Alternative Theory - Naval Stores - J.Steele

[gazzahk]

So does any member here have an opinion on Joys theory of soil liquidification

Soil liquefaction describes a phenomenon whereby a saturated or partially saturated soil substantially loses strength and stiffness in response to an applied stress, usually earthquake shaking or other sudden change in stress condition, causing it to behave like a liquid.

source: wiki



To me it seems pretty plausible. ie an earthquake cause the top of one of those large cavities underground to collapse. The vibration then cause the soil on top to start to fall into the cavity. The soil liquidification happens and seventy or so feet of soil fall into the cavity in the bedrock. This is replaced with water. When digging the pit they breach the side of this water source. There is the flood tunnel...

Here are some pics via google images that show examples of the process

https://www.google.co.th/search?q=s...ved=0ahUKEwj98JO3yPXRAhUKpo8KHdEgC2QQ_AUICCgB

This so far is the only plausible (non man made flood tunnel) argument I have seen to explain the water at 100 ft

Thoughts?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Stretch Da Truth]

Sorry Gazzahk, I missed "a large overlay made of coconut husk, 145 feet wide and the length of space between low tide and high tide" so I guess it is the whole beach. Lots of reading, sometimes it doesn't register if I am looking at one particular thing.

As for the soil liquidification, that is a pretty interesting theory. I was unaware of earthquake activity near OI back then and it does make sense to explain the water at 100'. It is not as glamorous as Box Drains and Flood Tunnels so it will not be mentioned on the show for sure.

 

[Eldo]

Well The Reason That EVERYONE digs a 100' pit and set flood traps is cause they were storing naval goods.....right

Not in a fortification, as was known at the time to be the method to this storage, but now they decide to dig the money pit......

And left a piece of parchment in the bottom just for the hell of it?

Joy has a ton of proof from times after KNOWN activity there......she ignores the facts to present the theory from a more recent time.

She has also tried to rip into me on FB Pages while she was selling her theory....and a Book.

Kinda Old IMO.....the Oak Island standalone theory?

 

[Roadhse2]

Yes they do look like log wall logs...with a Swedish Cope, used instead of chinking to keep out wind and weather. In between they may have had anything from seagrass to coir to clay to further tighten them up from wind entering. Common way to build in northern climates...

The building was not IN the cofferdam nor underground, only placed in that area from storm surges destroying the building and pier on which it sat and then covered with silt over centuries of wave action, the same as everything else they had to excavate to find.

Other pictures clearly show the rafters themselves, the notches, pegs, fascia board, and wood planking for roof...

So yeah...it is still a roof.

Any place inhabited by humans had to have salt, including Sweden, Norway, Greenland and northern Russia that are further north than OI and used seawater on the coastal towns to evaporate and then boil it out...The fishing company that owned OI had to have a LOT of salt to process their catches...No they didn't dig out the sand, they processed it from the well found just above high tide line that the finger drains flow into, NOT away from, and could maximize the yield of salt by concentrating it before it went into the process well, and then boiling off the well water on land in the area Dan B found to have scorched rock walls and earth. The shorter season needed a different method of procuring as much salt as possible over just evaporation on non concentrated salt alone...but the method of concentrating salt has been going on for centuries, in ALL climates, and is still used today by companies to get the maximum yield with the least manpower or resources of wood, coal, natural gas, used to do the final boil off.

Fish drying has always been done with fish hanging so the wind and sun could dry them out, not laying on a beach.

 

[gazzahk]

Fish drying has always been done with fish hanging so the wind and sun could dry them out, not laying on a beach.

