My abbreviated theory for the Knights Templar treasure in Nova Scotia

[ECS]

And? Mine journals do not say anything about Pirate Gold either. Two different subjects.
Just like your reference to Nolan what does that prove for you?

In 1974 when Nolan printed his Oak Island map, there was NO mention of Templars or Henry Sinclair proving it became a speculative fabrication in more recent times.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Charlie P. (NY)]

To use Polaris as a Star for True North is not a good way to navigate. If it's degrees change over time like 30 degrees in 2160 years. How can they use it as True North to Navigate. It has not even gotten to True North yet today. A navigator would have to know where True North is at all times and how much Polaris is out from True North before you can use it as a Star to navigate by?

Most voyages are much shorter than 2,160 years, and in 1802 Bowditch published tables useful (still) for close enough approximation for sea navigation. In daylight you "shoot" the sun at noon for a better position. Since 1400 AD Polaris has remained within 1 degree of true north. Close enough for navigation.

NavList: Latitude by Polaris (134952)

 

[Crow]

2,160 years? that seems how long this conversation has been going on?


Arrrrrgh! Old crow was clean shaven when this thread started.............





Wheres my treasure yahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Crow

 

[lokiblossom]

What was the Mag Dec. in the 14th Century? I don't know...thought you did.

I can tell you what it was in the early 17th century as Samuel Champlain recorded it in his logs!

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

This is a copy of a note attached to one of Beta Analytic's "COMPLETE" lab reports explaining the c-14 dating of one of the samples of the coconut fibre from Oak Island.

"This is the previous coconut fibre sample done earlier. There is a 95% confidence it is 1168-1376 AD"

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

If you are so convinced of the accuracy of BETA ANALYTIC's dating report, why do you constantly avoid posting this report and only post one line quotes you alleged to be from this report?
What is also in that report that you don't want others to read?
95% "confidence" is NOT the same as 95% "accurate", Loki, and that 5% of doubt is always the disclaimer, along with the lack a sealed chain of custody from in situ recovery to the laboratory.
Once again, that report does not place the alleged Oak Island coir into the hands of Templars, Sinclair, or any other group, that, my friend Loki, is pure hopeful speculation on your part that is NOT supported by professional historians or the real documented historical record of the Templars and Sinclair.
Fact fabricated from fiction is fiction.

 

[franklin]

Most voyages are much shorter than 2,160 years, and in 1802 Bowditch published tables useful (still) for close enough approximation for sea navigation. In daylight you "shoot" the sun at noon for a better position. Since 1400 AD Polaris has remained within 1 degree of true north. Close enough for navigation.

NavList: Latitude by Polaris (134952)

No. The North Star moves one degree every 71.6 years. So it would have been off almost 9 degrees in 1400 AD. View attachment 1837218

 

[SSR]

If you are so convinced of the accuracy of BETA ANALYTIC's dating report, why do you constantly avoid posting this report and only post one line quotes you alleged to be from this report?
What is also in that report that you don't want others to read?
95% "confidence" is NOT the same as 95% "accurate", Loki, and that 5% of doubt is always the disclaimer, along with the lack a sealed chain of custody from in situ recovery to the laboratory.
Once again, that report does not place the alleged Oak Island coir into the hands of Templars, Sinclair, or any other group, that, my friend Loki, is pure hopeful speculation on your part that is NOT supported by professional historians or the real documented historical record of the Templars and Sinclair.
Fact fabricated from fiction is fiction.

The best way to explain this to unscientifically inclined persons is to point out that if you gave a lab a purposely contaminated sample they would still report that there result has 95% confidence. That confidence level has nothing to do with the viability of the sample to inform you about a date. They cannot know what you did or did not do to your sample. They perform the test and tell you that their method of handling and analysis only introduced that much error. It is for you to determine if using degraded coconut fiber in a marine environment is an acceptable material to try and date. If you have doubt you can look to other methods of dating to try and corroborate. There are no corroborating tests on other material to produce date like the ones suggested with the coir. There are however many instances of things dated by at least two methods that points to activity post 1761 and well into the 1850s.

