In Search Of The Lost Dutchman Mine

[phillyflyers]

No. There are no credible sources that you're right. None.

If you make a claim, it's up to you to support your claim. Otherwise it's just hot air.

What may be a "credible source" to you may be BS to normal people.

What you stated is incorrect.

First, we know for a fact there is gold in the Superstitions. The Dutchman Mine has always been located there. Always.

He was seen on many occasions going in and out of those mountains, and the map he drew on his death bed to Julia Thomas led directly into those mountains.

If you insist on sticking to what the geologists say, that's fine but it's not the facts.

Secondly, there are PLENTY of credible sources you can find that state exactly what I said.

Yes, I said it, but you asked the question so you go find it for yourself like I did.

 

[quantumleap]

What you stated is incorrect.

First, we know for a fact there is gold in the Superstitions. The Dutchman Mine has always been located there. Always.

He was seen on many occasions going in and out of those mountains, and the map he drew on his death bed to Julia Thomas led directly into those mountains.

If you insist on sticking to what the geologists say, that's fine but it's not the facts.

Secondly, there are PLENTY of credible sources you can find that state exactly what I said.

Yes, I said it, but you asked the question so you go find it for yourself like I did.

So still no sources then.

Whenever someone says "we know for a fact" and then doesn't show sources, it's a sure sign that they are using the "fact" statement to try to convince people. If you have to use that word without support it makes your point look weak. If you had a point you wouldn't need to claim it's a fact to be true. Your support would stand on its own.

Just because he went to the Superstition Mountains doesn't mean that's where he found the gold. There are a few witnesses at the time who pointed out that the high grade ore traded by the "Dutchman" was identical to the ore found at the Vulture mine. It's more likely he found his mine near there and not in the Superstitions.

So you're saying what geologists come up with aren't facts. That's simple dismissal. Geologists are the ones that would know the best what type of gold may or may not be found in the Superstitions and it certainly wouldn't be the high grade ore the Dutchman traded.

 

[phillyflyers]

So still no sources then.

Whenever someone says "we know for a fact" and then doesn't show sources, it's a sure sign that they are using the "fact" statement to try to convince people. If you have to use that word without support it makes your point look weak. If you had a point you wouldn't need to claim it's a fact to be true. Your support would stand on its own.

Just because he went to the Superstition Mountains doesn't mean that's where he found the gold. There are a few witnesses at the time who pointed out that the high grade ore traded by the "Dutchman" was identical to the ore found at the Vulture mine. It's more likely he found his mine near there and not in the Superstitions.

So you're saying what geologists come up with aren't facts. That's simple dismissal. Geologists are the ones that would know the best what type of gold may or may not be found in the Superstitions and it certainly wouldn't be the high grade ore the Dutchman traded.

Where's your sources?

Show a source that the Dutchman got his gold from anywhere other than the Superstitions as you claim.

Show your source for your statement about geologists.

 

[quantumleap]

Where's your sources?

Show a source that the Dutchman got his gold from anywhere other than the Superstitions as you claim.

Show your source for your statement about geologists.

I thought so. No source.

 

[phillyflyers]

I thought so. No source.

I do have sources. Not going to look them up for you.

You want them, do the work yourself.

Where's your sources?

 

[phillyflyers]

 

[quantumleap]

Thanks for the reference. But this is about a man who thought the mine was in the Superstitions. That's not proof. That's one man's opinion.

Even by looking at Wikipedia you can see that the type of gold Waltz had doesn't fit the terrain of the Superstitions:

Lost Dutchman's Gold Mine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

One fact against the existence of "Lost Dutchman Mine" is that Waltz was a "placer miner"; while the gold pieces he had were in quartz, the Superstition Mountains are in fact volcanic. Lastly, the alleged mine directions Ruth had were from an 1895 newspaper account.

and

John D. Wilburn in his book Dutchman's Lost Ledge of Gold (1990), wrote that the Bulldog Gold Mine near Goldfield, Arizona, fits very well the description Jacob Waltz gave as the location of his 'lost mine'. Furthermore, Wilburn stated that geology indicates that there is no gold in the Superstition Mountains, which are igneous in origin.

There May Be a Long-Lost Gold Mine in the Arizona Mountains

For more than a century, adventurous souls have sought the Lost Dutchman Mine, and since 1891, more than a hundred people have claimed to find it. But the mine remains shrouded in mystery, so much so that it might not exist at all.

www.discovery.com

Today, the consensus among geologists is that the Superstitions are unlikely to contain a secret gold mine.

 

[phillyflyers]

Thanks for the reference. But this is about a man who thought the mine was in the Superstitions. That's not proof. That's one man's opinion.

Even by looking at Wikipedia you can see that the type of gold Waltz had doesn't fit the terrain of the Superstitions:

Lost Dutchman's Gold Mine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

One fact against the existence of "Lost Dutchman Mine" is that Waltz was a "placer miner"; while the gold pieces he had were in quartz, the Superstition Mountains are in fact volcanic. Lastly, the alleged mine directions Ruth had were from an 1895 newspaper account.

and

John D. Wilburn in his book Dutchman's Lost Ledge of Gold (1990), wrote that the Bulldog Gold Mine near Goldfield, Arizona, fits very well the description Jacob Waltz gave as the location of his 'lost mine'. Furthermore, Wilburn stated that geology indicates that there is no gold in the Superstition Mountains, which are igneous in origin.

