Hard to believe

[gazzahk]

We will never know now if the three (or 4) original finders did find treasure (Some stories have Sam Ball with the other three when the treasure was found)...

I believe the three old ladies were truthful in their belief of the family legend. However this does not mean that someone (ie there grandfather) did not make it up.

Even with the appearance of wealth among the 'alleged' originally finders it may be the case that there wealth was gained by other means (ie they stole it) and made up the treasure rumor to cover up their crime. It would not be the first time people have claimed stolen wealth was found treasure.

I find the story told by the old ladies (descendants) both 'credible and plausible'. To me it explains the origions of the quest for of the search. Once people saw the wealth and heard rumors of the treasure they went looking for more.

However I certainly do not claim that this story is true or supported by any strong evidence. It is based purely on hearsay and circumstantial evidence. Hardly convincing....

I just find it very difficult to believe the early search attempts would have gone ahead with so much expense and effort if there was not some 'real treasure' involved somewhere...

All the other treasure stories about OI have zero credibility or no evidence to support them at all.

I would guess if those ladies sold there cross now as "The only remaining treasure from Oak Island" it would be worth a fortune...

It is nice to think some actual treasure was found.

It is a shame that the Laginas have never bothered to investigate the story in more depth. The other reports given in this earlier referenced article https://www.oakislandcompendium.ca/...s-the-story-of-an-oak-island-familys-treasure suggest that some coins remain too....

But as many other posters said there is "no proof" anything was found and the Laginas have no interest in investigating the story so I guess we will never know.....

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Dave Rishar]

Dave Rishar, our discussion all started because I made the comment that the original kept quite about their digging and would have had reason to keep it quite if they did find some kind of treasure. You apparently don't believe that and started questioning me about it and I kept having to explain it to you.

What did you explain to me?

Granted it's just my belief can't prove it and said as such...

I interpret that to mean that your belief is not based on facts, as if it was based on facts you would be able to prove it by simply giving me those facts. Is this interpretation incorrect?

Your the one experiencing cognitive dissonance as you keep questioning everything over and over again..

I don't believe that I'm experiencing cognitive dissonance, but I'm open to the possibility that I am. I have a decent understanding with how the human mind functions with regards to cognitive bias, enough so to know that even though I know what to look for, my own cognitive blind spots may prevent me from seeing it. However, questioning a story is not necessarily indicative of cognitive bias and is usually a sign that someone is thinking critically, which in turn is a preventative measure against cognitive bias. By asking many questions, I'm seeking to accumulate more data in order to make a more rational decision. If I was locked in to my beliefs, there would be no reason to ask questions and gather additional data.

I do get frustrated with having to keep explaining myself to the skeptics on here from time to time.. End of this discussion and will not post about it anymore.

Yes you will, because it made you angry, and I told you why it made you angry, and that also made you angry.

What exactly have you explained?

Back to our original discussion. How hard is it to believe that if 3 guys were digging a hole and for whatever reason believed there was some sort of treasure in it, that they would probably not go running around town telling everyone?

That's hard to believe because they did tell everyone, which is why we know about it today.

And now you're angry again. Aren't you the least bit curious how I know that?

 

[n2mini]

Last post to you. I liken you to Tom in CA which I have quit posting after. I think ya'll are one in the same or atleast related. Have a great Mothers Day...

 

[ECS]

I don't mind an opposing view.
I'm all for a good debate but only when it is a discussion and not someone just throwing out pot shot one liners...

...and what do you call your above post on #43?
A pot shot two liner?

 

[n2mini]

Correct more or less, but it was atleast addressing what was said/asked of me, and or explaining why there is another person on here that I will not be posting after regardless of what they say. They both have made comments as if they are psychiatrists and trying to diagnose people/me off their posts.. Instead of just explaning their position or answering what is asked of them...

 

[Dave Rishar]

Last post to you. I liken you to Tom in CA which I have quit posting after. I think ya'll are one in the same or atleast related. Have a great Mothers Day...

Anger combined with actual hallucinations. And you didn't answer a single one of my questions. And you didn't address a single one of my points. And you did exactly what I predicted that you would do, even after I made that prediction available to you, and you had time to think about it before posting, and you'd earlier said that you wouldn't do it. Yes, we're firmly in the realm of cognitive dissonance now, but I'm not sure that it's mine.

When you're ready to know how I got inside your head like that, remind me and I'll point you to the right resources. (This can be done via PM.) The brain's operating system is actually remarkably simple. It's simple and important enough that it should be taught in elementary school, but the kids learn useless crap like arithmetic instead. I'd like to start a thread on it sometime but this isn't really the forum for that and this is starting to sound like an advertisement for something.