I suspect that when entire theories reside on one flimsy result that that won't easily be put aside. It's just the nature of belief that forces people to hold on to what appears to confirm the belief. A very good example of this in this thread you can find in the description of the supposed riches that the Priest Sauniere allegedly accessed from the treasure of Templars at Reine-le-Chateau. This will apparently never be put aside as a claim even when it can be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sauniere was dabbling in an immoral scheme of selling masses by mail order, something that got him in serious trouble with Rome (and that is documented). He had sold so many masses at one point that he could not have possibly all performed them in his lifetime. That was the source of his loot. Mystery solved, right? Nope. Even when Pierre Plantard admitted to having faked the documents he deposited in the French National archive (relating to the mystery at Reine-le-Chateau and Templar links going to Godfroi de Bouillon) the Templar crowd won't let go of the suggestion those are legitimate claims. It would take serious deprogramming at this point to get some believers to lose their beliefs. We can blame the proliferation of badly researched, yet highly interesting, books that succeed wildly at getting bad suggestions accepted.

 

[DaveVanP]

The circle shows the position of true north, in relation to the sky, with the current position at Polaris, as the 12 o'clock position ("+2000") of the circle. Procession moves in a counter-clockwise direction. True north will barely be within the constellation Cygnus, about 10° from the star Delta Cygni (almost as bright as Polaris), in approximately 11,500 years.

 

[SSR]

View attachment 1837339

The circle shows the position of true north, in relation to the sky, with the current position at Polaris, as the 12 o'clock position ("+2000") of the circle. Procession moves in a counter-clockwise direction. True north will barely be within the constellation Cygnus, about 10° from the star Delta Cygni (almost as bright as Polaris), in approximately 11,500 years.

That's exactly the case, and I misspoke when I tried to recall the time when Cygnus would be next. I went and reported from memory the elapsed time since Thuben would have been in that position before Polaris. Apologies for that. If you move around that circle and located the occurrences of major Stars in constellations that become a North Star you' ll find 5. They are roughly in the positions that allow for a crude five pointed star to be made.



If you measure the ratios of time in relation to the total cycle you' ll start to see interesting things come out. Something akin to musical harmonics starts to get suggested. The periodicity of certain celestial occurrences has for long served as cues for symbolic suggestions by humans. The esoteric mystery writers of the 17th century kinda went nuts with this stuff when it first started coming to life. Every time an apparent pattern could be seen in our past it has been used as "proof" that there was "Godly" intent in the Universe. The star in circle motif has entered into the symbolic repertoire of humans by observations like this. I've tried to look back and see exactly when this sort of thing could have first been worked out. It's not exactly clear, but the knowledge that one degree of precession equated to about 72 years has been known for a very long time, at least since the Babylonians. A closer type of parallel to that is found in the ratio of distances and diameters of the moon and the Earth and Sun. It makes eclipses on Earth appear almost exactly total when the bodies align. Injecting significance into this is what humans of the past have always done. Today we know this to be a random fortuitous occurrence for our epoch as those distances are in the process of forever changing. For the time humans have been writing, the observation of this has seemed special and meaningful when it really isn't.

 

[DaveVanP]

Drawing a five-pointed star among five fairly MINOR stars that really don't stand out is arbitrary. If you didn't have a diagram, you could not find them, particularly because there are several stars nearby that are brighter and more noticeable, Vega, Deneb and Altair the most notable. It could as easily as well be a Chrysler emblem. With time, I could connect enough dots to draw the Mona Lisa or the Last Supper - does this mean Da Vinci was trying to "send a message from the stars?"

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

No. The North Star moves one degree every 71.6 years. So it would have been off almost 9 degrees in 1400 AD. View attachment 1837218

I believe you are very mistaken. While there is an axial tilt and progression of the equinoxes that makes one complete circuit every 25,772 years; you cannot divide that by 360 degrees to come up with an annual "error" for the observation of Polaris vs. celestial North. Because your system would have Polaris moving all the way around the Earth's sky rather that just in the small observable "circle" around the celestial pole that it actually transite. That is to say the pole's wobble from side-to-side as observed against the star background only transcribes a limited portion of "sky".

2,000 years from now Errai in the constellation Cepheus will be the closest visible star to become the new "north" star. 12,000+/- years from now it will be Vega.

But if you start on Polaris at a declination of 89 degrees (almost straight up) and figure Vega at the other extreme (currently 38 degrees declination) that is an extreme "spread" of 51 degrees. So it takes 252 years to move one observable degree.

 

[SSR]

Drawing a five-pointed star among five fairly MINOR stars that really don't stand out is arbitrary. If you didn't have a diagram, you could not find them, particularly because there are several stars nearby that are brighter and more noticeable, Vega, Deneb and Altair the most notable. It could as easily as well be a Chrysler emblem. With time, I could connect enough dots to draw the Mona Lisa or the Last Supper - does this mean Da Vinci was trying to "send a message from the stars?"