There May Be a Long-Lost Gold Mine in the Arizona Mountains

For more than a century, adventurous souls have sought the Lost Dutchman Mine, and since 1891, more than a hundred people have claimed to find it. But the mine remains shrouded in mystery, so much so that it might not exist at all.

www.discovery.com

Today, the consensus among geologists is that the Superstitions are unlikely to contain a secret gold mine.

What is it you're trying to say?

Waltz ONLY EVER worked in the Superstitions while in Arizona.

Quartz does grow in volcanic rock, you understand this, right?

The gold Waltz took out of his mine was unique in every aspect.

Samples of it aren't matched with any other known source on earth.

So where did he get it from?

The Superstitions.

 

[quantumleap]

What is it you're trying to say?

Waltz ONLY EVER worked in the Superstitions while in Arizona.

Quartz does grow in volcanic rock, you understand this, right?

The gold Waltz took out of his mine was unique in every aspect.

Samples of it aren't matched with any other known source on earth.

So where did he get it from?

The Superstitions.

I'm not here to disprove every unsupported claim you make. You'll just make something else up and expect me to disprove it so this will be the last:

Vulture City

At one time Jacob Waltz worked the Vulture Mine. High-grading activities (stealing raw gold) at the Vulture Mime were legendary and prevalent.

As far as quartz being present in igneous rock:

https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1969/0610/report.pdf

Igneous rocks contain as little as 0.2 and as much as 73 ppb
(parts per billion) gold. The average, calculated on the basis of
50 percent granite and 50 percent basalt, is 3.0 ppb.

Waltz's ore was high-grade ore, not something as little as 3.0 parts per billion.

I've answered every "fact" you've brought up and showed how your claims were made up by your imagination.

 

[phillyflyers]

I'm not here to disprove every unsupported claim you make. You'll just make something else up and expect me to disprove it so this will be the last:

Vulture City

At one time Jacob Waltz worked the Vulture Mine. High-grading activities (stealing raw gold) at the Vulture Mime were legendary and prevalent.

As far as quartz being present in igneous rock:

https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1969/0610/report.pdf

Igneous rocks contain as little as 0.2 and as much as 73 ppb
(parts per billion) gold. The average, calculated on the basis of
50 percent granite and 50 percent basalt, is 3.0 ppb.

Waltz's ore was high-grade ore, not something as little as 3.0 parts per billion.

I've answered every "fact" you've brought up and showed how your claims were made up by your imagination.

There is no factual source that states that Waltz ever worked at the Vulture mine.

I'm the one providing the videos and who brought this topic up.

You are the one who can't substantiate his claims. Everything I've said can be found easily. I'm just not doing that for you.
.
Waltz gold came out of the Superstitions. Not anywhere else.

Get your "facts" straight.

 

[quantumleap]

There is no factual source that states that Waltz ever worked at the Vulture mine.

I'm the one providing the videos and who brought this topic up.

You are the one who can't substantiate his claims. Everything I've said can be found easily. I'm just not doing that for you.
.
Waltz gold came out of the Superstitions. Not anywhere else.

Get your "facts" straight.

There you go again. Even when I post support for my point you simply put out your opinion against it. That's just simple dismissal .Anyone can do that.

You're just not going to bring up any more support because as far as your video goes, you provided a video of someone other than Waltz.



I can understand why you wouldn't want to be embarrassed anymore.

I'll stick with the expert opinion of the geologists.

 

[phillyflyers]

There you go again. Even when I post support for my point you simply put out your opinion against it. That's just simple dismissal .Anyone can do that.

You're just not going to bring up any more support because as far as your video goes, you provided a video of someone other than Waltz.



I can understand why you wouldn't want to be embarrassed anymore.

I'll stick with the expert opinion of the geologists.

You didn't post anything that proves your false points.

You didn't post anything that legitimately refutes what I've stated.

You're so full.of shit, you didn't even know that samples of Waltz gold were compared and tested against ores from:

Mammoth ore
Black Queen ore
Vulture ore
Kochera ore
Camp ore

Since it's obvious you don't have a clue what these are, these are the names of mines gold was found in.


Only the Camp ore, which came from the Superstitions, exhibited similar elements and minerals from Waltz sample.

The rest weren't close.

Which also disproves your unfounded assertion that Waltz worked the Vulture mine, which he surely did not.

Stop acting like you know what you're talking about when you don't have the first clue.

 

[quantumleap]

So still no support to prove your points? Uh, except a YouTube video that isn't relevant?

 

[phillyflyers]

So still no support to prove your points? Uh, except a YouTube video that isn't relevant?

I don't have to post what I know to prove a point to an ignorant.

 

[phillyflyers]

 

[phillyflyers]

 

[phillyflyers]