Here are multiple pics of fish drying on a beach

https://www.google.co.th/search?biw....0..0.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.0.0.LX-nwEFG9T0

https://www.google.co.th/search?biw....0..0.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.0.0.z-llx2-LIcY


Here is an old photo In Nova Scotia of fish drying on a beach



https://novascotia.ca/archives/acadians/archives.asp?ID=17&Language=

Here is drying moss in Nova Scotia



https://novascotia.ca/archives/acadians/archives.asp?ID=17&Language=

Here is a pic of Kelp being dried on a beach



http://www.123rf.com/photo_7238832_kelp-seaweed-laid-out-on-a-beach-to-dry.html

The shorter season needed a different method of procuring as much salt as possible over just evaporation on non concentrated salt alone...but the method of concentrating salt has been going on for centuries, in ALL climates, and is still used today by companies to get the maximum yield with the least manpower or resources of wood, coal, natural gas, used to do the final boil off.

What method? Show me a single example anywhere that uses water draining through sand, coconut fibre and eel grass (or other equivalent substances) on a significant size beach into a few drains that only sit under part of that beach anywhere else in the world as a way of concentrate salt.

I have looked extensively and I have not found a single method anywhere ever that is like the one D.King is putting forward in his speculations.

 

[gazzahk]

Well The Reason That EVERYONE digs a 100' pit and set flood traps is cause they were storing naval goods.....right

Her theory does not have the pit being dug that deep. Her explanation of chapel vault is pretty poor.. ie earthquake caused it to drop down 100+ feet.

Personally now I think Chapels vault was just Chapel finding the old shaft of previous diggers (Exactly the same as core sample taken by Laginas thought they had found the vault) so I doubt that anyone other then treasure seekers ever dug down 100+ feet.

She does not support flood tunnels. Her theory is soil liquidifcation.

 

[Roadhse2]

A quick search turned up this 17th century method...not to much different in use as the OI one would be...note the amount of salt, even in a short season of sun this method produced..

"Method Seawater is captured at high tide in reservoirs, this in turn is fed into the shallow ponds where the seawater is left to partially evaporate. When the brine is of sufficient strength it was pumped by windmill to a holding tank. Pipes fed the brine down to the metal pans in the boiling house under which coal fires were lit and the brine was boiled until the moisture was evaporated.
Diagram of making seasalt

The sea salt manufacture was seasonal, depending on good weather, but an average season was sixteen weeks. Each pan would produce about 3 tons a week and the town supplied most of Southern England with salt. Lymington salt was also exported in large quantities to the Newfoundland fisheries as well as many other countries around the world."

http://www.lymington.org/history/thesaltindustry.html

Also thank you for the fish drying pics and description...I was hoping you would object to that and prove me wrong...as this shows that yes, there was enough sun in NS to evaporate water in a seasalt pond...Which you keep saying 'can't be' and yet is the same as drying fish in the sun, removing the water from them...Thanks for proving my point.

As I cruise around the net I will post other examples of this type of low tech use of concentrating seawater for maximum salt production at lowest cost in manpower and resource...Will they be identical to OI? Of course not, they had to use what they had on hand...

 

[gazzahk]

A quick search turned up this 17th century method...not to much different in use as the OI one would be...note the amount of salt, even in a short season of sun this method produced..

"Method Seawater is captured at high tide in reservoirs, this in turn is fed into the shallow ponds where the seawater is left to partially evaporate. When the brine is of sufficient strength it was pumped by windmill to a holding tank. Pipes fed the brine down to the metal pans in the boiling house under which coal fires were lit and the brine was boiled until the moisture was evaporated.

This process is nothing like the one D.King claims for OI

The natural saltwater spring, and/or controlled amounts of seawater through channels in the dyke, would be allowed to permeate the sand on the artificial beach by capillary action. Wind and sun would dry the sand leaving a mixture of salt and sand. The process would be repeated at regular intervals until there was a considerable quantity of salt in the sand. In the meantime the tides would be kept off the beach by the dyke. Once sufficient salt had accumulated in the sand on the artificial beach, a larger than usual but still controlled inundation of seawater at high tide would be allowed through the dyke, covering the beach and dissolving the salt in the sand as the water dripped through the coconut husk and eel grass layers down through the rocks and through the finger drains to the well. The purpose of the coconut husk and eel grass layers was to sieve out any sand and silt from the concentrated salt solution before it reached the well.

