Swordgate Year One: 365 Days of Thimblerigging

12/16/2016

Yeah, that's right: I used my thesaurus.

It was one year ago today that J. Hutton Pulitzer's claim of a "100% confirmed Roman sword" first surfaced in an online newspaper article. The story arc over the last year has been fascinating to watch. The original claim began to crumble almost immediately, as swords nearly identical to the claimed "ancient Roman" sword began surfacing. It quickly became apparent that these Hercules-hilted swords had been produced and sold as tourist souvenirs during recent times (i.e., sometime in the last two centuries). So much for that.

Preparations underway for the Swordgate One Year Anniversary gala.

As more and more swords surfaced, we began to assemble data showing that the "Roman sword" from Nova Scotia was almost certainly not the earliest sword in a copy chain: it is smaller, less detailed, and lacks features found in swords such as the California sword. This is important, as detail is lost and size decreases (because molten metal shrinks as it cools) as new molds are produced from swords. Importantly, the "Roman sword" shares a set of anomalies on the blade (absent from the California sword) with several others. Taken together, this means the "Roman sword" could not have been the original, but is just one of many swords produced from a mold that post-dates the California sword. Independently, sophisticated metallurgical analysis showed the "Roman sword" to be a modern item and a close inspection noted numerous inconsistencies with Roman metalworking.

So that's case closed, right?

No. One of the hallmarks of pseudoscience is the unwillingness or inability to change one's conclusion when confronted with evidence to the contrary. We've seen that in spades over the past year.

Caught unprepared by the appearance of so many Hercules-hilted swords, Pultizer attempted to dismiss them as "recent replicas" that were somehow different from his "ancient Roman sword." He has continued to insist two things: (1) the replicas are copied from an original, authentic Roman sword that is curated at some museum in Naples; and (2) the replicas have a different metallic composition than the original swords. As I wrote earlier this month, keeping those two assertions alive has been the center of gravity of a shell game that's been going on for almost a year now.

Multiple times I have challenged supporters of the sword to provide evidence supporting either one of those assertions, and so far they have not. Read the comments on this post for an example of how the conversations go: I'm told over and over again that all that information is freely availabe, yet when I ask for some kind of source (because I haven't been able to find it), I'm told "do your own research."

The best anyone has been able to do for the elusive XRF data that are purportedly in the "sword report" is page 52:

Excerpt of page 52 of the so-called "sword report."

As far as I can tell, that's it: just a chart showing the atomic number and mass of ten elements. There is nothing quantitative here. The paragragh at the bottom implies that the "percentages of such metals can actually be tracked to the very mine operating in ancient times the Roman used to manufacture the Oak Island Roman sword." I have been unable to find the percentages (or anything about the methods/procedures used) anywhere else in this report.

The ommision of the percentages is key, since Pulitzer's initial reaction to the metallurgical data from St. Mary's University was one of shock about the high percentage of zinc. The high level of zinc was one of the main factors leading to the conclusion that the sword was modern. Pulitzer's current claim that zinc levels are high bcause of naturally occurring zinc in the ores that were used is completely inconsistent with his original claim (based on his own data) that there wasn't much zinc in the sword. This is why he won't provide his data/methods with percentages: they can't possibly be consistent with all of his statements and will therefore reveal that that he is playing a shell game.

After a full year of this nonsense, the energy over the "Roman sword" claim isn't what it was in those early days of Swordgate. That's all right and good. As far as I know, the real-time engagment with the ridiculous "Roman sword" claim was without precedent. It was a group effort, and all of us that participated in this (and the small core of us that are still working on the problem of the actual origin and history of these swords) should be rightfully proud of what we've done and what we've accomplished. I'm looking foward to what Year Two will bring.

Peter Geuzen

12/16/2016 07:32:46 am

Also claimed to be in the sword: platinum and palladium

Claims of what the copper alloy 'fakes' are made of:
synthetic stone painted in a patina color
fake stone
fake rock
manufactured stone
cast stone with patina paint
cheap replica materials
man made stone painted in bronze
wood
plastic
ceramic
pig iron

Peter Geuzen

12/16/2016 07:55:46 am

Plus magnetite, which would have to be present for the lodestone assertion.

Ryan Gold

12/24/2016 12:51:17 pm

Maybe Hutton took the real sword and left them with a replica????

Joe Scales

12/16/2016 08:34:10 am

You know it's a bad claim, even for the Fringe, when the con game that is The Curse of Oak Island television show refutes it. They baited the wannabe Hutton and he took it hook, line and sinker. And how thoroughly enjoyable that sinking continues to be.

Now cue Hutton/Bill to insult the site, its contributors and lay more assertive false generalities upon us. Bonus points to those that can ignore it completely.

Pablo

12/16/2016 11:16:37 am

And to ad insult to injury, the show people don't pay attention to him LOL, giving him the "importance" he deserves

Doug C

12/16/2016 07:10:48 pm

Or maybe they don't pay attention to the show. Why you so sure it's them, they have everyone. It's not real history

Bob Jase

12/16/2016 01:43:13 pm

Thimblerigging? Now you've gone & made me nostalgic for Disney's Davy Crockett.

Who didn't carry a sword btw.

DPBROKAW

12/16/2016 03:28:40 pm

It's truly sad the Internet has allowed for such a well of fringe nonsense and lies to become TV shows and web sites for "the truly curious". I have 3 children and 7 grandkids and am proud to say they can spot the BS. At least Hutton/Phylaw doesn't pollute the cable networks with his brand of disinformation, just the Internet. His partner Wolter is another example of disinformation, but I think he actually believes his own nonsense to some extent. He craves academic approval and acceptance. Of course they both attack the same academics they wish to impress. It must be a conspiracy because no one of any worth will take their word for it! I think it would be great if we could prove some of the fantastic claims made by the fringe! Who wouldn't like to prove aliens have visited or that Romans made it to America century's before any other's discovery of the new world? But until the evidence is there these are nothing more than hypothesis and fabrications made to sell on TV and the Internet. Phylaw wants attention so badly he doesn't care what kind he gets. He is truly pathetic. But following this blog and others over the last year I have been truly amazed by the people willing to buy into his snake oil brand of nonsense giving him the attention he so desperately craves. I have a 8 year old grandson that knows that shows like Ancient Aliens are BS! Is fringe belief like a desease? It would be nice if there were some agency responsible for policing the Intenet and cable TV for honestly in content! I think many people actually believe there is. If a show claims to be a documentary it would have to show proof of it's claims prior to airing! As long as people continue to listen and encourage the snake oil salesman and women they're going to continue to spout their brand of BS as long as it sells. It's blogs like this one that encourage me to remember that the majority of people know better. But the "true believers" are out there and they are loud! Keep up the good work Andy. I for one appreciate the sanity on this site.

