Mark Turner writes :
The limited Barker Ranch excavation came to an end without any finds. The digs were limited to about three feet deep whereas Susan Atkins once stated the bodies were eight feet down. Also note that due to some sites being in washes, forty years of flash flooding could have added several feet of soil deposits. The digging was limited to areas three feet wide by six feet long. Due to the way scent can travel underground (roots and water), actual gravesites can be quite a distance from scent locations. Ten feet is not uncommon and the distance could even be thirty feet. It should also be noted that this was a multi-disciplinary approach that did not rely only on dogs. Other scientific methods also pointed to these sites. Perhaps the best article can be found by clicking here. Some may consider the excavation a failure but it did bring new methods to the extreme sites for field testing. Everybody involved should be commended for the hard work involved and the experience gained.
Of course the fact that there are no bodies also probably contributed to the lack of finding any.
Hey- anyone notice that this maroon was quoting Susan Atkins? That's like believing the Bug. I think Mark should pay them back every cent they wasted on this!
4 comments:
Col says:
Of course the fact that they are no bodies also probably contributed to the lack of finding any.
I think you have to restate this Col. Perhaps you should talk of the fact they have found no bodies.
One sad aspect of the methodology of science (and elsewhere) is that whereas it is possible to prove the existence of something you can't prove (or rationally assume) its non-existence,
Don't blame me for this, blame the philosophers who reasoned this out (David Hume and Karl Popper, among others).
I never understood why you were so adamant there were no bodies period. Whether or not we ascribe any buried corpses to Manson and his acolytes, there could be any number of other dead people around - from native Indian ceemeteries to drunken miners and tourists who simply got lost. Remote places like DV are good for getting rid of cadavers.
Few areas of the world are without human remains if you go back far enough - and the fact that the investigation team dug so shallow and gave up so quickly defies archaeology, forensic investigation and common sense.
I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist, but something smells rotten in this investigation.
My two cents.
Frank
So all of that technology is not functional? Unable to locate pH changes in the soil, or the magnetic field of human bones, as advertised? It worked at the Body Farm, but not in Death Valley?
The original "inconclusive" tests likely read the chemicals emitted by desert plants. Once the investigators started shovelling, don't you think their fancy machines and equipment would've discovered evidence, if any was actually there to be found?
The nice doggie likely smelled the old animal bones, roasted over a campfire a thousand years ago. Which is what was discovered. That's what good ol' Buster was sounding on. Give him his milkbone anyway.
And I seriously doubt that the "family" dug any graves 10 feet deep, in the summer heat, through the hardpan, while stoned on acid. Let alone dug underneath that prehistoric camp site, then placed the ancient animal bones and ashes exactly and precisely back where they had been, on TOP of a body in a grave.
The investigation was called off because there wasn't enough evidence to proceed. Give it a rest, Ms. Tate.
A.C Fisher Aldag said...The investigation was called off because there wasn't enough evidence to proceed. Give it a rest, Ms. Tate.
Same reason it shouldn't have started in the first place..not enough credible evidence to justify proceeding.
If there had been, it would have been evident decades ago.
What's the story with Debra Tate, Pic Dawson and the FBI? I've heard rumors that they knew one another before the murders. Any truth to the rumors?
Post a Comment