D.King also does not claim that evaporation was being used on OI

Because of the relatively cold climate of maritime Canada, producing the salt by solar evaporation was not feasible

So once again please show an example that is in anyway similar to what D.King is putting forward as to his speculative theory..

Also thank you for the fish drying pics and description...I was hoping you would object to that and prove me wrong...as this shows that yes, there was enough sun in NS to evaporate water in a seasalt pond...Which you keep saying 'can't be' and yet is the same as drying fish in the sun, removing the water from them...Thanks for proving my point.

I am unsure of what you are saying here… Do you now think the beach was being used to dry seafood? Or are you just saying that you posted something which you did not actually believe?

Part of the reason I am speculating that the beach was made was because the drainage would be need with the common rain in the area. Otherwise the whole area would be turn mud. As D.King also says in his article rain would make his speculated process useless

But a heavy downpour would admittedly result in the rainwater seeping right through the artificial beach and into the finger drains and so into the well.

Please only show examples that match the process being speculated..

As I cruise around the net I will post other examples of this type of low tech use of concentrating seawater for maximum salt production at lowest cost in manpower and resource...Will they be identical to OI? Of course not, they had to use what they had on hand..

I agree there are low tech methods for producing salt. This is not in question. D.King method is… Please show an example of seawater being drained trough a sand /vegetable mater beach to concentrate salt.

The whole explanation is meant to be a method to explain the artificial beach.

How does this

"Method Seawater is captured at high tide in reservoirs, this in turn is fed into the shallow ponds where the seawater is left to partially evaporate.

have anything to do with the beach?

D.King never mentions anything like this in his article expect to say this method would not work on OI..

The only thing you offer as evidence is that salt was needed by people in the past…

 

[Roadhse2]

"Wind and sun would dry the sand leaving a mixture of salt and sand. The process would be repeated at regular intervals until there was a considerable quantity of salt in the sand"

Wind and sun...evaporation

I didn't say D. Kings theory was 'right'...I said that he had come up with the theory in the first place of it being a seawater to salt plant (which actually through later research a woman named Millie **** had written a book on this same salt theory back in the mid 80's, so Kings wasn't the first...) But in reality he is saying the same thing...'water is let back thru the dyke to inundate the dry sand and then goes onto the well increasing salinity'....I think they did it with the same method, but by releasing the water in the pond into the well when it reached a certain lower level, not after the sand had dried out....either way reaches the same result.

My theory expounds on that as to how it WOULD work with what we KNOW is in Smith's Cove, the mechanics of it...and that the owners of the island, a commercial fishing company shipping fish to other ports...would make it a need for them to have.

Look at the diagram presented...the 'reservoir' is the sea, the sluice gates are as I described earlier, in the case of Smith's Cove, in the cofferdam, The 'evaporation pond' is the area between the cofferdam and the beach on Smith's Cove, the downward slanting drain with another sluice gate, to a well..are exactly as I offered before of Smith's Cove...and items that we KNOW were/are there, with the drains slanting to a well, minus the sluice gates themselves.

No windmill, that we know of, but just as easily could be bucketed, or pumped, to pans, kettles, pots in the boil off area...

The reported 3 tons of salt per week from a 12x12 boil off pan in this article would make it worthwhile to do even if it fell short of that goal.

So yes...it is possible that this is a salt factory that the owners of the fishing company needed when they owned the island...there is historical precedence of these same type of salt factories, in one form or another being used all over the world at the time period, and before for hundreds of years...so why is it such a stretch for you to believe they may have had one at a fish packing business?

Your fish drying...that was also used for packing fish as I have said before...My comment was not to say they didn't pack fish dry...but that there was SUN enough for them to dry fish (or salt) in the first place, which you have steadfastly denied, in the case of salt....so I let you provide evidence to prove there was.

