History Channel - Oak Island mini series January 5, 2014

Does this whistle still physically exist somewhere? A closer examination using modern methods might prove to be very informative. For instance, is it bone, ivory, or something else? If it is bone or ivory, what animal was the blank harvested from? Can it be dated?

It's tempting to infer too much from one photograph, but I'm not sure that that was carved. If it was, it was done very skillfully, the top in particular.
 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!
rush said:
Thank you Robot for the pic I wanted to compare them. This one I will try to draw a picture of the one that I held it had a dragon , snake and two woman on it was of stone with a ball in the end that was a rattle. It was like 21/2 "L 1"w 1/2"th at the end with the ball in it sloping down. I think this one was aztec. Domo ari gato Mr. Roboto .. could it be Welch? maybe?
Click to expand...

From my research into the Oak Island Boatswain Whistle which compares in similarity with yours, I am of the opinion that they are "Flat Whistles" or better known through out Europe as "Carriage Whistles and then Cabby Whistles".
I have asked an expert Whistle author for his opinion and will relay this to you.
I spent 20 years living in Mexico and studying Mayan archaeology and the Whistles I did observe of the ancient culture were more of clay pipes made to represent animals or gods of their underworld.

My opinion with your Whistle is it possibly is of indigenous Mexican artisan, being carved of stone probably of Central Mexico and made to copy the European Carriage Whistle.
The Spanish in Mexico City were world known for their ornate carriages.
This Whistle if authentic could be of anywhere from 17th to 19th century.
It's is a shame you do not still possess it?
 

Did the Lagina brothers give any explanation why they believed the treasure was located in the swamp?
 

It was probably the only place left on that half of the island that didn't already have a hole in it. :)
 

I think, because the that one guy showed him the tree of life and placed the Mercy Stone in the swamp. That stone was suppose to be a very important starting place.

Scott
 

Why the Oak Island Money Pit was a Diversion

The frustration experienced by treasure hunters and followers of the Money Pit exploration has been just according to what was planned by the Freemasons.

This shaft was intended to be a diversion away from where the real treasure vault was located.

The Freemasons knew that it would be only a matter of time before this island was searched by the local people and natives living there.

Once this shaft was used as the entry tunnel leading to the vault and the treasure was secured up into the vault, they refilled and booby trapped it.
They then left clues such as the Oak Tree, Block and Tackle, shaft dirt depression, buried flagstone, and encrypted stone to entice followers to exhaust their time, effort and money digging there and then leave stating that no treasure is on the island.

This is much like a Ground Squirrel digs his main tunnel leaving a mound of dirt at the entrance to entice where the coyote is to dig all along the Ground Squirrel is up in his cavern sleeping and can leave at any time via his concealed alternate exit.
Once the coyote gives up he does not return to dig at the same hole.

The Freemason connection with the Royal Navy out of Halifax would have kept an eye on this island and anyone spending time searching may have quickly disappeared, as legend spoke about this island being haunted.

The idea of leaving an encrypted stone stating how much farther down one needed to go and how much was there was again a joke on the searcher to continue spending time digging at this spot.

After the encrypted sign came the water traps and after 40 feet below (as the sign translated was 2 million pounds) came the metal trap.

The 2 million pounds was not gold as presumed but iron from the scuttled Spanish Ships which would estimate to be 100 canons, anchors, and ballast left there to prevent digging further down to the vault tunnel.

These Freemasons were very intelligent men who were members of the Royal Society as astronomers, masonic mathematicians, naval navigators and
civil engineers.

To recover the location of the treasure vault one would need to think how they thought and naught like the coyote, blasting, drilling and digging at will.
 

Robot said:
They then left clues such as the Oak Tree, Block and Tackle, shaft dirt depression, buried flagstone, and encrypted stone to entice followers to exhaust their time, effort and money digging there and then leave stating that no treasure is on the island.
Click to expand...

Given that people have been digging up that island for the two centuries since then (and in some cases, are now eyeballing the surrounding islands and the mainland), would you say that this plan was or was not successful? I'd say that it was a catastrophic damned failure.

If the intent of whomever allegedly constructed a 130-foot-deep dry hole to convince people that nothing was buried there...man, I can't even type this with a straight face. Anyway, I'd say that this plan (if true) had just about the exact opposite of the desired effect. It also has next to no evidence supporting it, but none of the other treasure theories do either, so I can't really hold that over any single theory in particular.
 

