Extraordinary optimism for something that hasn't even been proven. Good weather (sea conditions) is right around the corner. 'if you're going to shoot, shoot, don't talk.

Quote: I always wondered if he was ever able to dive that wreck?
______________________________________

Unfortunately he never got to do it.

For those of you who remember the poster 'capted', I received news that he died several weeks ago.

For those of you who remember the poster 'capted', I received news that he died several weeks ago.

NOT SURPRISING

Quote: Hilarious!
__________________

Hilarious? Actually making unsubstantiated statements like "we're ON THE WRECK is rather sad and definitely misleading. But I suppose, no worry, Tinker Bell find all will rectify the situation.

Quote:
You're probably referring to the CEO saying they were "on the wreck" well they are. Most people read that and interpret it as they're tracking it down.
____________________________________________

Well they're not. There is no evidence produced whatsoever that validates they are ON THE WRECK. Suggest you be more careful with your choice of words.

The reality is that if the wreck was there it could have been located and proven by the currently available state-of-the-art remote sensing technology. Primarily cesium magnetometry, or from boat operated large coil ferrous/non-ferrous detection or low frequency sub-bottom profiling. This we need a Tinker Bell find all to find the wreck is in my opinion nonsense.

A Master on the Spanish Main is the title.

If these people want to know what real treasure hunting - treasure finding is all about, a new book has been released at amazon.com A biography of one of the famous - Burt Webber.

Quote: The question is what "big" is it?
___________________________________

Fluff & Puff?

Quote: Those that are watching that have no stocks.....are miserable. LOL!
___________________________________________________

Not at all. So far allot of puff and fluff with no hard evidence of anything. For short term gamblers Ok.

Quote: They have already signed a contract with the US Department of Defense.
______________________

Why no specifics? What percentage of a percentage do they own? What's the product. Toilet seats for military bases? Yes, and the band plays on. I'm waiting for the Tinkerbell show.

Quote: And they may not even need to be in the water to get that spark :)
__________________________

Oh man, and the band played on.

Quote: New technology effective, finding things that old technology missed.
___________________________________________

Why don't you be specific along with supportive facts. 'Finding things? Finding what?

Well, that's a fact, isn't it.

Quote: Actually the survivor stated he floated on a hatch cover, in his deposition. His deposition is in the Contratacion section of the Archivo General de Indias (AGI) Seville, Spain.
If I told you anymore info I would have to kill you! LOLOLOLOLOL Just kidding but the information is factual information, that part is true. I guess I've never floated on a hatch cover so I have no idea if he could stand up? or would have to have stayed laying down? JMO
_____________________________

I cited the AGI reference (Escribania 1058C), where as you haven't. Nevertheless it's not important. The survivors were clinging to a 'quartel" And so what. The same end results.

Please read again, perhaps more carefully. I clearly acknowledge the fact that cannons were recovered for scrap value during WWII. I also did not state they're necessarily all stacked on a pile. I've been on magnetometer surveys where we found iron cannons scattered and associated with a debris trail. I don't know that you have. So try and read again as it might be helpful.

Quote:
True, particularly during WWII, iron cannons were recovered from various wreck sites for scrap value. Cannons were also picked up occasionally by divers and sold sometimes to restaurants for outside display. That usually happened when the cannons were visible from the surface meaning shallow water, calm sea and clear visibility. The 1715 Concepcion (according to Rob Westrick, marine archaeologist, researcher, writer) carried 32 iron cannon. Numerous posters here have carried the excuse numerous times that the SFRX divers have such a difficult time finding anything because the water is + or - forty feet deep, there's constantly poor visibility and everything buried under the mud bottom. So you tell me, under those conditions how anyone would have previously seen and picked up canons? Let me tell you from experience that when one does a magnetometer survey over a ballast pile or actual debris trail containing iron cannons, the mag. practically sings out the Spanish anthem, the anomalies are so well pronounced. The obvious is, at least to me, the actual wreck site is not in the area or there would be large anomalies all over the place. There aren't are they?

If you got it this time, its pretty obvious SFRX isn't actually on the wreck site. My opinion but then what do I know?

Quote: Nope, just something I thought you might like. I found it very interesting that a reason cannons are not found, is years ago a large number of them were scrapped whenever found in shallow waters around Florida. Or they were found and displayed in various ways. JMO
____________________

True, particularly during WWII, iron cannons were recovered from various wreck sites for scrap value. Cannons were also picked up occasionally by divers and sold sometimes to restaurants for outside display. That usually happened when the cannons were visible from the surface meaning shallow water, calm sea and clear visibility. The 1715 Concepcion (according to Rob Westrick, marine archaeologist, researcher, writer) carried 32 iron cannon. Numerous posters here have carried the excuse numerous times that the SFRX divers have such a difficult time finding anything because the water is + or - forty feet deep, there's constantly poor visibility and everything buried under the mud bottom. So you tell me, under those conditions how anyone would have previously seen and picked up canons? Let me tell you from experience that when one does a magnetometer survey over a ballast pile or actual debris trail containing iron cannons, the mag. practically sings out the Spanish anthem, the anomalies are so well pronounced. The obvious is, at least to me, the actual wreck site is not in the area or there would be large anomalies all over the place. There aren't are they?