Joe Scales

12/17/2016 08:16:29 am

Wolter is such a marvel of combined ignorance, bravado and arrogance that will never allow him to realize his imbecilic tendencies. The perfect actor.

Azora

12/16/2016 05:43:13 pm

This is totally misleading Andy and you should be ashamed of yourself. The sword as reported was only one piece of evidence in the entire body of reaseach that AAPS reported as a preliminary summary. This means the research is still on going and until then no further research details will be released. All famous artifacts have replicas, this is nothing new. I'm sure you can't wait to see the full report as the team is eager to release it to the public. The project has expanded in scope and increase complexity of research, resources, and parties involved. The findings are bigger than any of us could have imagined last year. There are multi-national research teams, universities, and international ngo and governments involved. The teams have been quite until final media rights and government jurisdictions are all sorted out. Until then you can investigate the Cleopatra tomb, Nazi treasure train, or Monkey gold city, just this one. You'll just have to be patient as this unfolds, but it will be worth the wait as it's bigger than these.

Andy White

12/16/2016 05:47:30 pm

Hi Hutton/Bill!

What part is misleading? What are my factual errors?

Vintage PJ

12/16/2016 06:36:07 pm

Ha! Yes we can't wait to see the full report that the team is eager to release to the public...and the universities and governments involved. This outta be great.
So whats the ETA Hutton? 2 or 3 more years? Will that interfere with the National Geographic special?
I hope the report is public and not sold in book form. Ha!

Mike Morgan

12/16/2016 08:44:16 pm

Vintage PJ,

Could you point us to where you found information concerning a "National Geographic special?"

I find nothing in Pulitzers Facebook groups or in his tweets concerning a supposed "National Geographic special". The only reference to a possible association between Pulitzer/AAPS and National Geographic that I find is in the hearsay in the comment made by Kill Bill 12/13/2016 10:14:36 am under Andy's blog of 12/1/2016, "Swordgate: The Lie that Won't Die , "...working out licensing deal ( with National Geographic)" which doesn't necessarily indicate a special..

Jim

12/16/2016 07:01:48 pm

Azora, because of his Jewish heritage, will Frank Joseph be liaison to the Israeli contingent ?

Azora

12/16/2016 07:22:25 pm

Hutton is not overseeing the effort but is still actively involved, leading one of the expeditionary research teams and past spokesman, but the new patrons have their own PR and media relation team. As far as I'm aware Frank Joseph is not involved. This is all I can say right now.

Jim

12/16/2016 07:26:48 pm

Cool,,,, might I suggest sending Scott Wolter ahead to Madagascar with a suitcase full of untraceable lead coins to smooth over the politicians there?

Only Me

12/16/2016 09:34:49 pm

"The project has expanded in scope and increase complexity of research, resources, and parties involved. The findings are bigger than any of us could have imagined last year. There are multi-national research teams, universities, and international ngo and governments involved."

For a project of such importance, it's strange the coverage in fringe media, or even mainstream media, hasn't been grabbing attention.

"The teams have been quite until final media rights and government jurisdictions are all sorted out."

Seems all that effort has been for naught. Right out of the gate, Pulitzer began claiming the Oak Island sword was 100% confirmed as authentic. Now, you're saying it "was only one piece of evidence in the entire body of research that AAPS reported as a preliminary summary." Really? That "preliminary summary" is still claimed by Pulitzer to be the proof the sword is a genuine Roman artifact.

That's why I can't understand how you can say Andy's post is misleading. Pulitzer made a claim based on research you admit is "still on going", and, we still have to wait for the final results!

Based on what we DO know about the replicas, the test by Brosseau and now your explanation, nothing has changed. Pulitzer's claim is false until proven otherwise.

Azora

12/17/2016 06:15:09 pm

That's not how it works. Orginals have been found, identified, and tested. We do understand how it would be difficult for you to draw a conclusion without the original sword evidence and other facts that were intentially not made public to avoid distractions from conflicts of interest and professional bias from presenting misleading claims narrative prematurely that could compromise the entire project and those risking their careers and official positions. In short the best evidence and research data has been withheld until the final report release. You will just have to be patient but given how big this now is you can imagine the additional effort required to ensure the results are totally conclusive undisputed, and can withstand a level of public and professional scrutiny many times higher than Andy. We're talking about the very best scientists and researchers in their fields in the world. All participants are under very strict NDAs however the names will surprise you. It will be a tipping point of validation on many levels for those who have sacraficed their entire careers in this endeavor and even once former skeptics are now actively supporting the effort. The swords is just a small piece of a much larger study. I'm honored to play a very small role in this much larger picture. History is going to be made and the world will never be the same. It will all make sense once the official release schedule starts. Just be patient until then. I promise it's worth it.

Only Me

12/17/2016 07:22:05 pm

Azora, that sounds great and all, but....

"the original sword evidence and other facts that were intentially not made public to avoid distractions from conflicts of interest and professional bias from presenting misleading claims narrative prematurely that could compromise the entire project and those risking their careers and official positions"

Like I said above, it's too late. Pulitzer has made his claim, based, in part, on your project.

Also, you're going to have to provide a justification for saying any member of the project is risking his/her career/official position. "We're talking about the very best scientists and researchers in their fields in the world." So, what are they risking if they're doing their jobs?

"All participants are under very strict NDAs"

Apparently, not. Did I mention Pulitzer's very public sword claim? You did state earlier he is actively involved and leading one of the research teams. Are there any concerns over this clear breech of the NDA?

I'm still reading a lot of language designed to keep interest in the story high, promising a huge payoff in return. Until I see results that can be independently verified, my opinion of the whole thing remains unchanged.

Jim

12/17/2016 07:32:24 pm

Great,,, more unsubstantiated BS claims to support the last round of unsubstantiated BS claims. Who would have thunk ?
And releasing the evidence that allegedly proves the sword real will jeopardize future claims ?????

Joe Scales

12/17/2016 08:48:25 pm

Good people. You're not going to get anywhere arguing with a liar. Yes, Azora/Hutton/Bill is a liar. Polluting this site with outright lies to cover up past lies, to further future lies.

Klaus

12/17/2016 12:03:57 pm

... holding my breath ... NOT ... lol

Jim

12/17/2016 12:15:19 pm

He would release the white paper,,,, but,,,, the Mafia stole his evidence !

nomuse

12/17/2016 04:21:37 pm

We used to see this sort of thing around the Moon Hoax crowd. "Okay, so this piece of evidence isn't very good. But we have a bunch of other pieces of evidence (which also aren't very good."