Yes, it has been successful as no one has discovered the Treasure Vault yet!
If mankind continues to - Blast, Drill, Dig and even Open Pit Mine - I am sure they will find the evidence described.
The going rate for 18th century canons are $2- $3 thousand apiece and could add up to a small treasure per say!

The where a bouts of the Treasure Vault?
I will be posting my theory soon and looking forward to the knowledgeable forum members opinions.
 

What I'm saying is that if two centuries weren't enough time for people to lose interest, things probably didn't go according to plan. If, one day in the far future, people do eventually lose interest in this, they're going to turn on the surrounding islands. There are at least a few members of this forum that are looking in that direction already.

As a method to get people to stop looking for treasure, this was a flop. It was also illogical. If I wanted people to stop looking for treasure in a certain area, I'd be sure not to give them a reason to start looking in the first place. If I was truly dead set on providing a distraction (and I wouldn't be - not giving a reason at all is preferable to giving an incorrect reason), I'd place that distraction someplace else entirely. It would not be on my island. It would not be on a neighboring island. In fact, it would probably be in another country. Better yet, there would be no indication at all that something had been buried. People aren't going to look for something in the first place unless they have a reason to. Why supply that reason on the same island, let alone the same continent?
 

My theory only had the Freemason needing the diversion with the Money Pit from 1762 until when they would recover the treasure, before 1795.
They new with human curiosity that what ever they tried as concealment of the shaft, someone was bound to notice something (cut down trees, earth depression, disturbed dirt and vegetation, etc.)
It was better for them to keep any searcher occupied at this site until they were noticed or until the treasure was ready for recovery.

I agree that with all the digging centered at this site this diversion was carried out to a whole new extreme than what they had intended.
 

The "obvious disturbance" concern only makes sense if we take it for granted that a treasure was buried at some incredibly deep depth. It didn't have to be.

Now, let's instead say that I went out in the woods someplace. I pick a spot a good distance from any trails. I'm looking for an area completely loaded with underbrush on rocky, badly uneven ground that's completely unsuitable for cultivation and buiding. I uproot a few shrubs, dig a hole a few feet deep, bury the treasure, and replace the roots. I don't fell any trees, I don't use any rigging equipment, and I certainly don't dig any holes to China. The work is done very quickly and quietly in an area that's of no interest, and no other nearby indications of buried treasure are left. What are the odds of someone going out there to find my treasure? None, unless it's one of my people or a person that one of my people told. And what are their odds of finding it without modern equipment? Remote at best. Even with modern equipment, you'd need a bit of luck and/or some pretty detailed information.

But these guys were smart, and they could certainly do better. So can I. Several moments after coming up with my first plan, I came up with my second one: I would hide my treasure in plain sight, and I'd have a person guarding it. If I have a group of people that I can trust to bury this thing and keep their mouths shut, I have at least one person that I can trust to watch over it for me. (And if I did not, I would do the job myself.) Instead of inscribing rocks and digging immense holes, I'd have a man clear some land and establish a homestead. He'd build a house and a barn, raise animals, grow crops, and do exactly what everyone else in the area was doing at the time. He'd have his family with him; if that was impossible for some reason, he'd explain that he was saving money and getting everything in order before sending for them - again, just like everyone else.

A farmstead like this needs a well, perhaps more than one. That would require a hole. Sometimes you have to dig a few before you get a really good well. My man would dig as many as he had to until he had such a well. And my treasure? It would be at the bottom of one of those unsatisfactory wells, or all of them, or even the good one.

My treasure is now a buried secret with an undercover watchman, and because the local yokels have no reason to suspect anything different or to look for treasure in the first place, that's exactly where it would stay until I was ready to come for it. No stones required engraving, no artifical beaches were constructed, and no 130-foot-deep holes were dug. All that happened was a farmer did what farmers do.

Suppose that something bad befell my employee? Perhaps he got sick and died. In this case, my treasure's still safe, although it's no longer being watched. I'd have another man buy his farm when word got to me. But say that the worst happened, and my man turned on me and decided to recover the treasure for his own use? I'd like to think that I picked a guy that wouldn't do this to me, but temptation always remains an issue. If this was a concern to me (and it should be), I'd get one or two adjacent lots and have my people on those too. They would not be known to my watcher, and they would not know why he was there and what he was doing. They would only know that I wanted them to keep an eye on his land. He might very well abscond with my treasure, but I'd know who took it and possibly where they went. I would not know this if my treasure was buried on an uninhabited (or even sparsely inhabited) island with no one watching it and the equivalent of a giant neon sign telling people to look for treasure.

