Is ANYONE else getting TIREd of

[Robot]

Lack of Evidence...Is A Reason...To Dissuade You...Come On Tom!

A person should be self-persuaded when there is lack-of-evidence for it, in the first place. That lack-of-evidence for it, should be adequate to dissuade you. But it's not.

If your "evidence" is the story itself. Then you can NEVER be dissuaded by anyone. You will just retreat to pointing at the story itself, as evidence for itself. See the vicious circle ? Therefore : No one can ever dissuade you.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Dave Rishar]

Dave: I suppose that I guess I will have to provide my reasons/facts as to why I believe the story/money pit. As Tom frequently does, he turns it all about the treasure which I wasn't addressing at all. I will begin a series of posts providing what I consider proof over the next few weeks with verifiable facts. However, as no one here has provided any proof of their own as to why the money pit is a hoax/fake/misunderstanding and not an engineered structure, the usual debunkers arguments will be ignored/not valid. The time for them to present their evidence has passed and the chief among them failed to provide any credible information other than speculation/statements. A huge disappointment to me to say the least as I wanted the debunkers to be right. Coconut fibers will be the first post.

People here have provided plenty of proof why the Money Pit is a hoax/fake/misunderstanding, starting with the fact that no variants of the original story (and there are variants, which implies that at best all but one of them are incorrect) make any sort of logical sense. We've been providing this for years. I've been arguing this for so long that I've literally forgotten some of my own arguments. The reason why I stopped going deep on the research is that nobody cares. I'm addressing beliefs that (as has been pointed out to me numerous times by people on both sides of the issue) are based on faith, and faith cannot be challenged by logic. It's the same as arguing politics or religion. It doesn't matter what the facts are. Humans form beliefs and then attempt to rationalize them, and cognitive dissonance guarantees that most people will not be able to accept a good argument against their beliefs. At this point, I merely provide commentary for those that have not yet made up their minds.

Note: sometimes that proof is simply blowing a hole in a long-held belief that was generally accepted as factual. It's not the sort of proof that people like to see, but it's proof nonetheless. Thus, when people talk about cipher stones and wooden platforms and such and I ask, "Well, where are they?", the cognitive dissonance kicks in and some people get angry with me. I didn't prove that they don't exist, but if we can't prove that they actually do exist, why are we using them to justify the existence of other things?

What's more, if someone believes in the existence of a treasure (or engineered structures, or UFOs, or Sasquatch) on Oak Island, it is literally impossible for me to disprove that belief, no matter what facts I have available to me. As I said before, it's often difficult to prove a negative and I gave an example of why. If you believe that something is there, nobody in this world can talk you out of that. It doesn't matter how much of that island has been bulldozed and excavated. What we're looking for might be under there, right?

As a practical matter, if I spend twenty minutes looking for my car keys in the living room and I fail to find them, I assume that they're not in the living room. If I'd spent two centuries looking for my car keys in my living room...well, there may be car keys, but they're probably not in my living room.

Let me say this: Until there is a treasure found, all ANYONE can do is speculate. No one can proof something not found.

I'm 100% in agreement with this statement. This is why I'm sometimes hard on certain theories. In those cases, we're not even putting the horse in front of the cart anymore. We're discussing the color of the cart and the condition of the horse when there is neither a cart nor a horse in the equation. It's silly.

However, can the story and the engineered money pit be proven? THAT, is what I am hoping to provide information on.

We'll see. Given that people have been living on that island for at least a few centuries now, I'd be surprised if they hadn't build anything.

I understand entirely what you are saying. Because I believe that puts means I should have to prove why I believe. But it makes no sense for me to provide an argument when I am not trying to convince anyone to believe me. I am the one asking to be dissuaded!

As a practical matter, how could anyone ever dissuade you?

If I believed in unicorns, how would you prove to me that they do not exist?

 

[Tiredman]

If it's the treasure we're thinking of, then ... no ... you won't be seeing comments about it. At least not dissenting ones.

No Tom it's a whole new TV series hunting lost treasures. I am in it.

 

[Robot]

Unicorns, or Even the Easter Bunny...I Would Hope You Would Try To Prove They Exist!

