My abbreviated theory for the Knights Templar treasure in Nova Scotia

[DaveVanP]

Sorry but I deleted your worthless and ridiculous analogy that followed, comparing the enslavement of humans by aliens to Templars sailing the Atlantic!

Cheers, Loki

Stichin's tale is no more, nor less believeable than the yarns you spin for us...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[ECS]

Hmm, the samples were contaminated.
So evidently the testing firm acknowledged that the samples were contaminated. In the Oak Island tests as I recall only one sample was considered too contaminated for an accurate test, but again it was acknowledged.
No, the tests were correctly done and you might as well give up on that line of reasoning.

Btw, your own dating is also quite skewed. An 1848 sample is what you claim the three boys found?
Note also that it was Middle Eastern Coir!

Loki, Loki, Loki-you really need to read that post. No where do I say that those intrepid lad's rope was made from coir.
As for the 1848 date, that referenced an ARCADIAN RECORDER newspaper add for the firm of W M Stair & Co ropeworks in Halifax , Nova Scotia on the Avon River that had been in business since 1810, and imported Middle Eastern coconut coir.
...but thanks for a current example of manipulation of facts to misrepresent their actual meaning to support a fragile position.

Now back to the discussion, please attempt to pay attention.
You cite these dating tests, especially BETA ANALYTICS as evidence of Templar activity on Oak Island due to their plus/minus dating.
What you do not take into account, is the chain of custody provenance of that coir sample from discovery to the lab for testing.
As mention concerning the sample submitted to Wood's Hole labs, it was brought for testing by a company representative that had a vested interest in treasure hunting activities, making the coir sample provided suspect because of this lack of provenance.
Questions concerning chain of custody provenance that need to be addressed before BETA ANAYLTICS dating results can be accepted as actual accurate "evidence" of this alleged Templar activity:
1. Who recovered the coir and where was it taken for verification.
2. When was it recovered, and was a sample of the soil included during this recovery.
3. Were photos taken in situ and the find verified and cataloged by professionals.
4. Was the sample sent to BETA ANALYTICS a fresh sample or was it in storage or displayed for several years in a museum acquiring additional contaminants before submission.
5. How was it presented, packaged and by whom, and how was it delivered for this dating, and was the soil included.
6. Was preconceived expectations mentioned to BETA ANALYTICS before testing.
7. Was the sample professionally validated as actually being found on Oak Island to eliminate the possibility of substitution.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

I'm not sure, but I thought the first mention of the fibers was the result of the Truro Company's excavations in the middle of the 19th century. I don't believe "The Boys" ever mentioned it in their diggings. Though their story was also first told by others around the time of the US Civil War.

 

[ECS]

The two major critical points that Loki seems to ignore are the chain of custody provenance of the coir submitted for dating and the fact that a rope manufacturing company in Halifax, Nova Scotia on the Avon River imported coconut coir from the Middle East beginning in 1810, providing much more likely source for the coir found on Oak Island, Nova Scotia than alleged Templars.
It is quite possible that the suppliers of the Middle Eastern coir had large stockpiles of coir warehoused in buildings with coir and debris accumulated and transferred to these shipments from much earlier centuries.
Still the chain of custody provenance from discovery to laboratory dating or the supply chain of coir to the W M Stairs Co in Halifax does not constitute any matter evidence of Templar activity on Oak Island beyond wishful speculation.

 

[BZN-es]

From everything written to here, I didn't understand where and what to look for. Can you summarize what and where you are looking. In a few words. Thanks.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Where would be Oak Island, Nova Scotia.

What to look for would be any significant evidence of pre-Columbian (pre 1492) European involvement at that location; specific to the order of the Knights Templar.

 

[lokiblossom]

From everything written to here, I didn't understand where and what to look for. Can you summarize what and where you are looking. In a few words. Thanks.

What I am looking for can be summarized in the first three or four posts on this thread that I started on January 31, 2015. Through the 48 pages of the last few years I have changed a few things relating to my premise's as information has become clearer.
As far as Oak Island goes, my premise is well stated by Charlie's last post #306 as I state such a visit in 1308, but it also concerns a site I visited near Annapolis Basin in 2009 where I believe the Templars hid an object as identified by Dan Brown, although in his case being a fictional novel it was probably by accident.

Cheers, Loki

 

[BZN-es]

What I am looking for can be summarized in the first three or four posts on this thread that I started on January 31, 2015. Through the 48 pages of the last few years I have changed a few things relating to my premise's as information has become clearer.
As far as Oak Island goes, my premise is well stated by Charlie's last post #306 as I state such a visit in 1308, but it also concerns a site I visited near Annapolis Basin in 2009 where I believe the Templars hid an object as identified by Dan Brown, although in his case being a fictional novel it was probably by accident.