I'd need a trustworthy man or three to do this for me, but I'd need a legion of trustworthy men to carry out what allegedly happened in most of the legends. And again, if I didn't have a man that trustworthy and it was that important, I'd do it myself.

This would not have to be done in the middle of nowhere. I could carry this out nearly anywhere. There would be fewer people around to see what was happening in remote locations, but I might be happier with lots of people around. A known person digging wells would not raise any suspicions, but unknown people digging up his land certainly would. And again, I have a person or people keeping an eye on things for me. I'm personally much more comfortable when other people are watching my things for me when I'm not around.

These are of course very simple methods for hiding a treasure, but I tend to favor simple answers. Digging a gargantuan hole with flood tunnels and all the other stuff is simple only in theory.
 

G'd morning peeps, cafe ?? In Mexico they simply dug down, deposited their goodies, covered it partially up then put in broken boxes, trunks a few scattered old coins, some empty cans from their lunch, ete. then finished filling in the last few feet. The idea is that someone digging for the treasure would first find the upper layer then decide that somelse had already found it snd so just go away. Do ya spose ??? A block left to show where to dig and ????

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

Logic would agree with your scenario if it pertained to an area that was colonized and civilized.

The Mi’kmaq natives in this area were raiding and killing British colonists during this time period.
An appointed farmer or look out would have little hope of remaining uncontested on this Island.

People also do not realize the quantity of treasure that would have been involved.
My theory proposes it took 10 ships to move this treasure from Havana to Oak Island.

Written testimonies and affidavits testify that the Money Pit shaft was man made to a great depth.
These papers were sworn by upstanding people (President of the United States, World Famous Actors, Bankers, Authors, and Master Freemasons) who worked and saw evidence that something is buried at Oak Island.

http://www.oakislandtreasure.co.uk/archive/chappell/readthinkreason.pdf

The fact that this Money Pit shaft diversion was such a success can only speak for the ingenuity that went into creating it.

To date all the excavation has been centered on and around the area of the Money Pit and not much interest has been allotted to where I am convinced the true location of the Treasure Vault is.
 

This is the part I can't begin to fathom - the why. Now I'm not saying that there isn't a why.I just don't know what it could be. Treasure is stored for a purpose isn't it? To be retrieved at a better time usually. So as stated here why the elaborate setup? I seriously can't buy the decoy idea because its outrageous. Build a decoy to hide a treasure that without the decoy people wouldn't know was there? I know this general area reasonably well. If the treasure is 16 or 17 hundreds there was millions of acres of places they could have stored it without anyone seeing them. If its earlier then theoretically they could have put it anywhere almost literally. Indians? Sure they would have to watch out for the indians. But how hard was that? I could bury something now I'm pretty sure without anyone seeing me even if it was ten ships. Not overally easy but doable. Easier than a decoy tunnel. Easier then flood tunnels. Easier than every inch of this story. I am not saying it isn't true - but you would have to have privileged information to say it was. No logical deduction or extrapolation of whats known could lead you to these conclusions UNLESS your main premise was to prove it was true regardless of whether it is or not.
 

Why?
The Mason’s plan was to redirect a fortune to the “New World” (North America), to enable the transfer of the Masonic organization
The Mason’s plot originated after King George III’s destruction of the Whig’s political power with his redirection of this power to the Tory Party, and the Mason’s concern of the imminent invasion of England, during the Seven Years’ War, by the joint forces of France and Spain. Spain outlawed all forms of secret organizations, including the Freemasons.

When?
1762 until the treasure was removed prior to 1795.

Why the Diversion?
The concealment of the tunnel leading to the treasure vault down at the base of the Money Pit shaft.
The redirection of the evidence from the cut down trees and vegetation needed to construct the 9 oak planked levels in the Money Pit. ie: 13’ x 13’ shaft with 8” oak logs with 9 levels would equate to over 100 trees cut down.
The Freemasons knew that an operation of this magnitude with this many men and equipment could not be concealed but they could arrange to have any party’s interest frustrated and diverted away from the Treasure Vault.