Evidence doesn't add that way. A hundred claims with maybe a 1% chance of actually being right don't add up to one claim that has a hundred percent chance of being right.

The sword is the sword. Swerving off and arguing that you can't determine the sword's authenticity without first learning about a bunch of other (equally weak) fringe claims is nothing more than an admittance that the evidence for the sword's authenticity is weak.

I'm also laughing at the counter-argument above that "many famous artifacts have replicas." This also reminds me of the Moon Hoax crowd, who were so convinced by their own cleverness they could only understand the objections of others as stemming from not understanding their claim -- never would they grasp that not only had their opponents understood their point, but that they had moved beyond it to the next step.

What is important is not that there are replicas of the sword, but that the "replicas" show strong evidence of being the originals in the process. (Or, rather, closer to the original.)

nomuse

12/17/2016 07:31:17 pm

Oh, how lovely. Scientific discussion can't take place because none of the actual evidence can be made available. Okay, sure. So there's nothing to discuss. In the meantime the Bronze Hut is taking what he HAS made available to the court of public opinion.

Sorry, still a fail. If you are going to present a case to the public based on certain evidence and certain evidence only, then expect that same evidence to be what is used to evaluate the claim.

Azora

12/18/2016 07:11:59 pm

No case has been presented yet. All that was released last year was a preview of an going study and announcement of upcoming white paper. Only a handful of people - namely field experts were able to review some of the findings to verify the authenticity for some of the media, government, and university partners. We were forced to release the info, against our desire prematurely last year as we had lots of pressure to do so. It turns out it was a blessing as we have received help from the most unlikely places and now have the financial support to do the full investigation, especially now that it's scope has since expanded. At this time there is nothing for you all to discuss as you don't have all the information and the case has not been presented publicly. In due time it will. As far as I can tell no one in this chat group is qualified to judge us and the cross-disciplinary evidence we now posses. This is beyond OI and the Latina brothers and others involved with the show. I really wish we could. You will hear all about it when the media release schedule starts, as you will not be able to ignore it. Until press conference there is no further news or updated at this time.

Only Me

12/18/2016 08:09:13 pm

"At this time there is nothing for you all to discuss"

Oh, ho, ho, ho! I disagree.

"No case has been presented yet."

Do I REALLY have to point out, again, Pulitzer's claim about the Oak Island sword?

"All that was released last year was a preview of an going study and announcement of upcoming white paper."

Then the XRF data was part of a preview, not a finalized product that backs up Pulitzer's claim? Interesting!

"Only a handful of people - namely field experts were able to review some of the findings to verify the authenticity for some of the media, government, and university partners."

And none of the handful are named J. Hutton Pulitzer, right?

"We were forced to release the info, against our desire prematurely last year as we had lots of pressure to do so."

Well, that's to be expected when one of your team leaders breaks the terms of the NDA and publicly announces he found an authentic Roman sword off the coast of Oak Island based on what you admit was preliminary, on-going research.

"and now have the financial support to do the full investigation, especially now that it's scope has since expanded"

The "very best scientists and researchers in their fields in the world" don't come cheap, do they? I mean, you can't expect them to work for free!

"Until press conference there is no further news or updated at this time."

Or until Pulitzer shoots his mouth off again.

GEE

12/18/2016 06:57:11 pm

AZORA, all of your comments are misleading. Always with the "can't tell you anything" crap. What investigation? Hutton isn't leading anything but his voice behind his lips. I want to know why the Laginas would lie concerning the sword? If it is indeed party of the OI history wouldn't they be the first to say, we found something. Wow, I don't know who you are or were all of a sudden you came from. But if you have no information that you can give us finding Huttons XRF findings stop wasting our time.

Azora

12/18/2016 08:22:07 pm

Please refer to my comments above. This is much bigger than Hutton and Oak Island. I suggest you all focus your energies on other historical matters until the public release as the case circumstances will totally change.

Only Me

12/18/2016 09:31:53 pm

"This is much bigger than Hutton and Oak Island."

Even if true, Pulitzer still made his claim and submits the work of your project as evidence his claim is real. That is the subject of discussion and trying to distance yourself from him is too little, too late. Remember, Azora, you made the choice to come here and state Andy was "misleading" in his assessment of Pulitzer's claim.

You can't say that and then all but admit Pulitzer's claim was premature, damaging to your project and based on unverified preliminary data.

"I suggest you all focus your energies on other historical matters until the public release as the case circumstances will totally change."

Again, Azora, it was your choice to come here and inject your project into the discussion. Perhaps you should have remembered the part about being quiet until everything had been sorted out.

Jim

12/18/2016 09:37:53 pm

Hutton,,um, er,,,Azora; I have a question that doesn't involve the research or project directly, so you shouldn't have any reason not to answer it.
Will the very best scientists and researchers in their fields who are members of Huttons expeditionary research team be given equal status to Hutton and allowed to choose their own costumes (ie, Indiana Jones, Cortes, Columbus, Dr Livingston etc ) or will they be required to wear the roller derby queen body Armour getup's like the rest of the Treasure Farce members ?
Or will they all wear quasi-military uniforms with badges, insignia and a beret with a treasure force logo ? And if so, will Hutton be bumped up in rank to El Capitan or perhaps Admiral ?
I mean, we all know Hutton frowns upon archeologists wearing regular clothes.

Doug C

12/19/2016 07:52:48 pm

Agora, when will we hear more details about the project? Can't speak for the others here but I'm very interested in this and possibly helping, using our testing facility. I filled out the request paperwork at AAPS and they were supposed to forward to the project office but haven't heard a back yet.

Kill Bill

12/18/2016 11:47:33 pm

Azora,

Thanks for being another light in the darkness here. Please keep up the good work you are doing and cant wait to be read into the report once it's ready for peer review. Don't waste your time with these guys they will do nothing but cause you all trouble. They are not helpful and will only seek to destroy good hearted explorers who are making real sacrifices.

PS: red stone, blue gem, green revolver

- Bill

Only Me

12/19/2016 01:53:15 am

I wouldn't be thanking her, Bill. Her comments completely undermined your earlier assertions.

"The researchers have made it very clear that the swords you point to are all replicas from the originals"

"Just found out some interesting info relating to this case from a good source connected to them."

"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."

Wrong!

"

Only Me

12/19/2016 02:01:07 am

Accidently submitted before I was finished.