Cheers, Loki

Thanks

I'll check what is or isn't there.

 

[ECS]

The voyage did occur, Templars did land on Oak Island, the coconut coir is proof of that...

The coconut coir found in Oak Island is most likely "proof" that Middle eastern coconut coir imported for rope manufacture by the Halifax company W M Stairs & Co, established on the Avon River in 1810 is a possible source of this discovered coir, and not Templar debris.
Without proper professional chain of custody provenance from undocumented in situ removal and handling of the samples before laboratory dating submission, and the established fact of the presence of coir in Nova Scotia for rope manufacture, renders the "coir as evidence" for an alleged Templar voyage to Nova Scotia as a false foundation for theory, that lacks hard outside collaborating evidence of such a voyage beyond naïve speculation.

 

[lokiblossom]

The coconut coir found in Oak Island is most likely "proof" that Middle eastern coconut coir imported for rope manufacture by the Halifax company W M Stairs & Co, established on the Avon River in 1810 is a possible source of this discovered coir, and not Templar debris.
Without proper professional chain of custody provenance from undocumented in situ removal and handling of the samples before laboratory dating submission, and the established fact of the presence of coir in Nova Scotia for rope manufacture, renders the "coir as evidence" for an alleged Templar voyage to Nova Scotia as a false foundation for theory, that lacks hard outside collaborating evidence of such a voyage beyond naïve speculation.

So the Halifax Company imported over 500 year old "coconut coir", an interesting premise!

As for your implication that someone would have spiked the samples by misrepresenting their origin, its important to remember that this all happened when everyone was looking and hoping for other premises, ie, pirate treasure, crown jewels, ect. Templar treasure hardly considered yet. And if brought from some other source from where? Still the only place "coir" dated that old could have come from is the Far East or Eastern Mediterranean and even then it would have been highly degraded.

Again, your second mention of someone in Nova Scotia using 500 year old coconut coir for rope manufacture just doesn't make sense. Btw, many American and Canadian companies have used and still use coconut coir for various purposes, but I believe its newer stuff.

Cheers, Loki

 

[franklin]

Noah even had ropes on the Ark.

 

[ECS]

So the Halifax Company imported over 500 year old "coconut coir", an interesting premise!...
Still the only place "coir" dated that old could have come from is the Far East or Eastern Mediterranean and even then it would have been highly degraded...

Yes, Loki, it would be "highly degraded" as would your alleged Templar coir that would be of the same age.
Are you now claiming that Templar coir does not degrade or decay as other non Templar coir would?
You are adept at avoiding and ignoring actual facts as with the lacking chain of custody provenance of the "dated" coir samples that conflict with your "premise", including that there was another coir source, that was local and nearby, that the recovered coir on Oak Island could have originated.
Cheers, Loki!

 

[ECS]

...Again, your second mention of someone in Nova Scotia using 500 year old coconut coir for rope manufacture just doesn't make sense...

Once again you quoted something I never posted about that Halifax ropemaking firm using "500 year old coconut coir", revealing that your comprehension of the written word opens imaginative elaborate embellished versions beyond what is adamantly stated in the text.

 

[lokiblossom]

Yes, Loki, it would be "highly degraded" as would your alleged Templar coir that would be of the same age.
Are you now claiming that Templar coir does not degrade or decay as other non Templar coir would?
You are adept at avoiding and ignoring actual facts as with the lacking chain of custody provenance of the "dated" coir samples that conflict with your "premise", including that there was another coir source, that was local and nearby, that the recovered coir on Oak Island could have originated.
Cheers, Loki!

Lol, of course the Templar "coir" manufactured before the 14th century would have been highly degraded 500 years later in 1810. but the Templars didn't use it in 1810, it was your Halifax company (post 709) that you claimed used the coconut coir in 1810 that was dated to before the 14th century.

If you remember, I premised a voyage to Oak Island by a few Knights Templar's in 1308, a full 500 years earlier by my math.

And btw, nothing about the chain of custody "conflicts" with my premise.

Again you are claiming the Halifax company used 500 year old coir, as you are indeed saying the coir on Oak Island, dated to before the 14th century could have come from the 1810 company (post 709).

Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

I think the point ECS is making is that coir buried/submerged in 1810, when tested 200 years later could very well give REPEATED erroneous readings (off by as much as 1,000 years) as to Carbon 14 testing. That is why every lab includes not only a "time span" but also a probability of accuracy. There is very little to do to determine exactly how much effect salt water, or minerals in the water may effect the readings. NONE provide an accuracy of 100%, which is what is required to be considered "FACT". Any % less can only honestly be stated to be an "estimate", or "supposed".