If you cannot see the relationship between that diagram and the way Smith's Cove is set up, from the windmill over to the left in the diagram, then there is not much else that can be shown you as to the 'how' it works...and why it is possible. We also don't know that there was a sand bed it drained through, though that also has been mentioned in other articles as a way to increase the salinity of the water by putting the captured salt back into solution as the water drains though and goes on to be processed....but for all we know, that sand after a 100 years could be just sand deposited by wave action...Beaches gain and lose sand all the time, everywhere...

Edited to add.."Because of the relatively cold climate of maritime Canada, producing the salt by solar evaporation was not feasible "....Yes it is not feasible to make the salt by evaporation alone,,,,that at some point when it had reached the salinity level you wanted...you would have to boil it off to 'finish' off the salt to a dry state...

 

[gazzahk]

"Wind and sun would dry the sand leaving a mixture of salt and sand. The process would be repeated at regular intervals until there was a considerable quantity of salt in the sand"

Yes his theory is trying to explain the beach.

The resivor pond theory does not explain the beach.

So you are now saying that you do not support D.King’s theory (which was the question I responded to) either. Your NEW theory has nothing at all in common with D.Kings article.

So we can start by agreeing that D.King is wrong and that his method outlined is not a viable method to make concentrated salt.

Good I am glad we agree

As to your completely new speculative theory..

It does not even attempt to explain the role of the beach.

If water was only allowed into a completely flat area inside the coffer dam then
a) It would require that area to have no seepage (as evaporation would be minimal anyway any seepage would cancel out the effects pretty quickly.
b) It would require the area to be flat enough that significant evaporation could occur between heavy rains
c) It would to a large part need that area inside the coffer dam to be fairly flat (not full of rocks pits etc)

This theory also means the water would be kept below the level of the finger drains as it would need to be very shallow water.

So why go to the effort with the beach?

 

[Roadhse2]

Wrong on all counts....

My theory as to how to works has not changed at all...

"The resivor pond theory does not explain the beach." he is saying the same thing...but has used the word 'dyke' for the cofferdam separating the two

Where I veer off from his theory is that I don't think the sand was dried out (or semi)....

That a certain water level was kept in the pond area and as it dropped it was added to, left to evaporate some more, and then let into the well before the sand had dried out. The reason for this is then you are using water already concentrated and not 'new' sea water that would dilute the already concentrated water. If there was sand, (and not just wave action sand brought in from after the cofferdam was gone in the years since)...then the water already in the pond would concentrate the brine to an even higher salinity as it traveled through it.

But either method would work...I just believe mine to a higher degree of salinity, which is the whole point...

(a) Seepage is going to happen no matter what configuration you used, but not under water with the same pressure on both sides of the cofferdam...the water would equalize and not go anywhere, with slightly more pressure on the seaward side if the evaporation pond side was at a lower level...maybe gain a bit from the slight pressure differential between the seaward side and the lower pond inside the cofferdam

(b) rain is just part of the game, you get the salt during the non rainy season and store it (under that roof) in the dry...just the same as in other parts of the world...and like the article said, they generally have 16 weeks to do so....OI may have had 8 or 4 or 12 or 20...but whatever it was, they took advantage of it

(c) why would the beach need to be flat or smooth? Water evaporates off the top...it doesn't care what shape the bottom is, nor how deep it is...but using 5 foot of stones could explain the bottom being flatter, and staying that way.

All that matters is the water level is above the drains level...by how much they would determine as to the salinity of the water when they wanted to draw some off into the well...

 

[gazzahk]

Wrong on all counts....

My theory as to how to works has not changed at all...

"The resivor pond theory does not explain the beach." he is saying the same thing...but has used the word 'dyke' for the cofferdam separating the two

Where I veer off from his theory is that I don't think the sand was dried out (or semi)....

You cannot have it both ways. D.King argues that

Because of the relatively cold climate of maritime Canada, producing the salt by solar evaporation was not feasible.

Yet the method you are proposing is evaporation… Therefore you are saying his is wrong… rIght?

