sword on eBay] over ten different times . . . I think they're worried about contact because they're posting pictures from the Naples Museum but sending a different cast iron sword in response. So what actually happened is when this story broke, people started looking at the sword and we all started asking questions of the sword and the people in Italy that were selling it . . . actually eBay shut them down because eBay realized that they were taking pictures of the museum sword which [unintelligible] supplied to eBay and they were actually supplying a different sword that was fake, cast iron, and whatever. So, I'm not sure they're going to want to answer a lot of questions when they were using authentic photos to ship a fraudulent piece of merchandise."

He's talking about the Italian eBay sword (Sword 4 in our database). It was purchased by a Canadian and I had it in my office for several months. The sword that was pictured on eBay is exactly the same sword that was shipped. It was a copper alloy sword that shared many similarities to the supposed "Roman sword." Pulitzer couldn't explain it any other way, so he made up a story. That's why he can't provide a picture of the Naples Museum sword.

Here's the link to what I wrote about it (and the link to Pulitzer's audio) if you'd like to "investigate" this for yourself.

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/dear-ms-simons-pulitzer-lied-to-you-about-the-italian-ebay-sword

Kill Bill

12/15/2016 03:44:09 pm

Andy,

Stop referring to the replicas. It's a non issue as far as I'm concerned. There is supporting evidence of a sword that has been documented in association with that museum. I know this from another party and the material is accessible to the public if you search for it, from when I heard about this story last year. For all your huff and puff you are either simply too lazy or ingnorate to do the research so you keep focusing on eBay replicas. Who cares how many replicas you have found, it doesn't mean anything other than that the sword held significance in the past as people don't make replicas Hutton gave some clues but I doubt for obvious reasons he may be withholding some of the facts, maybe to throw you off a bit. The only reason I can concudle for a professor like yourself to engage in this pure entertainment that you have a personal vendetta against him. Looking at your past work that's all you do here.

Kill Bill

Andy White

12/15/2016 03:54:25 pm

Hutton supplied the information that the Italian eBay sword is, in fact, the Naples Museum sword. That is, in fact, a naked lie. It's his weak attempt to explain why his "Roman sword" is, in fact, just the same as a whole string of replicas. That's why the "replicas" matter: they're all recent, including the Nova Scotia sword. He has provided no positive evidence to demonstrate otherwise, despite all his claims. It's really pretty simple.

Jim

12/15/2016 03:57:31 pm

" There is supporting evidence of a sword that has been documented in association with that museum. I know this from another party and the material is accessible to the public "

So,,,, provide us with this documented supporting evidence !!!
Simple, easy peasy !!! But noooo, you have the facts but won't tell anyone. Hmmmm where have I heard that before ?

Only Me

12/15/2016 02:30:52 pm

"You guys are really pathetic. Now you want me to do all the investigate work for you?"

Is that not what you demanded from Andy and everyone else commenting on this story? Why do you get to make such a demand while taking exception when the demand is turned on you?

"But again if you already believe that anything from Hutton or any other explorer is false and bogus then of course you will only look at the things that confirm your preconceived bias."

Since you've made it clear you already believe Hutton's claims are true, you're guilty of only looking at things that confirm your belief.

"Everything I've suggested is quickly shot down - no this can't be true. Or tell me so I can crap on it before getting the facts."

Because you've suggested nothing that isn't a repeat of Hutton's claims. So far, there has been nothing to establish those claims as true. The only one crapping on the facts has been you. The facts have not supported Hutton's claims.

"Found other communities where people are more open, intellectual, and foster collaborative research environment."

Translation: "I'm returning to my echo chamber/safe space."

Yes, Bill, do return when Hutton's bombshell fizzles out upon delivery. I can't wait to hear what excuses are offered.

Kill Bill

12/15/2016 03:59:04 pm

No I'm not believing until I see the final report, but having an open mind is more than any of you have in here. This little hornet nest of Hutton critics I've stumbled upon. It's all very comical. But if any of you can't wait for the full report than by all means do your own research otherwise shut the hell up. Appears none of you have any desire to explore other topics of study as researchers or as a group. All it seems like is you all hiss, piss, and complain on here.

Get a life guys!

