Written by the TreasureGuide for the exclusive use of treasurebeachesreport.blogspot.com.
 |
| Small Button Uncleaned. |
This is a small button I found a week or so ago. It is shown on a dime. It was found along with some copper and a lead shot.
 |
| Encrusted Back of Same Button. |
I wanted to see what the shank looked like, so I decided to clean the button.
 |
| Another View of the Button Back. |
 |
| Partially Cleaned Button Back |
After some cleaning I could see that the shank was completely dissolved. In the photo above, you can see the vacancy where the shank was. It is the hole extending from about the 8 o'clock position towards the middle of the button.
I was sorry that the shank was no longer there, but I could see what it would have looked like.
The button was copper or copper alloy, but the shank was iron. I don't think I'll clean it any more than that.
---
The latest edition of the SAR (Sons of the American Revolution) magazine reported some interesting poll numbers that were originally published in the Washington Post. Here are some of them.
More than one in three people could not name a single right protected by the First Amendment.
Only one in four people can name all three branches of the government.
One in three cannot name a single branch of the U. S. government.
77 percent of students in public high schools in Oklahoma couldn't not mane George Washington as the first U. S. President. A poll in Arizona got similar numbers.
In another poll it was found that the majority of millennials (58 percent) would prefer to live in a socialist, communist or fascist nation rather than a capitalist nation.
I don't have more specific information on the poll or sample.
I knew things were headed that way, but was surprised by these numbers.
---
One important skill for any treasure hunter is the ability to evaluate sources of information. Some sources are misleading. I've recently posted reports on finds that were filled with inaccuracies. When you see those types of reports you have to wonder what is going on. You need to evaluate what you read. That is why I try to always post my sources. You can usually go to the original source and check it our for yourself and then conduct additional research if you want to.
There are a number of signs that alert me. One of the most obvious is wild unsupported assertions. Some people are cautious about what they say, and some make bold pronouncements with little evidence, and as a result, often turn out to be clearly wrong.
In social media, it doesn't much matter how often you are right or wrong, as long as you get attention. Some people work harder for attention than getting things right.
It seems to me that nothing has been a bigger failure in education than the Critical Thinking movement. I won't get into that here even though it is a hot topic for me.
I've made my fair share of mistakes, but one thing I have going for me in this blog, is if I make a mistake, someone will usually point it out to me. That is always helpful even though I don't always agree with every comment I receive.
Here are some good tips for analyzing news sources by Melissa Zimdars (2016) - Merrimack College assistant professor of communication & media
Avoid websites that end in “lo” ex: Newslo. These sites take pieces of accurate information and then packaging that information with other false or misleading “facts” (sometimes for the purposes of satire or comedy).
Watch out for websites that end in “.com.co” as they are often fake versions of real news sources
Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.
Odd domain names generally equal odd and rarely truthful news.
Lack of author attribution may, but not always, signify that the news story is suspect and requires verification.
Some news organizations are also letting bloggers post under the banner of particular news brands; however, many of these posts do not go through the same editing process (ex: BuzzFeed Community Posts, Kinja blogs, Forbes blogs).
Check the “About Us” tab on websites or look up the website on Snopes or Wikipedia for more information about the source.
Bad web design and use of ALL CAPS can also be a sign that the source you’re looking at should be verified and/or read in conjunction with other sources.
If the story makes you REALLY ANGRY it’s probably a good idea to keep reading about the topic via other sources to make sure the story you read wasn’t purposefully trying to make you angry (with potentially misleading or false information) in order to generate shares and ad revenue.
If the website you’re reading encourages you to DOX individuals, it’s unlikely to be a legitimate source of news.
It’s always best to read multiple sources of information to get a variety of viewpoints and media frames. Some sources not yet included in this list (although their practices at times may qualify them for addition), such as The Daily Kos, The Huffington Post, and Fox News, vacillate between providing important, legitimate, problematic, and/or hyperbolic news coverage, requiring readers and viewers to verify and contextualize information with other sources.
Here is the source link, which also provides some other possibly helpful information.
https://library.nwacc.edu/fakenews/evaluating
---
It looks like we're going to have a few days of small surf.
Happy hunting,
TreasureGuide@comcast.net