While I was a student at East Carolina University, my major was U.S. History, with a minor in "Maritime Studies", which in effect was Underwater Archaeology. I spent several summers in the mid-late 90's doing field work recovering two Revolutionary War-era gunboats in Chesapeake Bay, and later assisted with research in the location of the submarine CSS Hunley in Charleston Harbor. The oil fires of the Gulf War damaged my lungs enough that I had to give up diving, but - I got to meet Clive Cussler!
I had considered post-grad work in Pre-Columbian or Colonial Archaeology but life interfered.

One thing that was drilled into us in our Freshman year - DO NOT look for evidence, artifacts, or documentation to support a hypothesis - ALWAYS gather ALL the evidence, artifacts, and documents FIRST, analyze them, THEN come up a preliminary hypothesis using logic and "Occam's Razor" as your guide - "What is the SIMPLEST way to explain this?" As more evidence presents itself, you must consider ALL evidence, not just what you WANT to use, then the hypothesis can be changed or modified, even rejected.
Once it is sufficiently supported, forwards, backwards, upside-down... your hypothesis can be presented as a thesis or dissertation, to be reviewed and critically analyzed by your peers and experienced experts.

 

[UncleDig]

Lets see pictures of this Revolutionary War-era gun boats that you recovered from Chesapeake Bay!

 

[ECS]

POST #209 MAY 5, 2020

The coconut coir found in Oak Island is most likely "proof" that Middle eastern coconut coir imported for rope manufacture by the Halifax company W M Stairs & Co, established on the Avon River in 1810 is a possible source of this discovered coir, and not Templar debris.
Without proper professional chain of custody provenance from undocumented in situ removal and handling of the samples before laboratory dating submission, and the established fact of the presence of coir in Nova Scotia for rope manufacture, renders the "coir as evidence" for an alleged Templar voyage to Nova Scotia as a false foundation for theory, that lacks hard outside collaborating evidence of such a voyage beyond naïve speculation.

Loki, Loki, Loki, reread this post and present where exactly I stated that W M Stair & Co used 500 year coir to manufacture.
Just another example of how you twist and manipulate a basic factual statement by making misinterpretations what you perceive as contrary and threatening to the feeble foundering foundation of scattered random speculation you constantly post as "proof".
One would think that your time, Loki, would be better spent by pursuing actual real factual evidence of a Templar presence on Oak Island than all these misguided attempts of discrediting others by misrepresenting their post's content.

 

[lokiblossom]

The coconut coir found in Oak Island is most likely "proof" that Middle eastern coconut coir imported for rope manufacture by the Halifax company W M Stairs & Co, established on the Avon River in 1810 is a possible source of this discovered coir, and not Templar debris.

You are saying that the "coir" discovered on Oak Island, dated to before the 14th century could have come from the rope manufacturing of the W.M. Stairs & Co that was established in 1810, and therefore was not Templar debris.

That would be 500 year old, highly degraded, coconut coir imported to Halifax for rope manufacture sometime after 1810 AD!

Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

The first picture is our camp at "the beach". I'm the guy with the on the left with no shirt and backwards ball cap
I took the other photo. I cant remember who the other diver is. Pictures are from 1988. The logs are not part of a wreck, but a nearby wharf of an age contemporary with the wrecks we were researching, that had collapsed nearly intact.

 

[DaveVanP]

You are saying that the "coir" discovered on Oak Island, dated to before the 14th century could have come from the rope manufacturing of the W.M. Stairs & Co that was established in 1810, and therefore was not Templar debris.

That would be 500 year old, highly degraded, coconut coir imported to Halifax for rope manufacture sometime after 1810 AD!

Cheers, Loki

Actually, what he is saying is that coir imported in 1810 for making rope could very well C-14 test to be 500 years older, when tested in the 21st Century. Extended immersion in seawater WILL INCREASE the C12 concentration in a sample BUT NOT C14, which will skew the ratio of C12 to C14, giving a FALSE age of being older...on the average of 500 years older. Any reputable lab will present only what the test indicates, not "adjust" for any variable (since that is UNKNOWN) such as seawater contact.

In the case of the gunboats I was involved with (posts 715 and 719), C-14 testing was done on dozens of wood, leather, and FIBER (caulking) samples...and we got consistent results on the wood samples (180-220 YBP [1989]), the others varied widely (75-875 YBP), even within samples taken from the same fragment. Part of the reason for the age disparity was that fiber used as caulking (oakum) is infused with tar, a carbon-rich material, which can artificially throw off the C12/C14 ratio, indicating a greater age. Hull planking samples taken adjacent to seams (and in contact with the caulking) also gave these "false age" indicators.