Only Me

12/15/2016 04:37:32 pm

"No I'm not believing until I see the final report"

Then why are you so adamant that you have to "defend" Hutton? Why do so when you don't know what it is you're defending?

"by all means do your own research otherwise shut the hell up"

I extend to you the same courtesy, Bill.

"Appears none of you have any desire to explore other topics of study as researchers or as a group."

It appears you have no desire to consider differing opinion. This inflexibility is a trait most common to fringe historians and their fans.

"All it seems like is you all hiss, piss, and complain on here."

Hypocrisy, Bill.

Jim

12/15/2016 05:00:47 pm

"But if any of you can't wait for the full report than by all means do your own research otherwise shut the hell up."

Waiting, waiting, waiting,,,,,,,,,,, waiting some more,,, past due oops,,,,,waiting some more,,,,,wait, wait, wait,,,there it is, Oh nope, just another report, not the white paper,,,waiting, waiting, waiting until after the convention,,,,should be any time now,,annnnd,,nope, wait wait wait,,,wait some more,,,,,,,waiting,waiting,,couintdown clock reaches zero, aaaand here it isn't,,,waiting, waiting,,,,,,

https://countingdownto.com/countdown/the-white-paper-countdown-clock

Jim

12/15/2016 04:13:03 pm

Andy,,,,,,,,,,, Kill Bill said this
". Spoke to ancient metal expert yesterday and gave me interesting details on this. I would love to share with you all here, but that would be really unfair to Andy. "

Since he has said he would love to share with us all here, would you release him from this unfairness thing ? So that he can be good to his word about sharing this info ?

Andy White

12/15/2016 04:15:26 pm

Sure, no problem. I don't even know what he means by "unfair" anyway. Share away, Bill -- blow us all away.

Kill Bill

12/16/2016 08:59:16 am

Andy,

You appear to be highly selective on the sources and details you choose to discuss on the subject which is all very telling.

It's your investigation, so wouldn't want to spoil the entertainment you are providing these folks. But I'm curious which explorer of significant new discoveries living today do you respect and why? What's the standard you apply for yourself and the students you teach. What scientific methods and research would you find sufficient to validate claims? When you mention "fringe history", how do you define that without subjecting personal bias? Perhaps then one can reveal more.

Bill

Jim

12/16/2016 12:55:36 pm

"Andy,

You appear to be highly selective on the sources and details you choose to discuss on the subject which is all very telling."

Ya Andy,,, How come you only use real people and actual data to support your claims ?
Huttons transparent lies and make believe sources are surely winning the day !
And not only that, how come you can't at least wear a fedora and use a bull whip, at least try to look like an Archeoromanologist !
At minimum I hope your students wear cosplay body armour at your dig-sights.

Jim

12/16/2016 01:49:35 pm

Hutton, your whole post is merely deflection to change the subject, but heck I will play along.

" But I'm curious which explorer of significant new discoveries living today do you respect and why?"

Not you Hutton, sitting in your housecoat with your junk hanging out in front of a computer isn't really considered being an explorer. The Commander cosplay thing is make believe,,, you know that, don't you ?

" What scientific methods and research would you find sufficient to validate claims?"

Just that Hutton, actual scientific methods and research with compelling evidence.
Not BS invisible evidence that you refuse to release, not the word or expertise of a magic crystal salesman. Not the opinions of unnamed and imaginary academics.

"Perhaps then one can reveal more."

Perhaps you could reveal your XRF data ? Perhaps you could reveal the names of your fake academic cohorts ? Perhaps you could stop lying and making excuses ? Perhaps you could produce one shred of real evidence that proves your claims ? Perhaps, but it's doubtful. Carry on playing the fool, a little humor seems to be your only contribution to mankind.

Only Me

12/16/2016 06:02:18 pm

"You appear to be highly selective on the sources and details you choose to discuss on the subject which is all very telling."

Andy has no choice when the sources and details are selectively provided by Pulitzer.

I'M curious which legitimate academic(s) living today you respect and why. What's the standard you apply for yourself and the claims you accept. When you think of "mainstream" science, how do you define it without interjecting personal bias?

I wonder what you stand to gain from applying a double standard, Bill.

Swordgate: The Lie that Won't Die

Leave a Reply.

Archives

Categories