"We do understand how it would be difficult for you to draw a conclusion without the original sword evidence and other facts that were intentially not made public to avoid distractions from conflicts of interest and professional bias from presenting misleading claims narrative prematurely that could compromise the entire project and those risking their careers and official positions."

"The sword as reported was only one piece of evidence in the entire body of reaseach that AAPS reported as a preliminary summary."

"No case has been presented yet. All that was released last year was a preview of an going study and announcement of upcoming white paper."

"The teams have been quite until final media rights and government jurisdictions are all sorted out."

"All participants are under very strict NDAs however the names will surprise you."

"Until press conference there is no further news or updated at this time."

Sorry, Bill.

Andy White

12/19/2016 05:11:55 am

And just to keep it real, let's remind ourselves that the working definition of "explorer" here seems to be "guy in a costume who authenticated an obviously planted fake artifact in a parking lot and then lied about it for two years."

Jim

12/19/2016 06:25:36 am

Hilarious,,,,, and then Hutton, posing as Azora, just can't help himself and calls Marty and Rick Lagina " the Latina brothers". Talk about a dead giveaway !

Bob Jase

12/19/2016 09:39:10 am

Stop talking to yourself.

Kill Bill

12/19/2016 08:08:03 pm

Andy you are just jealous since the explorer community kicked you out years ago for the stuff you did. Oh you didn't think we would find out did you? You can't get professorship at a university archeological department, so you pretend you are a serious researcher while you work for the community college affiliate as a dopey sociologist. So now you sit on the sidelines and watch others do the heavy lifting in the field and making the big bold discoveries while you complain and whine like a little kid who's parents didn't get him the Indiana Jones costume he wanted for Halloween and the explorer set for Christmas. Now you are aiming to be the historical authority on modern replicas! Lol

Only Me

12/19/2016 09:23:23 pm

So much for being open, intellectual, and fostering a collaborative research environment. Remember, Bill, it's not helpful for you to just attack someone who is authentically interested in seeking the truth. Let's be more helpful.

Andy White

12/20/2016 03:07:15 am

It's uncanny how someone who doesn't use his real name, can't spell, and leaves no email address can misrepresent his critic in so many ways. It's very telling. Keep up the good work, "Bill," there's a reward out there for you somewhere.

Kill Bill

12/20/2016 10:42:01 am

Andy this seems to be your only default response in the absence of any actual substantial defense. Your bot must have malfunctioned again. At least you know my work is good. As for you just full of lies. For example David Kennedy (who reportedly posses one of the original swords) responded back that he never shared any non-public details of the sword he posses with you given your known history of misconstruing the facts. So what you basically did is attempt to say you contacted David and then extrapolated stuff from his website where Hutton got some of his details, leading people to believe that David's response concurred with your position on the sword. That's a new low for you. Until you analyze David's sword or review his private data you have NO basis of comparison. Your whole case is faulty. If anyone had a half of brain they will see that the public description mentions it is originally from from the German collection, and probably found close to the village near the mine that Hutton mentioned. I personally happen to believe its at another nearby mine one that Hutton didn't disclose for obvious reasons (hoping to confirm this). But the fact that you never did any of this work, never connected it to Germany, the mines, nothing - just proves you are as worthless as a modern sword replica. You also never got anything substantive back from the Naples Museum when historically catalogs have it archived, and from research i've been doing on my own has found way more than you have for the past year. The missing link is the Oak Island sword but Hutton was not able to test it completely. Given the unique nature of these swords and their historic significance there is a lot more to meet the eye. One of things that people like you Andy completely miss is the oblivious role of secret initiate societies (ancient Rome had many) and its the reason a lot of the objects, symbols, and locations have remained a secret. But you don't quite understand this I'm sure. You do know that replica's come from somewhere I hope. At this point i'm really concerned if your students are getting a quality education from the classes you are teaching at the community college. Did you find dinosaur eggs yet?

Only Me

12/20/2016 10:56:07 am

Poor, Bill.

Keeps lying about public information, archives and contacts AFTER Azora already stated there is no public information, no one involved is talking or allowed to talk due to signing a NDA and there is nothing to discuss until the long-promised press conference.

Poor, Bill.

12/20/2016 12:07:53 pm

Kill Bill,

"One of things that people like you Andy completely miss is the oblivious role of secret initiate societies (ancient Rome had many) and its the reason a lot of the objects, symbols, and locations have remained a secret."

If they have remained a secret how do you know about them?

Jim

12/20/2016 08:47:37 am

Where does one get an "Explorer Degree" anyway ? At the U of Mu ?

Peter Geuzen

12/20/2016 09:19:16 am

Andy, any thought or chance of asking an associate in the Psychology Department to provide a guest blog on what Jovan's cognitive disorder is and the physical, speech, and writing manifestations that result? It would be interesting to chart cause and effect to the various components. Each new claim, fabrication, outburst etc. could be recorded and grouped in database types for posterity, using the science that applies. A poster could be made.

Jim

12/20/2016 09:28:47 am

The fact that he is now posing as a woman named Azora is especially disturbing.

Kill Bill

12/20/2016 10:52:19 am

So that's all you got now? Supposedly Hutton is on here acting like several people. Right -he's got nothing better to do than engage you clowns. Give me a break. The only people on here that are providing thoughtful information is Azora and OnlyMe. The rest - WORTHLESS.

Jim

12/20/2016 01:43:37 pm

Calling yourself worthless is the first worthwhile thing you have said.

Andy White

12/20/2016 12:41:49 pm

It's funny that you have to lie to try an hurt my credibility, but all I have to do to hurt yours is tell the truth.

Kill Bill

12/20/2016 06:12:47 pm

And when will that start Andy? When hell freezes over? The only person who is the fridge is you and your dozen little pen pals on here and perhaps a big foot too. Sorry to burst the party guys. It's really sick how you twist the facts and ingore the truth. There is no place more fridge than andy and his blog. So hillarious!!

Andy White

12/20/2016 07:11:02 pm

I'm sorry "Bill," did I say something to hurt your feelings?

Remember when Pulitzer said the sword's brass was gold? Seriously - you can't make stuff like that up.

Oh wait.

Jim

12/20/2016 07:56:16 pm

Jeez Hutton,,er Bill, are you new to english ? The word is "cool" not fridge. And yes, I agree Andy is a cool fellow.

nomuse

12/20/2016 03:56:45 pm

Man, they just keep piling on.

"Trust us" that an original sword was at the Museum of Naples. No, we can't tell you the catalog number, provide a letter from the curator, or even pictures. You just have to trust that OUR lack of anything substantive is much more meaningful than YOUR lack of anything substantive (aka, trying to contact the museum and getting no reply).