If I believed in unicorns, how would you prove to me that they do not exist?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

View attachment 1663087

Robot, I loved that quotation. C.S. Lewis was a great writer and thinker. Tackled things from a philosophical perspective, getting people to look logically at things.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

" .... no variants of the original story .... make any sort of logical sense...."

But that's just it Dave. It DOESN'T have to make "logical sense" to be "true". All the faithful have to do, is prove it is *possible*. Not whether it was logical . If there is any remote fantastical possible way something *could* have happened , then therefore, the burden of proof is on you to prove it DIDN'T happen. See ?

".... If I'd spent two centuries looking for my car keys in my living room...well, there may be car keys, but they're probably not in my living room...."

AAaahhh, But the keys MIGHT still be in the living room. You can never be certain. And you haven't "proved" they're not still in the living room somewhere.

"....as arguing politics or religion. It doesn't matter what the facts are.......
" ... most people will not be able to accept a good argument against their beliefs...."

There are people who do indeed change their views, when faced with some casual conversation. People can begin to see the error in their thinking, the better-merits of another view, etc.... But you're right: Other people can't grapple with it .

 

[Digger Pop]

I watch it because it more interesting than anything else thats on at that time. The cash spent blows my mind. Not expecting to see treasure come from 100 ft. in the ground but Id still like to swing a detector there.

 

[Red James Cash]

IMO,oak island money pit is real,no treasure but,it's to keep somebody busy there while the treasure is sitting someplace else.There might be a few goodies there but,there just there to keep the finder convinced that there's more.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

IMO,oak island money pit is real,no treasure but,it's to keep somebody busy there while the treasure is sitting someplace else....

You're joking, right ? If not, it sounds like the line-of-reasoning that some Yamashita treasure hunters I talked with, believed in. When they (and scores and scores of others) dug countless dry holes, because of supposed treasure markers, spurious maps, clues, etc..., Here's what they'd say: All those clues, maps, cryptograms, ciphers, symbols, etc... were put there by the Japanese to throw off future would-be treasure hunters. Ie.: to have you "digging in all the wrong places".

Strange how that works. It's never that there's no treasure. It's always chalked up to some conspiratorial reasoning, and all just further-points-to the truth of the legend.

 

[Red James Cash]

Who's to say different.Nobody alive today was there,Just theories and speculations on and,by, everyone here.People can argue back and forth till your fingers fall off.Unless you were there you don't know.Nobody does.

 

[Red James Cash]

The best way to hide something is to make people believe that it's someplace that it's not

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... .Unless you were there you don't know.Nobody does.

Sure. That's true. But what we *can* do is make a pretty durned good best odds-on-favorite, for how the data is adding up. Or ... lack-of-adding-up, as the case may be

The best way to hide something is to make people believe that it's someplace that it's not

Or perhaps nothing is "hidden" in the first place.

 

[Red James Cash]

Or perhaps nothing is "hidden" in the first place

Prehaps,then again that could bring you back to post #132.

 

[the_mad_cladder]

I would sooner wash the gravel in my driveway than watch that show. I can’t see how anyone would. I post stuff that I find on here from time to time, if it’s interesting. Just imagine if I posted a hundred posts talking about how I was about to find something.... to me that’s what the curse of oak island is like. I would likely be eaten alive or maybe even banned! Rightfully so.

 

[cyzak]

Its hard to stay awake watching the show.

 

[Red James Cash]

I know what you're saying,I don't watch it either.Ive read books on it years ago,that's about it.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Just imagine if I posted a hundred posts talking about how I was about to find something........

..... I call it a hoax when someone claims something that is not proven.

I didn't say it !

 

[A2coins]

I was done after the first couple sodes

 

[Dave Rishar]

The best way to hide something is to make people believe that it's someplace that it's not

While I'll agree that a good way to hide something is to get people digging in the wrong place, I'd argue that an even better way is to not encourage them to begin digging in the first place.

 

[Red James Cash]

While I'll agree that a good way to hide something is to get people digging in the wrong place, I'd argue that an even better way is to not encourage them to begin digging in the first place.

kind of hard to stop people from digging if that's what their mind is set on doing.