That a certain water level was kept in the pond area and as it dropped it was added to, left to evaporate some more, and then let into the well before the sand had dried out. The reason for this is then you are using water already concentrated and not 'new' sea water that would dilute the already concentrated water.

So your view is there is water over the whole beach or is not over the whole beach? How could higher water then has evaporated be let back over the sand without letting in new sea water?

If there was sand, (and not just wave action sand brought in from after the cofferdam was gone in the years since)...then the water already in the pond would concentrate the brine to an even higher salinity as it traveled through it.

Sorry how many feet of water is being concentrated in the dam? Up to the top of the beach?

How many gallons of water does the sump hold? How many gallons of water are you speculating are being held inside the dam?

As soon as the drain was open the sump would be full with virtually no effect on the water inside the dam.

But either method would work...I just believe mine to a higher degree of salinity, which is the whole point...

what evaporation? Are you claiming water that was 4-5 feet deep would evaporate enough in that climate to increase the salt concentration? How many inches per day are you speculating would evaporate from this significant sized and depth dam.. Do you havew anything to support high levels of evaporation.

(Side point: there is little in the way of evaporation from the swamp.)

(a) Seepage is going to happen no matter what configuration you used, but not under water with the same pressure on both sides of the cofferdam...the water would equalize and not go anywhere, with slightly more pressure on the seaward side if the evaporation pond side was at a lower level...maybe gain a bit from the slight pressure differential between the seaward side and the lower pond inside the cofferdam

So you believe there would be no natural transference of the ocean between the outside of the dam the inside?

(b) rain is just part of the game, you get the salt during the non rainy season and store it (under that roof) in the dry...just the same as in other parts of the world...and like the article said, they generally have 16 weeks to do so....OI may have had 8 or 4 or 12 or 20...but whatever it was, they took advantage of it

So if it rains heavy in the ‘non rainy season” the whole effort or process is made pointless…

Pretty easy to convince people the effort needed to build this system when a heavy rain can kill off most of your salty (sunny) period (How many days are you speculating it takes the evaporate of this water to a high enough effort to concentrate the salt. Especially seeing new water is being added any time the water drops.

(c) why would the beach need to be flat or smooth? Water evaporates off the top...it doesn't care what shape the bottom is, nor how deep it is...but using 5 foot of stones could explain the bottom being flatter, and staying that way.

It effects how much water is in the dam and how much water can be transferred to the sump. You seem to think there would be significant evaporation in your dam. I do not. In this climate (As also sated by D.King water evaporation is minimal and evaporation would not be an effective method to make salt in this climate/location).

All that matters is the water level is above the drains level...by how much they would determine as to the salinity of the water when they wanted to draw some off into the well...

How does the drains relate to the beach. Nothing you have said above addresses why the beach was built with the method described. Your method has water always over the drains. What is the need for the beach. The water at the drains entrance is what will go in the drains.

I am sorry I now disagree with you on two main things

1. The method you are describing is nothing like D.Kings article and his theory is in direct contradiction with what you are proposing. It is a complete new theory. Once again

Because of the relatively cold climate of maritime Canada, producing the salt by solar evaporation was not feasible

2. The method you are putting forward makes zero sense as a way of trying to concentrate salt on OI. The method you are proposing has never been offered by anyone as a possible way that salt was produced on OI.

Please offer something in the way to support this method of making salt on OI.

So far all you have offered is that salt was needed…

 

[gazzahk]

Oak Island Temperatures

Yr ? Weather statistics for Oak Island, Nova Scotia (Canada)

So they have zero months with the normal temperature over 20" Celsius (68 Fahrenheit )

Great for evaporation....

Edit: adding graphic of temp and rainfall



So even in the driest month they still have over 50 mm (2.3 inches) of rain. This beach is at the bottom of the hill so when it rains it would be a natural draining point for the hill

At night even in the summer the temperature get to 5" Celsius (41 Fahrenheit ) So how cold is the water in the dam going to be.