 

[b3y0nd3r]

Sworn testimonies have put innocent people on the electric chair before. Personal testimony is the least reliable form of evidence that there is.

It's good enough in a court of law, should be good enough for this here discussion.

"May have." And I'm glad that you mentioned the 3/3 aspect.

I may be a supporter of the story, but I will admit things that don't fit.

They probably did feel that there was more to it than just a sinkhole. That doesn't mean that it was ever there.

You are right. However, there must of been some very credible and telling evidence. You aren't the only logical one in recorded history.These were logical men as well.

Are we sure about coffer dams and flood tunnels then? I don't watch the show.

Check your facts and get back to us.What keeps the filters from clogging?

Fiber density ie a fiber is bigger than a grain of sand also they are longer and adhere together.

I like to put out facts and logic for people that haven't made up their minds yet. I fully understand that I will never be able to change someone's mind on this if they believe in it like they do in religion, politics, or any other faith-based belief system. I'm not here for them. I'm here for the newcomers.




See above. I'm not wasting my time.

Facts? Where are your facts? Where are your studies of the coconut fiber? The wood? The materials found? How many interviews have you done to contradict the presented evidence? How much research time have you invested in gathering the facts? Anyone can dubunk anything with talk. Present your concrete verifiable facts and we will listen. Until then, it's just word salad.

If this was meant to be hid, why are people looking for it two centuries later?

Because it wasn't hid well.

Don't try to apply logic to the Oak Island legend. It's not a good fit.

This is just silly.NOTE: I was not angry during the writing of this post.Bolded for clarity.

 

[b3y0nd3r]

Anger combined with actual hallucinations. And you didn't answer a single one of my questions. And you didn't address a single one of my points. And you did exactly what I predicted that you would do, even after I made that prediction available to you, and you had time to think about it before posting, and you'd earlier said that you wouldn't do it. Yes, we're firmly in the realm of cognitive dissonance now, but I'm not sure that it's mine.

When you're ready to know how I got inside your head like that, remind me and I'll point you to the right resources. (This can be done via PM.) The brain's operating system is actually remarkably simple. It's simple and important enough that it should be taught in elementary school, but the kids learn useless crap like arithmetic instead. I'd like to start a thread on it sometime but this isn't really the forum for that and this is starting to sound like an advertisement for something.

So basically, you are here to harass people?

 

[Dave Rishar]

You made this almost impossible to accurately reply to, so if I make a mistake, keep that in mind.

It's good enough in a court of law, should be good enough for this here discussion.

It's not, or it should be not. If I accuse you of killing someone and I swear that I saw you do it, and no other evidence is presented, would that warrant a conviction in your opinion?

You are right. However, there must of been some very credible and telling evidence.

There must have been? Like what?

You aren't the only logical one in recorded history.These were logical men as well.

I try to be logical, but I can't always be. Human thinking doesn't work like that. I'm not sure that those folks even tried, as they likely didn't understand the problem. Hell, most of the people that I deal with today don't understand the problem.

Check your facts and get back to us.

Or just tell me the facts.

Fiber density ie a fiber is bigger than a grain of sand also they are longer and adhere together.

That's not a good answer.

If a filter keeps things out of something, it will eventually clog on those things that it's keeping out. If it is not clogging, it is not keeping those things out. A filter designed to keep something else from clogging will instead clog itself. What keeps the filters from clogging?

Facts? Where are your facts?

All over this forum.

Where are your studies of the coconut fiber? The wood? The materials found? How many interviews have you done to contradict the presented evidence?

Back at you. Educate me. I can't prove a negative, but you can certainly prove a positive.

How much research time have you invested in gathering the facts? Anyone can dubunk anything with talk. Present your concrete verifiable facts and we will listen. Until then, it's just word salad.

Do you want to know why you're angry?

Because it wasn't hid well.

So your position that someone dug a hole that big and rigged it with elaborate booby traps, and then didn't bother to hide it well?

Did the "original three" not enlist other people to help them dig? If they did, was that a good method for keeping something a secret?

This is just silly.NOTE: I was not angry during the writing of this post.Bolded for clarity.

Yes, you were. And you'll continue to be after you've read this, because I triggered your cognitive dissonance again.

So basically, you are here to harass people?

You actually replied to a post in which I explained why I'm here. You even quoted it. Did you not read that part, or did you not understand it? If you did not understand it, I will try to rephrase it if that's helpful. If you did not read it, then you should probably read it. It explains why I'm here.

 

[b3y0nd3r]

You made this almost impossible to accurately reply to, so if I make a mistake, keep that in mind.



It's not, or it should be not. If I accuse you of killing someone and I swear that I saw you do it, and no other evidence is presented, would that warrant a conviction in your opinion?


