BONES!!!

6ADB5E1E-9BB6-4F1B-B60F-3F7074581B1F.png
 

Well, for that matter: Romans and Templars have nothing to do with Oak Island, either. At least there is no compelling evidence presented yet.
 

Well, for that matter: Romans and Templars have nothing to do with Oak Island, either. At least there is no compelling evidence presented yet.

Well the Romans were in Arizona in 700 AD. and the Templars were in America in 1175 AD maybe before then.
 

According to dismissed claims.

Are you talking about the lead items found (or made) by Manier that had random Latin sentences lifted from textbooks?

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/522744/summary

Yes that is the one. But it was not a hoax as history since that article has verified it has authentic. The guy that wrote that article did not even have anyone that spoke old Hebrew Language.
 

Yes that is the one. But it was not a hoax as history since that article has verified it has authentic. The guy that wrote that article did not even have anyone that spoke old Hebrew Language.

No, they did not "unhoax" the lead items. Quite the opposite. There was little Hebrew; old or new (Some random words on two of the items). The inscriptions were mostly Latin random phrases. Taken verbatim (including printing errors) from high school textbooks in use in AZ at the time with quotes attributed to Cicero, Virgil and Horace. In fact, the creator of the items has pretty much been identified as artist Timotéo Odohui, who lived in the area and worked in lead.

https://leowbanks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/UnearthingMysterSept2002.pdf
 

Last edited:
No, they did not "unhoax" the lead items. Quite the opposite. There was no Hebrew; old or new. The inscriptions were Latin. Taken verbatim (including printing errors) from high school textbooks in use in AZ at the time with quotes attributed to Cicero, Virgil and Horace. In fact, the creator of the items has pretty much been identified as artist Timotéo Odohui, who lived in the area and worked in lead.

How did he place the items found 6 feet beneath calcite that had aged for centuries? No Hoax here.
 

By digging holes and dropping them in. The site was examined and the ground had been "recently" (era of the unearthing) disturbed in the size required to place the objects.

But we're talking about Oak Island. Quit running off on non sequitur topics and tangents.
 

Beeperspuppy, topic is oak island
 

It has been claimed when some of the earlier settlers died they was buried on the island. So finding of bones is no mystery in itself.

This issue here is the depth the bone fragments were found. Dunfield made a mess of the Money Pit area... but I believe he only dug down to 100'. So any bones in that area that was backfilled could be due to Dunfield. But if they're found below the Dunfield Pit... then who knows. They could be in situ or backfill from deeper searcher shafts.
 

7.84 tonnes on a wood pallet, yea thats real, LOL

Interestingly enough, those photographs were real. The gold was not, however:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-aug-02-fg-gold2-story.html

tl;dr version - during the second Iraq war, US forces caught a few trucks running for the boarder with loads of ingots. When detained, the drivers explained that they were hauling brass, not gold. The US said, "Sure," and had it tested. It turned out that the drivers were correct - they were hauling melted down cartridge cases.

That's why the soldier posing under the ingots was able to breathe, and how the trucks didn't break in half: each of those ingots only weighed about 40 lbs. The only remaining question is what Saddam was planning on doing with them.

Yes that is the one. But it was not a hoax as history since that article has verified it has authentic. The guy that wrote that article did not even have anyone that spoke old Hebrew Language.

If a sword (that does not look like any Roman sword that I've seen) that was made of lead (which Roman swords were not known to be made of, and would be useless as a material to make swords from) is claimed to be of Roman origin, that claim ought to be immediately suspect. It would then be necessary to prove that this very unRoman thing was actually Roman before using it to explain the presence of Romans somewhere where they were not known to be. If this could not be proved, such evidence would instead imply that the other artifacts (which are of similar origin and were found in the same context) are probably not Roman either.

As Charlie P. pointed out, there were other problems with the artifacts as well. I just went for the low hanging fruit here.
 

This issue here is the depth the bone fragments were found. Dunfield made a mess of the Money Pit area... but I believe he only dug down to 100'

140 ft with deeper exploration holes. And the other 27 groups in the last 200 years have perforated the island so much it's a wonder it's not called "Oak Shoal".
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top