A Customs Agent at the Mexican border notices a Mexican man crossing the border on his bicycle with two sacks tied to his handlebars.
He becomes suspicious and searches this man only to find sand in each bag.
This continues daily for a few months.
One day he notices the Mexican man in a tavern and decides out of curiosity to confront him.
He asks the man strait out that he knew he was smuggling something and what was it?
The Mexican man answers with a smile “Bicycles”
 

Robot said:
Logic would agree with your scenario if it pertained to an area that was colonized and civilized.

The Mi’kmaq natives in this area were raiding and killing British colonists during this time period.
An appointed farmer or look out would have little hope of remaining uncontested on this Island.
Click to expand...

Why did it have to be buried there? What was so important about that island? And why endure the risk of both burying a treasure and digging an enormous hole (which would have taken some time) in an area where the whole effort might be ruined by a native attack?

Robot said:
People also do not realize the quantity of treasure that would have been involved.
My theory proposes it took 10 ships to move this treasure from Havana to Oak Island.
Click to expand...

As spotty as the evidence of any treasure at all is, there is no reliable evidence at all as to what the treasure might have been. Speculating about its exact makeup is exactly that - speculation. There is nothing to realize as to size unless we know what might have been there in the first place.

Robot said:
Written testimonies and affidavits testify that the Money Pit shaft was man made to a great depth.
These papers were sworn by upstanding people (President of the United States, World Famous Actors, Bankers, Authors, and Master Freemasons) who worked and saw evidence that something is buried at Oak Island.
Click to expand...

As for the link, from pg. 1 it states that "From these facts it can readily be proved..." that there was wood and metal at the bottom of the hole, and that "...it is reasonably certain..." that there is a large treasure at the bottom. Yet your theory asserts that the whole thing was a diversion, and any treasure in the area is long gone. As you are using this as evidence to support your theory, how do you reconcile these differences? (I would rather have quoted the whole section verbatim but I can't seem to copy and paste it. I invite any interested parties to look at the section in question if they think that I'm taking things out of context.)

I also find it interesting that this piece focuses on the pirate treasure theory, just as the older versions of the legend did. This is another problem that should be addressed if you're going to base a conflicting theory on it, at least in part.

Robot said:
The fact that this Money Pit shaft diversion was such a success can only speak for the ingenuity that went into creating it.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think that we can both agree that if this was a diversion, it accomplished basically what it was meant to prevent - it got people digging all over the place and kept them at it for centuries, with no end in sight. I also think that we could agree (but may not) that an equally effective diversion could have been done much more easily.
 

Well, people DID see Lights above Oak Island, etc.; UFO's...? ALIEN Freemasons did it! ONLY future technology! VERY VEXING!
 

"Time is of the Essence"

One has to ascertain how much past evidence, affidavits and historical stories are required or needed to convince and prove ones’ theories to others.

It would compare to the Billions of people today who believe in their found Faith through recorded stories, without providing the claimed ancient hard evidence (Ark of the Covenant, Holy Grail, Rod of Moses and Golden Tablets, etc.).

Like Heinrich Schliemann’s discovery of Troy from his theory that Homer's Iliad and Virgil's Aeneid was a true story, other searchers have also found laid up treasures from believing in recorded stories.

Yes it is important, but not necessary to locate and prove past evidence.

It is more important and necessary to proceed with investigating from these stories to try and locate "new" evidence that will help prove or disprove the existence of a treasure buried at Oak Island.

Time is of the essence that we move ahead to try and solve this mystery before nature by the threat of global warming with rising ocean waters, destructive storms, lost existing markers, or encroaching land developments all hinder future possibilities.

I commend the Lagina brothers with their faith in these stories and with them committing their time, effort and resources to try to confirm it.

I trust the knowledgeable discussions on forums like this will help add to it and hope to add new evidence with my recently researched theory as to where I believe the Treasure Vault is located.
 

Shucks Ladies & Gentlemen, a cool limade? I have a sleeping, extremely hi grade Gold / Silver mine here in Mexico.. If the Lagina bros had invested that amt' of money in it they would be reaping quite a few millions a month right now (hmm, so would I ! Hey introduce me to them Robot :laughing7::laughing7:

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Oak Island Cross Treasure Sign

⬅️ Previous Thread

wonder if this has been tried?

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Metal Detecting Stuff

Latest Discussions

Back
Top