And the mine that may have natural alloys with slightly different composition than normal is totally proof that a sword made from the stuff would magicallurgically have a zinc content characteristic of 18th-19th century commercial brasswares. And if it isn't, then oops that's the wrong mine and another one is actually perfect. Where is the other one? Can't tell you.

But of course no-one knows the actual metallurgy of the Oak Island sword because the XRF is under some sort of non-disclosure agreement for reasons. Excepting of course that the actual holders of the sword submitted it to analysis and even recorded interviews with the analyst, and all that data is freely and publicly available. But she might have been lying for reasons, so you should totally mistrust the analysis that has been made available and totally trust the analysis that no-one can say what is in it or even who made it.

Jim

12/20/2016 04:47:52 pm

Rah, rah, rah,, The world wide plot to suppress knowledge has been busted wide open by our hero Hutton. Apparently academia,national governments and everyone else has decided to bow down to the great commander and have chosen to abandon the great plot to suppress knowledge. Shocking, I know. Kill Bill, can you confirm that the Pope will be working in Huttons group and will be wearing cosplay body armour ?
The fringe will now take their place as the worlds top experts in all things historic and scientific. Giants, aliens, Atlantis, heck even vampires will be given their rightful place in the annuls of history. Magic swords will once again rule the day. Rejoice that the days of truth are upon us my friends.

Kill Bill

12/20/2016 11:11:34 pm

Andy is the fridge and he's got all you clowns fooled. It's called false flags and misinformation. He's an expert at this stuff. Also what is everyone's strange fascination with Hutton? It's honestly kinda creepy. There are lots of explorers out there doing interesting things. I'm told Andy and Hutton share a past so this would explain his strange obcession but I don't have all the details. Maybe Andy will disclose, but will he tell the truth?

Jim

12/21/2016 12:09:05 am

Ah,, so you meant to call Andy a fridge ? Did you also mean to say " ingore", and saying " Sorry to burst the party " did you misspell balloon using party ? Hutton, next time perhaps you should use "Archie Bunker" as your alias.
You are right about Hutton being kinda creepy, however "kinda" is a bit of an understatement !
Do you think it might be possible for you to write up the white paper after you learn how to spell ? Perhaps a few adult education classes would serve you well. Really Hutton, there is no shame in admitting you are semi-literate and simply couldn't comprehend the XRF data. We will all understand and endeavor to assist you, bless your heart.

Kill Bill

12/21/2016 01:11:15 am

Just for you I'll play along. You got me Jim, I'm Hutton, so what would you like to know?

Jim

12/21/2016 02:48:10 am

Simple really, the XRF data for the oak island sword as you promised and proof of the Naples Museum sword. Nothing has changed.
I expect only more lies and double talk though.

Only Me

12/21/2016 04:34:43 am

Just for the record, Bill, there are currently four versions of the story: yours, Pulitzer's, Azora's and Andy's.

Azora hints she has the winning hand, but won't disclose anything.

Pulitzer's claims are directly contradicted by Azora.

You are repeating Pulitzer's claims and attempting to defend them. Your assertions are also directly contradicted by Azora.

Neither you nor Pulitzer have argued any of Azora's comments are wrong, so between the three of you, who are we to believe? Before you can change anyone's opinion, you need more than assertions that are contradicted by an alleged member of the AAPS project.

The only version that has documented data, a scientific test and at least two independent analyses supporting it is Andy's.

The only logical conclusion I can draw is one, or more, of you isn't telling the truth and I'm not convinced it's Andy.

Kill Bill

12/21/2016 01:06:47 pm

OnlyMe, I will respond to you fully since your responses are most thoughtful. I am curious if you have your own version other than Andy's. In my opinion he just basically took the History Channel's version as his own. I can't speak for Hutton (who allegedly has XRF data) or Azora's claim relating to the AAPS and their project, but I of course have my own thoughts on this. Let's put the Oak Island sword on the side for right now. And let's assume there is at least one Roman sword out there. I believe these are not weapons but is a votive gift given for some special reason - protection, initiation, or medal of achievement. From my research one of the likely origina custodians is the Batavian Hercules Cult from the Lower Rhinne region posses by leaders of Roman military legion that operated out of that area but also traveled to Rome. The sword David is considered to be authentic (he's one of the top artificate authentications for private collections namely very wealthy individuals) in this small world. He claimed the sword originally came from a "German collection" which would make sense. The sword that was once at the Naples Museum (I have seen documents that attest to the archives) which I believe had been lost or stolen fallen has fallen into the the hands of a private owner. On the black market there is a very healthy appetite for this kinds of objects linked to Hurcules, mysticism, and occult. I believe these two are in fact originals and Andy has not seen or have had access to the data. I'm doing my own reseach on the providence of these and the relation to the secret society. Now for the Oak Island one I consider this a wild card. It's either a real replica or misidentified by scientists that analyzed it since their assumption was that it was a weapon and metal properties made it modern but there is new evidence to show that Ancient Rome had some metallurgy on the surface appears to be modern bronze. A recently discovered ancient Greek and Minoan shipwreck has also confirmed. So I'm not ruling it out but on the other hand the properties appear to be different than what David Kennedy found - namely the gold. The providence is strange but its also very likely many missions came over to America in ancient times. The reason we don't know about it and why'd many records don't exist is that America was a trade secret among ancient cultures and those that knew it was to their advantage to keep it as a monoply. The goal was not colonization but rather trade missions to get valuable rare supplies. I believe the Romans would have known about this or at least suspected carthridge and phoniecians of having such a secret. There is records from Rome, Greek, etc and so perhaps you send your best most loyal legion to investigate. The 9th legion last seen in Germany is also still missing too. So I don't think the case is shut as Andy claims, yet I dont have the XRF data Hutton has ( I do know he showed people who verified), or the insight that Azora/AAPS has - I'm just doing my own research with some colleges.

Bob Jase

12/21/2016 01:47:47 pm

"Let's put the Oak Island sword on the side for right now. And let's assume there is at least one Roman sword out there."

So we'll put away the subject of the discussion then talk about it?!?

"The sword David is considered to be authentic (he's one of the top artificate authentications for private collections namely very wealthy individuals)"

Now is David the name of the sword (as the sentence reads) or some previously unnamed (and still un-last-named) person?

"The sword that was once at the Naples Museum (I have seen documents that attest to the archives)"

Really? Because no one else has seen these - why don't you link to them & prove your case to get this over with? Lemme guess - secret!

"I'm doing my own reseach on the providence of these and the relation to the secret society."

Provenance would be better. Oh, and what secret society? Lemme guess again - its another secret!

"the properties appear to be different than what David Kennedy found - namely the gold."