Quote: Forgot to post this, also the person floating on the hatch door could see! land for three days! So without buildings and laying on a door, I guess he could have been fairly close to the land? Maybe mile? two miles? but not out to sea like some have stated. JMO
______________________________

Although I've posted it numerous times before I shall address this matter once again. I have copies the research from the renowned researcher / treasure hunter Jack Haskins. In AGI Escribania 1058C it says" the Concepcion grounded off Cape Canaveral. Seven survivors floated for three days on a 'quartel'. They reached shore and made their way to St. Augustine". Of course at some point they saw land. They were washed up on it. You show me documented reference they saw land for three days while afloat. According to Haskins he had believed the Concepcion grounded a way off shore. I'll take his opinion any day over the arm chair theorists posting here. On that subject, show me on a chart a shallow reef or sand bank right off the SFRX contract area where the Concepcion would have wrecked? This is the reason why I will continue to maintain the conviction that what's been found in the area was the result of flotsam. Just as the seven survivors drifted ashore, so did a piece of the upper deck or side bringing in the one cannon, the few artifacts and the section of wood with the deadeye strap. Thats my opinion and I'm not exactly an armchair theorist.

Quote: Raider... I can almost taste that free beer all ready!!
_____________________________________________

More than happy to based upon the positive discovery of the wreck. Not on this pump up puff & fluff. Good luck to you just the same.

Quote: Why do you never address the water conditions?
_______________________________________

Underwater visibility is not an issue when doing remote sensing surveys. Professional, experienced divers can do on bottom proofing and identification with only a couple feet of visibility. I know. I've been there. I don't recollect calling anyone a liar. If I have please show me. So why does any of this really matter when the good Dr. Torres is coming to the rescue with the find all Tinkerbell?

Quote: "shouldn't" take 3 years, as if there's a precise standard of finding treasure in a specific radius

So what does that mean, when they find it this year, year 4...took too long???

Unreal
_____________________

Unreal indeed. Kinda says there's no wreck there or real incompetence in trying to find the wreck, so take your choice. No problem, Tinkerbell's on the way.

Quote: Hedge, you conveniently left out period timbers, canon, platters and a pistol.

Mel hung around Atocha for 16 years, with water conditions far better than Melbourne and just about as many artifacts.

“There were a lot of people that doubted me and told me I was crazy” Mel Fisher
________________________________________

It's now over ten years and counting and as I recall, the only thing of the things you mentioned, found by SFRX were a portion of upper side or decking with a deadeye attached. Everything else was found previously by Heartland. Although I posted addressing this a couple of days ago, I'll state it again. In those 16 years you mention, Fisher was near continuously finding valuable treasure and artifacts and bronze cannon all along the way. Fisher had to go through a very long learning process in the proper selection and application of remote sensing technology. On the other hand Webber spent but five months on his first expedition to Silver Shoals, found over a dozen shipwrecks but not the 1641 Concepcion. He developed diver operated cesium magnetometers, went back the next year and found the Concepcion in five days which is all historically documented. Primarily between Fisher and Webber, all the development and application work is all done. There are others to be credited as well in successful application of sub-bottom profiling and side-scan sonar. The point is that now having spent over then years finding nothing really significant but yet in the past two years having the CEO saying publicly they are on the wreck but yet can't produce sound evidence to support that statement is rather sad I would say. But once again, do not despair for Tinkerbell is on its way.

Quote: The Buried, in the mud, for centuries wreck, under years of mud. Close your eyes and we'll give you a 3 square mile area to find something that could be2' x 2' x 3' long, or smaller! This is the reason for the new equipment their working on! JMO
___________________________________

Excuse me for having to say this but that is a very naive statement. One is not looking for fragments of silver plates or a burial mask. One is looking for a shipwreck. Those that look for and find shipwrecks are familiar with the obvious;

Multiple cannons, anchors (if not used and lost during the storm) tons of ballast rocks, lower hull structures, olive jars (intact and hundreds plus of shards) always telltale of a Spanish shipwreck, ceramics, small arms, black glass bottles, silver, pewter and talavera earthenware dining services, utensils and cooking pots, navigational instruments, silver and gold bullion and coins (tons). These things are not only found in the nucleus of the wreck site but also in the outer parameters.

