I will admit, I am quite discriminating when dealing with historical artifacts. A skeptic, but not necessarily a cynic.
I consider myself open-minded to POSSIBILITIES.
"Evidence" is NOT "proof". Even a PREDONDERANCE of evidence is NOT "proof". Evidence indicates "what COULD BE' not "what IS". "Conclusive evidence" is merely that which is definitive enough to form a CONCLUSION, not DETERMINE FACT.
Even if the lead cross Gary found had been enscribed with the initials "H StC" it would not be PROOF that it belonged to Henry StClair, or that HE left it on Oak Island....jst that he "could have".
I do have an interest in "what could have been"...but only that it COULD have been. Isolated and ambiguous evidence do not history make.
I am a fan of Jason Covalito...check out his website.
COULD the Templars have visited Oak Island? - possible, but not likely. I won't say it DIDN'T happen, but no one can state positively that it DID.
COULD Vikings have visited Minnesota? Possible, but not likely. I won't say it DIDN'T happen, but no one can state positively that it DID.
COULD there have been civilizations on earth thousands of years before the Sumerians?* Possible, but not likely. I won't say it DIDN'T happen, but no one can state positively that it DID.
COULD there have been pre-Columbian, even pre-Norse, European, African or Asian contact with North America? Possible, and I go out a limb to lean towards being "likely"... but I won't say positively that it DID.
DID Egyptians have a settlement in the Grand Canyon

...I can't go with that one....
DID aliens influence human development?….I can't go there, either...ditto for *Atlantis.