Oh look now David has a last name. But what gold? You mean the brass that Hutoon said was gold?

"The reason we don't know about it and why'd many records don't exist is that America was a trade secret among ancient cultures"

Yeah, all of them knew about it but all of them kept it secret.

"The 9th legion last seen in Germany is also still missing too."

So are Amelia Earhart & Jimmy Hoffa. There's material for a couple more episodes for you.

Only Me

12/21/2016 02:18:42 pm

My version of the story is this: four people, four versions, only one has been forthright. Until I start seeing some verified data from another party that isn't Andy, I have no reason to accept any other version.

"And let's assume there is at least one Roman sword out there."

I can't seriously consider a claim that is based on an assumption. It would be no different if someone told me, "Let's assume griffins are real."

"The reason we don't know about it and why'd many records don't exist is that America was a trade secret among ancient cultures and those that knew it was to their advantage to keep it as a monoply."

Jason Colavito has written a blog post addressing this claim. The reasons for why it isn't possible can be read here:
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/stephen-c-jett-argues-for-multiple-and-repeated-pre-columbian-contacts-with-the-old-world-in-new-article

"The goal was not colonization but rather trade missions to get valuable rare supplies."

I will repeat my comment from the blog post linked above:

"If regular voyages for trade did occur, there would be evidence of this in two ways:

1) There should be more Old World artifacts being discovered. The lack of such artifacts speaks against this regular trade.

2) New World inhabitants would have been exposed to diseases from the Old World long before sustained contact after Columbus. Such diseases would not have had as severe an impact at a later date, as enough time would have passed for native peoples to develop immunities.

The idea Old World cultures were actively involved in the New World just isn't supported by the available evidence."

As others pointed out, there would also be the presence of New World goods in the Old World, and, the possibility of genetic evidence from intermixing between each side.

I understand you're doing your own research. I think what you need to understand is Andy has limited his efforts to Pulitzer's claim about the Oak Island sword and *only* that claim. Pulitzer wants us all to believe him, but the available evidence doesn't support the claim. It doesn't help him when he refuses to make public the XRF data he says proves him right.

Jim

12/21/2016 03:38:39 pm

As expected, no evidence but lots of double talk. Nice evidence free fairy tale there Hutton.

". I am curious if you have your own version other than Andy's."

Andy doesn't have a "version"' he simply looked at the complete lack of evidence to support this claim.
No evidence = No credibility
Nice work Hutton, spinning a whole new fantasy to muddy the waters, however :
No evidence = No credibility

Kill Bill

12/22/2016 01:09:56 pm

Andy is the one with no credibility. He's a unknown associate professor at a community college. Since you love focusing on Hutton let's focus on his credibility. He's been featured on major television shows, was an advisor to the producers of the curse of oak island, author, speaker, Smithsonian laureate, and his discoveries are widely reported by the media. Have you seen how many people listen on his Soundclouds? He's also working with the AAPS and from the PUBLIC press release there are several former professors at major universities involved in his work. He's also partnering with Scott Wolter who is an actual doctor of science (not anthropology which is considered a soft humanity) and is among the most well known (where you are with him or not) historic investigator having had many shows, speaking gigs, you name it. So i don't know why you would frame the credibility on Andy's side who's some random dude with a blog that has "no real" credibility in his field, from peers, industry, television, media, etc. You do realize that you can't get on these shows or get featured in the media without the producers and journalist reviewing your work? It's called due diligence. Stop questioning credibility unless we put Andy's under the spotlight.

Bob Jase

12/22/2016 01:27:52 pm

Gee K B, you defend Hutton as if you were defending yourself.

You also lie (he's no Smithsonian laureate - http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/is-j-hutton-pulitzer-really-a-smithsonian-laureate ) and whack-jobs a plenty get dumbass tv & other media coverage - alien abducttes, bigfoots, conspiracy nuts, Trump.

Jim

12/22/2016 02:36:48 pm

Credible ;
1. capable of being believed; believable:
2. worthy of belief or confidence; trustworthy

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10104214256672809&set=gm.399142217086147&type=3&theater

Wow, that's gotta be the biggest sandwich holster I have ever seen !

Jim

12/22/2016 03:17:57 pm

Hahahaha,,, whats with the leg strap for a sheath knife ? Is that for a quick draw Hutton ?

Only Me

12/22/2016 06:44:46 pm

"He's been featured on major television shows, was an advisor to the producers of the curse of oak island"

Only Curse of Oak Island, and no, he was never an advisor.

He is not a Smithsonian laureate. See the link Bob Jase provided.

"his discoveries are widely reported by the media"

You'll have to name one that *isn't* the OI sword.

"Have you seen how many people listen on his Soundclouds?"

Do you know how many people suspect he purchases those hits?

Scott Wolter is NOT a doctor of science. For twenty years, he falsely listed an honorary masters degree on his CV that was never official; he publicly admitted this.

"You do realize that you can't get on these shows or get featured in the media without the producers and journalist reviewing your work?"

Not true. Many individuals have been guests on different fringe shows, oftentimes listed with credentials they don't actually have. The same people that have appeared on Ancient Aliens have appeared on CoOI, Coincidence? I think not.

Jim

12/22/2016 07:33:36 pm

Only me : Perhaps when Hutton says " Scott Wolter who is an actual doctor of science" he means that Wolter doctors science to suit his own fancy. Similar to what he does with history :

http://scottwolteranswers.blogspot.ca/2016/11/oak-island-1179-map.html

You will note Wolter casually waves away 800 years of documented history pertaining to longitude in favor of Templars having "secret knowledge".

Joe Scales

12/22/2016 08:30:48 am

Good People,

1) Hutton used his early appearances on The Curse of Oak Island for his own profiteering in the form of attempting to sell his Solomon's Secret kit just prior to the airing of the season two finale by posting outright lies and falsehoods in regard to what would be revealed in said episode. Thus, he burned bridges with Oak Island Tours, Inc.

2) Hutton then got word of the sword to be used in season three and acted independently as a spoiler; again, attempting to profit from his past appearances on the television show, though by that point he was clearly persona non grata.

3) The show itself debunked the sword and had the last laugh accordingly.

4) All that remains are his lies upon lies upon lies. Upon lies.

Andy White

12/22/2016 01:53:27 pm

"Bill," you won't be surprised to know that I have a PhD (Wolter has a BA; not sure if Pulitzer ever graduated kindergarten).

Also, I teach and do research at an R1 school. Feel free to look it up what that is.

I'm sure you know these things, just choose to lie about them for whatever reason.