What are you talking about with your trip into hypotheticals? I'm not implying there is any specific meaning to this, only that some feebler minded humans have always sought to draw their own conclusions from stuff like this. Don't be implying I am, please. I'm only interested in the origins of these ideas, not promoting them. The stars in question are irrelevant to someone interested only in the constellation/asterism that contains this "house of the Gods". You are acting as if this wasn't somehow observed and acted upon in the past. It was. Now, you can mock just about every attempt to imply meaning in all this, but you will in fact be mocking every attempt there has ever been at equating regularity in the sky and patterns in nature with a creative force (name it what you want). I don't oppose ridiculing religious beliefs. The extrapolation of meaning is childish/primitive, but the observation on which it is attempted stands. There is a regular precesion cycle of the polar star. It moves 1 degree approximately every 72 years and some Babylonian also noticed that 5 x 72=360=which gets you around a circle in degrees. That this relationship to 5 existed sent people into a line of thinking about this coincidence. The polar star location passes through these 5 constellations and it is not always associated with the most luminous star in that constellation, but there will always be one star in it that is a polar star. This happens to be some of the first deduced scientific observations humans made and wrote down. Eclipse cycles, and future eclipse dates, soon followed. This five pointed star suggestion has a counterpart in symbology too, an upside down pointed star will be the duality-linked symbol associated with the opposite of the Great creative force's home (evil as opposed to good). Out of these shenanigans came symbols like Satanic pentagrams to denote the space for evil to reside. It's all horseshit, but we may as well be informed about where the inspiration was taken.

Your half-witted attempt to mock composition in drawing and art is noted. The joke is on you if you think perspective and proportion did not originally come out of astronomical observation. The scene of the Last Supper is almost all symbolic elements. It's certainly not depicting any real event. That's easy enough to understand when one realizes that Christianity is nothing but a rewriting of older religious myths with a new twist. Even DaVinci stole the ideas behind the proportions in Vitruvian man from an older idea, that of a Roman's crude drawings of such a thing. Art has been guided by myth and myth by observation. It's how geometry made it's way into the OI story too. The OI narrative is actually a hodge-podge of various symbolism that fits into a larger fiction that most remain unaware of (COOI makes no effort to promote it), almost all of which is tied to religious symbolism. It has nothing to do with real events unless you call one man writing down an allegory that serves as its starting point an event. It stems from local Nova Scotian literature influenced by ideas circulating in England at the time. Married to it are ideas about Francis Bacon and Shakespeare. The Money pit is the old Manichean Legend of Enoch's vault/chamber married with a bunch of other ideas taken from Pythagoreanism and esotericism. There are no valid conclusions to be made from any of it except to say that this sort of story telling using the same age old symbols has been going on for a very long time. It's all over Shakespeare too. That someone, let's say Petter Amundsen i.e., would propose an identity link between authors of two similarly inspired stories is painfully juvenile. He would be forgetting how the same mythologies work to inspire story tellers everywhere. There are parallels in stories that do not imply one story creator is related to the other in a way that necessitates a rewriting of history that demands two people become one.

In Baroque Art you will see the same old repeating composition elements that do in fact carry the same weight of symbolism. There is common symbolism in all of it that doesn't imply a great conspiracy to hide a common artist, for example. Poussin's "Et In Arcadia Ego" uses Euclidian composition elements just like are found everywhere anything is constructed with geometric construction techniques. If you can show me a circle I can relate it to Poussin. If you show me 9 levels in a pit I can relate it to Poussin geometrically. It's that way because the artists are inspired by the same mythology. That cease to be the case after a while when symbols start to lose their meaning. Occasionally they reappear as inspiration in revival periods.

The OI story is real in the literary sense and fake in the popular culture's implied meaning sense. That's to be expected. Almost all implied meaning associated with symbols is a mad stretch. Man, does it make for great stories, though. The only detective work that makes sense is tracing back to the origin of the common symbols.

 

[ECS]

The best way to explain this to unscientifically inclined persons is to point out that if you gave a lab a purposely contaminated sample they would still report that there result has 95% confidence.
That confidence level has nothing to do with the viability of the sample to inform you about a date.
They cannot know what you did or did not do to your sample.
They perform the test and tell you that their method of handling and analysis only introduced that much error.
It is for you to determine if using degraded coconut fiber in a marine environment is an acceptable material to try and date.
If you have doubt you can look to other methods of dating to try and corroborate.
There are no corroborating tests on other material to produce date like the ones suggested with the coir. There are however many instances of things dated by at least two methods that points to activity post 1761 and well into the 1850s.