There must have been? Like what?



I try to be logical, but I can't always be. Human thinking doesn't work like that. I'm not sure that those folks even tried, as they likely didn't understand the problem. Hell, most of the people that I deal with today don't understand the problem.
[/B]
Or just tell me the facts.

[/B]That's not a good answer.

If a filter keeps things out of something, it will eventually clog on those things that it's keeping out. If it is not clogging, it is not keeping those things out. A filter designed to keep something else from clogging will instead clog itself. What keeps the filters from clogging?

All over this forum.



Back at you. Educate me. I can't prove a negative, but you can certainly prove a positive.



Do you want to know why you're angry?
[/B]
So your position that someone dug a hole that big and rigged it with elaborate booby traps, and then didn't bother to hide it well?

Did the "original three" not enlist other people to help them dig? If they did, was that a good method for keeping something a secret?

Yes, you were. And you'll continue to be after you've read this, because I triggered your cognitive dissonance again.



You actually replied to a post in which I explained why I'm here. You even quoted it. Did you not read that part, or did you not understand it? If you did not understand it, I will try to rephrase it if that's helpful. If you did not read it, then you should probably read it. It explains why I'm here.

Well I tried to engage you in a discussion. You would rather do character profiles.

 

[Real of Tayopa]

O.K. As I have said before the Pit is only a ""Red herring" yes there IS a treasure, else why the pit? But it is on another part of the Island, accessible through a side tunnel in the pit , which they missed in the original excavation or a simple excavation elsewhere.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

O.K. As I have said before the Pit is only a ""Red herring" yes there IS a treasure, else why the pit? But it is on another part of the Island, accessible through a side tunnel in the pit , which they missed in the original excavation or a simple excavation elsewhere.

What pit? There was a depression beside a tree and "the pit" was formed by people digging after 1795.

Possibly it was a natural doline/glacial sink hole that had silted in over thousands of years.

Since we don't know where the original pit was it is hard to say at this point. Any evidence has been destroyed repeatedly.

 

[Carl-NC]

It's not, or it should be not. If I accuse you of killing someone and I swear that I saw you do it, and no other evidence is presented, would that warrant a conviction in your opinion?

That's a good question.

 

[Dave Rishar]

Well I tried to engage you in a discussion. You would rather do character profiles.

I made twelve points. You responded to the only one that allowed you to exit the discussion, and then you exited the discussion.

Start here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

I'm trying to be helpful.

 

[Real of Tayopa]

What about the wooden platforms every 15 or so ft plus the water inlets,¿ they certainly were not designed for dewatering. I admit that the origional clues were scanty --a pillow block on a tree limb overlookinga slight depression, I like your illustration.

 

[Dave Rishar]

What about the wooden platforms every 15 or so ft plus the water inlets,¿ they certainly were not designed for dewatering. I admit that the origional clues were scanty --a pillow block on a tree limb overlookinga slight depression, I like your illustration.

If we disregard the inconsistencies in the various stories around these things, we're left with the fact that we don't seem to have forensic evidence of any of them. (At least one person here thinks that we have evidence of water inlets that were manmade, so I'll reserve judgement on that while awaiting their answer.)

Stories about wooden platforms and what sort of rigging may or may not have been on a tree (again, there are multiple versions of this story) will remain just that to me until we have concrete evidence that they actually existed. Someone actually recovering a treasure of some sort would make my opinion moot and I'll be quick to admit that I was wrong if and when that ever happens, but I'd still be interested in the specifics, even if we can never know them.

 

[franklin]

What about the wooden platforms every 15 or so ft plus the water inlets,¿ they certainly were not designed for dewatering. I admit that the origional clues were scanty --a pillow block on a tree limb overlookinga slight depression, I like your illustration.

If you or anyone had buried a treasure would you leave a block and tackle hanging over the hole? The only way a block and tackle would be hanging over a depression is if what treasure was buried there had been removed.

 

[Robot]

If you or anyone had buried a treasure would you leave a block and tackle hanging over the hole? The only way a block and tackle would be hanging over a depression is if what treasure was buried there had been removed.

Not Necessarily...If One was doing so...As a...Diversion!

 

[franklin]

So the Lagina brothers found a ship in a swamp. Does not mean there is any treasure. Many ships during hurricanes are cast in stranger places. The only thing I do know is the treasure that was buried on Oak Island has been recovered and I know where it is today.

 

[Dave Rishar]

Not Necessarily...If One was doing so...As a...Diversion!

If I wanted to hide something, the last thing that I would do was give people a reason to look for something. Sure, I could get them looking in the wrong place, but I'd think it preferable to not get them looking at all.