Remember the brass that Pulitzer said was gold? And remember when he said the replica swords were all plastic? He lies like a rug. I'd hate to see you fall into that same pattern, now that you're a loyal fan of my blog.

Kill Bill

12/23/2016 12:43:17 am

"Andy" then you won't be surprised to know that there's a significant difference between Anthropology and Geology. Anthropology is a NON science based degree, a study of culture, and is part of the humanities. As you also know the American Association of Anthropology admitted in 2010 that it is not based on science. Perhaps the goal is less about discovering facts of culture but in preserving cultural identity. Geology on the other hand is a field based on science, part of the earth sciences and therefore follows the evidence based approaches and the scientific method. This is like saying that engineering and the arts are of the same thing, when they are not. There is a reason why Forbes listed Anthropology as the #1 worse college degree. I'm very familiar with R1 schools having graduated from one, but yours however is ranked last and you are still working as an "associate research professor" for a research institute of the University of South Carolina. Now as for Hutton you can't really compare him to academic world. From what I know about him he's more like a Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates, technical and entrepreneurial brilliance, and kind of people who have the spirit to explore new areas and question age old concepts. Its known he was one of the first internet tech entrepreneurs and is one of the top patent authors in the world. I think you have to look at him for raising important concepts and ideas, that others trained in science like Scott Wolter or the professors at AAPS from top R1 schools to do the white papers. What's really interesting is that you seem to single out Hutton as your poster child for some reason. I'm not sure why you do this if its not personal. Also why are you so discouraging of people exploring bold new ideas? Would you tell your students not to follow the scientific evidence, even if it might change the conventional thinking of our time. There are many things that were called "fringe" later to be proved true.

Andy White

12/23/2016 04:23:08 am

Hi "Bill,"

I admit that I stop reading your comments after your second or third lie/error. If you're not even going to try to be accurate, what's the point?

Reading your discussions of academia, anthropology, archaeology, and science is like listening to my 5-year-old trying to explain the relationship between electricity and magnetics. You're just way out of your depth and it's painful/comical to watch you try to appear knowledgeable.

If you don't have anything to contribute to a discussion of the swords, what are you still doing here?

Only Me

12/23/2016 07:10:23 am

>>> What's really interesting is that you seem to single out Hutton as your poster child for some reason. I'm not sure why you do this if its not personal.<<<

Bill, I ask you to take a step back and reconsider those words. How are you NOT doing the same thing? You've attacked Andy for being disingenuous, his teaching methods, his position, his ownership of a blog, the university he works for and his chosen profession!

That ax you're grinding is based solely on, "Andy disagrees with Pulitzer." You were the one who said,"It's not helpful for you to just attack someone who is authentically interested in seeking the truth." Now you're being hypocritical.

12/23/2016 09:50:36 am

Kill Bill,

I am an archaeologist in Canada with many colleagues in the maritime provinces. If there was some sort of scientific excavation/study going on in Nova Scotia involving a possible Roman site as you and Azora claim being conducted by AAPS with professors at "top schools", I likely would have heard about it.

I have heard nothing of the sort.

Regardless of the NDA's, that is something you can't keep secret.

Kill Bill

12/23/2016 01:10:20 am

UPDATE - Scott Wolter's said on his blog that news is imminent: "I'm hoping I can share with the world on television. We'll see. Either way, we will have an announcement later this year that is sure to generate a lot of discussion and many blog posts!" Hopefully he means this year!

Azora is this relating to the same project your team is involved with?

Jim

12/23/2016 04:59:36 am

Kill Bill : Do you know what grade Hutton managed to attain ? Did he progress all the way to high school ?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=578620399007954&set=a.108577152678950.1073741828.100005799968638&type=3&theater

Jim

12/23/2016 05:17:46 am

Kill Bill : Scott Wolter said

"Either way, we will have an announcement later this year"

You said

"Hopefully he means this year!"

What the heck else could it mean ? He has approximately 8 days to make good on his promise !

Mike Morgan

12/23/2016 10:32:55 pm

Kill Bill/Jim

Probably should see a doctor about your premature excitation problem.

Anonymous December 23, 2016 at 1:01 AM

"Scott, you said in above reply that an announcement is coming by the end of the year. I really hope you mean by the end of this month. Any more you can share or at least how we can find out when and where you will make the announcement?"

Scott Wolter December 23, 2016 at 7:24 AM

"I was talking about 2017 as we are currently vetting the new info. When and where has yet to be decided."

The Undynamic Duo is always in an endless loop of "vetting".

Jim

12/24/2016 07:52:38 am

I guess when he said "later this year" that wasn't carved in stone !

Kill Bill

12/24/2016 02:56:51 pm

I was the one who asked the question to him on his blog. Yes it's not till 2017

Kill Bill

12/24/2016 03:25:42 pm

At least they are vetting something. That is more than what Andy does.

Andy White

12/23/2016 04:25:38 am

Stop the presses! Another vague promise on a blog of big news of some unknown thing sometime in the future? Now THAT's how science is done!

Only Me

12/23/2016 07:41:03 am

I hope I'm forgiven for not waiting with bated breath. Wolter's last big announcement involved the release of his own white paper about the Jesus Ossuary on his own blog. At least he finally admitted in the paper his previous work (e.g., the Kensington Rune Stone) was "speculative research."

Joe Scales

12/23/2016 09:12:41 am

I remember Wolter wrote about the sequence of all the KRS numbers and claimed they matched exactly to those in the York Rite Ritual. When it was pointed out to him that only two numbers actually matched in the same sequence, not surprising given the vast groupings to choose from in the rather long masonic text, he later focused on only those two numbers in another blog post, as if they were somehow "sacred".

He is an absolute imbecile and has only displayed incompetence when using any sort of scientific approach to his fringe meddling of history.

Kill Bill

12/24/2016 03:01:05 pm

Andy no need to get all upset because you have no clue what they are doing. Your lack of any intel is surprising to me for one who is supposed to be "in the know" in the archeological community.

Andy White

12/24/2016 03:05:31 pm

It's not archaeology, "Bill." It's a shell game that only a sucker wouldn't see through at this point. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Kill Bill

12/24/2016 03:29:33 pm

Andy you are the sucker that is being played. Seems like they intentionally didn't release all the facts. I'm sure when it all comes out will be very funny to see you eat your words and blog too.

Only Me

12/24/2016 03:58:11 pm

According to Azora, Bill, NO facts were released. That means all we have to go on is Pulitzer's claim...which has been found wanting.

nomuse

12/23/2016 07:57:26 am

Even if that diatribe were correct, geology still only trumps anthropology within_it's_own_domain. Domain matters. Sure, particle physics is a hard science, but counting quarks won't do damn-all for you if you are trying to discuss the use of literary allusion in the works of Oscar Wilde.

