At the moment, I'm not really interested in Amburg. my focus is on the guy who holds the video. his site is full of vintage vids.

KIRO did the helicopter video, but they claim they don't have anymore video, or at least they stated that. according to them it was nothing past 10 years. I'm not buying that at all.

I'm thinking there were other things that Van Amburg saw that were not part of the broadcast -- like how far they were digging, why he was allowed so close the first day, but not the second day.

He does have an email on the CalStart web site

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

At the moment, I'm not really interested in Amburg. my focus is on the guy who holds the video. his site is full of vintage vids.

KIRO did the helicopter video, but they claim they don't have anymore video, or at least they stated that. according to them it was nothing past 10 years. I'm not buying that at all.

I'm thinking there were other things that Van Amburg saw that were not part of the broadcast -- like how far they were digging, why he was allowed so close the first day, but not the second day.

He does have an email on the CalStart web site

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The number and intrusiveness of reporters became a problem on the second day so reporters were kept further away and not allowed to interrupt diggers etc. As Van Amburg himself notes 'it has become a circus out here' ...

In addition the first day was basically exploration. On the second day Palmer arrived and the agenda became more formal and 'by the numbers'. Some kind of order was required. There were specific things to accomplish without the interference of reporters trying to pull things out of your hands - literally! This isnt just my editorial opinion. This is how it was ... 

Several official photographers were appointed, in addition to Palmer doing official photography and documentation. The need for reporters or news people to do "documentation" had passed.

But of course I am just speculating -   

I finally got the video to play - clicking the YouTube logo! Thanks Shutter, I agree with everyone that this is a major find. It certainly confirms what Dorwin has been saying.

Carl decided not allow his video's to be viewed other than straight from You Tube. I don't agree with that function, but never the less the video is what it is.....which is great!

I agree this is a major find. I will be curious to see where everyone's analysis puts the money find. I have to think about it and consult with my teammates.  My only comment right off is that I would not trust the findings of fragments at depth. The way they were excavating the site was very unprofessional from an archaeology standpoint. Sand being walked on etc could have been shoved into the hole or tracked in on shoes etc. We saw the fragments in the archive and it was just a small pill box of them.

Tom Kaye

Tom, give us a profile (side view) for Tina Bar. In fact give us two. One for Palmer and one for yourself. Be sure to include approximate depths of different strata.  Say in the vicinity of Palmer's trench - would be a good place to start.

The newscast says small pieces were found buried 2 to 3 feet deep.  The money closer to the surface seemed to be more intact.  Could the higher moisture content deeper have caused the money to decay into smaller pieces?

It's my understanding they used a front loader. I'm guess they distributed piles of sand, and then graded the area. when the sand was pumped onto the beach, the money could have moved or floated all over the place during these actions. it wouldn't be localized in one area on the spoil. this is also speculation...

I doubt the money floated onto the beach if it came from the bottom. it would have to of been brought up by machinery, and not naturally IMO.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

It's my understanding they used a front loader. I'm guess they distributed piles of sand, and then graded the area. when the sand was pumped onto the beach, the money could have moved or floated all over the place during these actions. it wouldn't be localized in one area on the spoil. this is also speculation...

I doubt the money floated onto the beach if it came from the bottom. it would have to of been brought up by machinery, and not naturally IMO.

Shutter, Your last sentence is 100 percent correct.

If the money was LOWER than the location it was found at, energy would have to be added to the money to elevate it to that location.

However, if the money was ABOVE the location it was found at, gravity would take care of moving it down to the found location.

I do understand a lot of what you try and prove with water levels, and the landscape of the area, however, I don't think the dredge theory can just be forgotten, or ruled out. this could also place the money in various locations going against natural means, or water levels. I just find it odd that the area was dredged, and the material placed very close to where the money was found. those are facts, but the fact of it being a part of the money find is not a fact