As I stated before, there are three primary applications of remote sensing that find Spanish Colonial shipwrecks (proven over and over). magnetometer, sub-bottom profiling, deep penetrating ferrous / non-ferrous metal detection, and in applicable cases these-scan sonar. The mud or zero visibility doesn't matter so that is no excuse. If a wreck lies with the area and a 'professional' survey had been performed, the wreck would have been found. Oh well, find all Tinkerbell is coming to the rescue right. Oh what a show.

Quote: It shouldn't take years if the wreck is actually there.
______________________________________

Precisely. There is no excuse.

With this, I'm inclined to agree.

Quote: Interesting statement....so essentially the timeframe from when he decided to become a treasure hunter and time he actually found treasure was.....well, the very same day???

Comment makes zero sense
___________________________________

It makes allot of sense but apparently you just didn't understand it.

When Mel Fisher made his commitment to hunt for sunken treasure, he had but one start up failure and that was to launch his career by trying to find the 1641 Concepcion on the Silver Shoals which Burt Webber later found in 1978. From then on Fisher became an on going treasure finder starting on many of the 1715 wrecks. Then on a number of the 1733 wrecks in the Florida Keys followed by the 1622 Atocha. Although it took him many years to find the Atocha motherlode, he was finding treasure, artifacts and bronze cannons all along the way. He was a hands on diver, not someone sitting behind a desk hiring names and just talking about it. But don't fret, it all should change when the find all Tinkerbell starts humming.

Mel Fisher, regardless of ethics, was the real deal. He was a diving, hands on treasure finder throughout his treasure hunting career. He didn't talk it, he did it.

Quote: This came out a few months ago however I can watch it again and again ...

Just saying

Check it out from SFRX
___________________________

The documentary of the one decade plus company that just can't find anything. (excuse me, I forgot. Tinkerbell's on the way).

It might be more encouraging to watch the documentaries made about pros like Fisher and Webber.
The "if you're going to shoot, shoot, don't talk. people.

Quote: It appears Spain is on notice, and they will negotiate with reasonable people once the wreck is confirmed.
__________________________

Dream on.

Quote: I have metal detectors and know how different metals show up in different ranges on the display.
_____________________________________________

Well golly gee, discrimination detectors have been around for a long time now. Try and discriminate in saltwater on a shipwreck. Another story.

Quote: He sure was different. He wiped out every investor at the end of the season if no Treasure was found.

He was also forced into conservation mode by pending litigation.

You are correct, big difference!!!
______________________

Now you're going from persistence (first point you were trying to make) to ethics. So what's your point in the first place?

My, oh, my......I can smell those rotten mangos all the way to here. I heard they were trying to sell them at .005 each.

Quote: Sounds like Fisher for how many years?

“A lot of people doubted me.” MF
___________________________________

Although I posted numerous times in response to the old Mel Fisher comments, I'll say it again. A night and day difference. Fisher was a hands on diving treasure hunter, treasure finder when he decided to commit himself to the hunt. He found real treasure on the 1715 fleet wrecks, the 1733 fleet wrecks and finally the 1622 Atocha. Even when in pursuit of the Atocha motherlode he was finding treasure, bronze cannons, etc. all along the way. Have you any idea how many 'Tinkerbell' type schemes he indulged in through those many years? Many. The wreck was found by conventional remote sensing methodology. Just like this sought after shipwreck could be found if 1. the wreck is actually there. 2. the remote sensing survey methods were applied by experienced operators who know what they're doing along with proper interpretation. This outfit has, what is it, over ten years in the game and never found or salvaged a Spanish colonial period shipwreck? Using Mel Fisher is not a very good comparison.

It might matter to people who know nothing about this game and plan to invest ill advised by persons who have a zero track record finding sunken treasure.

I just love the explanation of how the wreck that without proof got there. Kinda walked along the bottom and hit a bump or hill, etc., etc. Hilarious. I am amused by these theories as given by persons who never discovered a wreck or ever salvaged a wreck. The research testimonies as to how the 1715 Concepcion actually sank way off shore are held in complete denial.

Quote: where the ship came to rest. But for some reason they can't find it.
______________________________________

From a professional perspective, it all sounds like a bunch of nonsense. There are three fundamental methods by which shipwrecks are found. Magnetometry, side-scan sonar and sub-bottom profiling. If you can't find the shipwreck being sought with one of the three, the operator or operators are grossly incompetent or your searching in the wrong area or you just don't have a shipwreck period. What kind of background does this Indy have in remote sensing surveys? What has he ever found before? Is all of this stuff being spoon-fed or by the barnyard shovel full?

Quote: Tinker Bell is coming....
_____________________

So is the tooth fairy.

Quote: But the great thing about the interview is that it sounds like they're on the wreck!
______________________________________

Professionals know and can prove when they're on a wreck. All talk. No proof.