Knowing only physics also won't do you any good if you are trying to figure out the interaction of HOX genes in limb formation. Because there's a whole lot of steps between interactions at the atomic level and the body of domain-specific knowledge necessary to understand the later. It's a long path from first principles. One long enough to take a lifetime to untangle.

Denise

12/23/2016 09:50:14 am

Maybe things have changed since I was in college. Anthropology is a broad subject. My understanding is that Cultural Anthropology (which includes linguistics, and ethnology) is considered either "soft science or bordering on social sciences, while Physical Anthropology (which includes Archaeology) is considered a true science category. Anthropology covers many subjects and students of Anthropology have to decide which to specialize in, which is why an Archaeologist is always an Anthropologist but an Anthropologist isn't necessarily an Archaeologist.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Also "Kill BIll"? You seem to have unnatural fascination on HP, I find myself concerned by this behavior (it matters not my opinion of HP, your attachment to anyone on this magnitude is worrisome). It's not necessary, I am sure HP can fight his own battles just fine.

Also I think this conversation has swung wildly considering the original claim HP made was that "his" sword was THE sword pulled out of water near OI and was original. All of this talk of being a copy of some of original, just proves HP's claims wrong. Whether or not an original one exits somewhere is immaterial to the claim that he made for "his" sword.

All Andy did was get interested in the fact that there were other types of the sword out there, and like a good scientist started to classify and identify the ones he could find. Which is what you do in Archaeology: find artifacts (hopefully in context) classify and identify them and hopefully learn something from the database thus created. The Science of Archaeology in action!

Kill Bill

12/24/2016 12:44:19 pm

Denise ("Andy"),

Yes anthropology is not a science and the American Association of Anthropology admits this: http://cognitionandculture.net/blog/benson-salers-blog/anthropology-is-not-a-science-says-the-aaa

Andy is not a scientist, but neither is Hutton. My only fascination is the investigation so I do research the subject matter and people involved. I don't this case closed by any degree. The heart of the issue is that the sword will need to be tested again and or other Roman artifacts will need to be found in the area. I'm not sure what research is currently going on. But the fact does remain that the two people who tested it did that assuming it was a weapon not a votive and did not about the properties of the mine which apparently all the originals are traced to.

Andy White

12/24/2016 12:51:25 pm

What's you definition of "science," Bill?

Jim

12/24/2016 02:43:06 pm

Hutton, Is it your belief that by calling the sword a "votive" the physical properties of it are somehow changed ?

Only Me

12/24/2016 03:50:46 pm

>>>Yes anthropology is not a science and the American Association of Anthropology admits this<<<

Sorry, Bill.

According to the AAA, "To understand the full sweep and complexity of cultures across all of human history, anthropology draws and builds upon knowledge from the social and biological sciences as well as the humanities and physical sciences."
http://www.americananthro.org/

Also, in its Statement of Purpose, the AAA calls anthropology a science in both Section 1 and 2:
http://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1650&navItemNumber=760

Finally, in the preamble of its Long-range Plan, it states, "The purpose of the Association shall be to advance scholarly understanding of humankind in all its aspects, and to make that knowledge available to a broader public as appropriate. This includes, but is not limited to the classic research areas of U.S. anthropology --archaeological, biological, ethnological, and linguistic anthropology-- drawing from and building upon knowledge from biological and physical sciences as well as the humanities and social sciences."
http://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1985&navItemNumber=763

Still have doubts? The AAA issued a response:

"Some recent media coverage, including an article in the New York Times, has portrayed anthropology as divided between those who practice it as a science and those who do not, and has given the mistaken impression that the American Anthropological Association (AAA) Executive Board believes that science no longer has a place in anthropology. On the contrary, the Executive Board recognizes and endorses the crucial place of the scientific method in much anthropological research."

That response is no longer available at its own website, but is available here:
http://blogs.plos.org/neuroanthropology/2010/12/01/anthropology-science-and-public-understanding/

Yep, the AAA still considers anthropology a science.

Denise

1/2/2017 08:27:37 pm

Did you just claim I am Andy? How cute, you must be new around here. And I now know for sure that you are not HP because we've discussed our intents and identities on Jason Colavito's site. No I am not Andy, I am a Park Ranger with a Master's in Historic Preservation and a BA in History and Anthropoloy. So not Andy.

Kill Bill

12/24/2016 02:54:18 pm

Jim, I'm not Hutton for the billionth time. Lots of people don't think it's a closed case and until more information is released its all speculation. I'm using the word votive since it's the bread crumbs Hutton gave in media interview. Here's what I know: I've heard there is reseach going on near the island by another 3rd party. I also know the Lagina brothers definitely found something major this year, what it is I have no idea but will be shown on the series. I know there is some major announcement coming next year by Hutton, Scott Wolter, and from the AAPS.

Wishing you all a very merry Christmas!

12/25/2016 10:57:42 am

Kill Bill,

Please see my statements above. I will quote them here again for you:

"I am an archaeologist in Canada with many colleagues in the maritime provinces. If there was some sort of scientific excavation/study going on in Nova Scotia involving a possible Roman site as you and Azora claim being conducted by AAPS with professors at "top schools", I likely would have heard about it.

I have heard nothing of the sort.

Regardless of the NDA's, that is something you can't keep secret."

Maybe I am wrong but a quick call to the Nova Scotia Community, Culture and Heritage ministry will probably answer any questions:
https://cch.novascotia.ca/exploring-our-past/special-places/archaeology-permits-and-guidelines

Jim

12/24/2016 03:35:01 pm

And a very merry Christmas to you too Bill !
In all fairness I am finding your statement :

" But the fact does remain that the two people who tested it did that assuming it was a weapon not a votive and did not about the properties of the mine which apparently all the originals are traced to."

somewhat nebulous and do not want to misunderstand your intent. Are there in fact different sets of tests for " votive" and "weapon" as you seen to allude to ?
Did Hutton test this sword as a "weapon" although he has always maintained it is a votive ?
I can't seem to find any evidence that this sword is connected to any particular mine. Other than the word of a known liar, do you have any such evidence ?

Only Me

12/24/2016 04:03:04 pm

I'm highly interested in learning how changing the name of an object changes its material composition. Maybe that will help explain why Scott Wolter still identifies a lead bar as silver. Especially after a lab proved conclusively the bar is, IIRC, 94-95% lead.

Comments are closed.

Swordgate Year One: 365 Days of Thimblerigging

Archives

Categories