This dam which is 145 feet long and at least 30 feet out in the middle. This is according to your theory has in it excess of 4 feet deep of water. How much is going to evaporate per month?

Even if one inch per week evaporated (which there is no way that would happen) that would only increase the salt concentration by by 1/48th per week. Then you have them adding back more water .....

How would this be efficient?

This is also the prime season for fisherman to be out fishing not on land making salt. The salt making could of been done in the winter when they cannot fish simply by boiling water.

They have unlimited access to free wood.....

 

[Real of Tayopa]

ah me, spec,is rampart

1. any tar pit would have been shown on british naval maps of the day, since they were a necessary function.. Sides there would be some evidence of the tar left. none have surfaced so farr

2. Fish processing also would be on the maps of that period. Other lesser operations were.

3. Sea level has not risen that much.

4. The drainage tunnels were delibertly constructed to lead into the pit.not out

5. The soil liquification is feasable but not proven, there would be other evidence, nor does it have a place here.

6. I still think that the drainage tunnels were a form of a trap to protect whatever was buried there, although access to the deposiory is above the cove level, since they obviously intended to recover it some day, This was probably accessed by a lateral tunel in the fir
st part of the exavation and now lost.

7 The coco nut fibres and the eel grass were put in the drains for a specific reason, to keep the tnnels as free of debris as long as possiblt. And the drainage is from the cove to the pit..

8. I can see nothing new, the pit was dug as a distraction while the main room is off to one side above high water level, readily recoverable if the water trap had ben sprung and the pit was full of water

9. The problem still remains "What was buried there" ? I don't accept the Havana operation, since there would be too many naval personel involved, the king had very interesting ways to extract information..
.
.

 

[Roadhse2]

I have no idea where you are getting numbers for depth of the pool or the relationship between that depth and the drain openings themselves. We have no idea what the conditions were at that time, if the bottom was shallow and flat or deep and sloping.

There is no difference between what D. King has proposed and what I have other than the depth of water over the finger drains. I have written the same explanation over and over and there has been no change in my proposal, look back to the other posts if you wish, they are the same. The brine well if minimum diameter of 6 feet by the known 24 foot depth holds over 5000 gallons of water per fill...we have no figures to say how large the brine well was other than the depth by Dunfield, it could be 10, 20, or 40.

Salt in solution, in sea water, is the same if 1 foot deep or 4, until it reaches a 26% saturation rate and then it falls out of solution to the bottom, so the depth of pond is of little importance as you are not trying to remove all of the water by evaporation from the salt, only concentrate it. Wind needs to be added into your calculation also as that is a main contributor to the evaporation process.

Anyway, we have burned up enough pixels on this thread....

You say it can't be done....yet it HAS been done for 100's of years all over the world in the same climate. You even provide proof that evaporation takes place with your fish drying in NS on the beach...yet you say there can be none. You also seem to not be able to grasp the concept D. King has put forth and that I subscribe to with one modification, water level. So no explaining such a simple process is going to work as there is nothing else to explain. Being such a simple process is exactly why it was used all over the world, including far further north than OI.

Honestly, I don't care enough to keep trying to look up the evidence you want...I could make an argument for everything you have proposed in the negative, but to what end? Those same negatives could also be used in the other theories you have put forth, yet the drains and well are there for some reason...it is an interesting thing to ponder...but solving it or not will not make any difference as it has nothing to do with treasure, so is of little interest.

With that..I am busy here and no longer have the time to focus on finding any more provenance for this theory, I am not writing a book, merely stating my opinion...and so far, nothing else has been brought forward that applies to the cove as well, with evidence, both physical and circumstantial, as the salt works... IF something does, I will be the first to say, "yep that makes sense"

Have fun in your search...got to run

 

[Roadhse2]

Hi Real...

"2. Fish processing also would be on the maps of that period. Other lesser operations were."

Even as a private enterprise by the company that owned OI and also all of the fishing rights in the area?

Just asking...

"3. Sea level has not risen that much."

