Here's a picture of one of the tree carvings they published on this new alleged Jesse James KGC treasure site.
Problem with "tree carvings"
1. They are as subjective as beauty.
2. There is no universal "key" to them. At any time in history, any group or any person, the "key" and "meaning" was most often what the carver envisioned would help him remember where it was.
3. There is no way to definitely date the carvings themselves.
4. There is no way to forensically prove who made the carving.
5. When legitimate core samplings are actually taken of the tree (as was the case in the debunking of the alleged KGC treasure tree at Danville National Cemetery), its often found the trees are often much younger that thought and often didn't even exist when the alleged "burial" took place.
6. In the instant case, it was said in the article that the initials "J.J." were carved in one of the beech trees and it was automatically, absent any evidence, credited to being "Jesse James" name. Several problems with this:
A.
It's nonsensical, if you were Jesse James burying the treasure, you wouldn't put your initials on display to alert every tom, dick and harry that happened along that you buried a treasure nearby.
B.
A quick search of people with the initials "J.J." over the span of when they could have been carved, reveals hundreds of thousands of people with the initials J.J., so to attribute it to a dead outlaw means you aren't looking to critically examine the evidence for the truth, you're just looking to pervert the evidence to fit your narrative!
Bottom line, "Beech Tree" carvings aren't credible evidence, but to someone trying to sell a Legend, they're gold.