10 inches by all accounts over the last 300 to 500 years..

"6. I still think that the drainage tunnels were a form of a trap to protect whatever was buried there"

Dunfield already determined there were no tunnels from the cove to anywhere when he excavated. The bottom of the well the drains flow into was flat bottomed with no exit, 24 foot deep.

Good to see you post...Got to run...

 

[Roadhse2]

https://archyfantasies.com/tag/oak-island/

 

[Roadhse2]

Yay's and nay's on Kings salt theory, including D'Arcy O'Connor's thoughts....plus links that show the documents relating to trying to get permissions to ship salt to NS area from Europe that were not allowed as late as 1762/4 and high taxes discussed once they were..

The second page also brings into question if the coconut fibre was coconut at all as 2 experts could not identify as such, and thought it to be the fibrous part of seaweed instead...

Interesting..

Oak Island Treasure ? View topic - A New Solution to the Mystery of the Five Finger Drains

 

[Roadhse2]

" After the 1752 peace deal with Indians of LeHave, many New York based companies were formed to go fish in the area. Gifford and Smith are just one example. From the document titled "A List of Islands in Mahone Bay", we see Island 16 was granted to a "New York Company for fishing".

The Halifax Gazette

Saturday May 4: "This week arrived at Lunenburg from New York, Messirs Smith and Giffard who, as we are informed, have bro't with them several Fishermen and a large Quantity of Stores as they intend to carry on a Fishery and cultivate Land in Mahon Bay.

This confirms they returned to the area in 1754.

There are other entries for the Halifax Gazette, which shows who their Halifax, or NS agent was, a Mr. Maccleur. It also shows they had a store in Lunenburg and they submitted a notice for outstanding demands.

Gifford and Smith may have been a middle man too, as Smith is refered to as an agent for fishing companies. From the papers it would seem the bay was being scouted in the summer/fall of 1753 for potential fishing sites."

Continue reading in this thread and they explain the "G" stone found on OI, and another that is on Young's Island, as being markers for "Gifford" when they owned both islands...plus the off shore rocks with holes etc as being used for anchors for fishing nets...

Oak Island Treasure ? View topic - Another twist and another truth

 

[gazzahk]

What is left to sayRoadhse2. You do not address the points raised at all. How much water per week do you believe would evaporate from a dam that big? ( Did you look at those temperature and rain statistics for OI?)

My view is next to nothing.

You are welcome to believe what you wish but this does not make it true.

1. Your theory is nothing like D. King theory (show me any part of his theory that has a dam being evaporated)
2. Your theory would result in next to zero water evaporation over those 3 months when you are claiming the process took place.
3' You have offered zero evidence for your theory of salt being made by your method on OI other than saying people needed salt.
4. Your theory ignores the man made beach. It has no role in what you proposing.

edit:

I have no idea where you are getting numbers for depth of the pool or the relationship between that depth and the drain openings themselves. We have no idea what the conditions were at that time, if the bottom was shallow and flat or deep and sloping.

There were 5 feet of stone over the drains and 2 feet of sand. This means the top of the beach would have to be at least 7 feet above the drains. The man made part of the beach was 145ft long

Believing now that the flooding tunnels were connected to the sea, men scoured the island's shores. At an area known as Smith's Cove, they found a fascinating structure. The company built a temporary dam, called a cofferdam, to uncover a large overlay made of coconut husk, 145 feet wide and the length of space between low tide and high tide. Underneath the coconut husk was a layer of beach stones five feet deep. Beneath the beach stones were five finger-drains constructed of flat stones, converging into a single drain. The coconut husk worked as a barrier against sand to allow water into the drains.

Source: The Truro Company Discovers the Finger Drains - How Oak Island Works | HowStuffWorks

referencing this book: https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=yo_xAgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y&hl=en

2nd edit:
Slope of smiths cove



It is easy to see the beach slopes downwards in these two pics. Therefore to reach top of beach considerable water would of needed to be let into dam.