I suspect that when entire theories reside on one flimsy result that that won't easily be put aside.
It's just the nature of belief that forces people to hold on to what appears to confirm the belief...

SSR has raised very important and valid points concerning why accuracy these Oak Island coconut coir samples from BETA ANALYTIC C-14 dating results of 14th century not being absolutely accurate dur to the lack of other tests by other laboratories that collaborate this 14th century date.
When one takes in consideration the wood and other items that were recovered from Oak Island that date to the Canadian Colonial period, it makes that 14th century conclusion all that suspect and flimsy as for evidence of Templars on Oak Island.
Evidence needs to built upon sterner stuff than coconut fibre.

 

[dmg2016]

In 1974 when Nolan printed his Oak Island map, there was NO mention of Templars or Henry Sinclair proving it became a speculative fabrication in more recent times.

Please excuse my complete ignorance on the subject, but the theory of the lost treasure of St. Andrew’s Cathedral being on Oak Island dates back to at least the 1930s. The lost treasure of St. Andrew’s Cathedral was suspected to contain the spoils from the Battle of Bannockburn. There is some theory connecting the cathedral and the battle back to the templars. Using OI logic here, the templar theory dates back to at least to the 1930s.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

He'd have thrown it in if he'd have known about it and thought it would have sold more maps.

He was way before the "Ancient Aliens" fiasco as well.

 

[SSR]

Please excuse my complete ignorance on the subject, but the theory of the lost treasure of St. Andrew’s Cathedral being on Oak Island dates back to at least the 1930s. The lost treasure of St. Andrew’s Cathedral was suspected to contain the spoils from the Battle of Bannockburn. There is some theory connecting the cathedral and the battle back to the templars. Using OI logic here, the templar theory dates back to at least to the 1930s.

Consider that for most of the Chappell period (SR and JR) the ground game on OI was about a search for vault of Tudor manuscripts. When asked about a treasure, Chappell simply said he knew nothing about that sort of thing and that he was after the vault of documents his father had drilled into. There are theories that come from nowhere and "fit in" and then there are theories that are inspired by actual events that men have made belief systems around. COOI will tell you that people have been looking for a treasure on OI for 200 years. That's simply not the case. There have been short intense blips in activity there that have been fueled by conjecture. Most of it is one group being inspired by the PR efforts of previous ones. If you traced it back to 1857 and asked what possible influence started the searches then that would be fruitful. It all started from a suggestion of something in Chester Bay associated with a literary character named John Smith. That initial suggestion wasn't about a material treasure. Treasure, as it turns out, is what has been the most likely thing to keep inspiring people to go back. The search for a vault of documents covered the period 1897-1930s. And it was likely informed by suggestions written by Constance Mary Fearon Pott written starting in 1891. Nolan and Blankenship weren't much into that speculation, although Blankenship's partner David Tobias was a fan of it. Men have made the proverbial treasure there be what they imagined a great treasure ought to be. In our recent times, some religious fundamentalist types like Amundsen have tried to make it about a search for legendary religious relics (truly just allegorical quest legends misinterpreted as being about material objects). The Scots who had influence in Nova Scotia would certainly be quite pleased with a Scottish inspired treasure. Always keep in mind that the original inspiration for the MP is the legend of Enoch's impenetrable vault beyond the stone marker at the 9th level. The "treasure" was initially written to be about the discovery of one's own true nature (his true inner self). That there are suggestions of large symbolic stone crosses on OI is in line with this. In this legend you are given that the way to the inner chamber is through the cross (of crucifixion). It was initially religious allegory of a masonic bent (a quest of self discovery and a call to be a better person though the acquisition of knowledge) before any searches ever started. Why it has really never returned to that is beyond me. I guess people aren't interested in kind of stuff any more like they were in the esoteric revival period of the mid 19th century. Some people have gotten stuck on a treasure narrative that feeds on itself and they have left the original literary suggestion alone only to create new ones which do have treasure associated with it. So be it. That is human nature. Men will continue to die in shafts in Chester Bay looking for the wrong sort of thing in the wrong place exactly as it was originally written. Humans are that predictable.

Templar myths were all the rage in medieval Europe. They therefore made it into the esoteric revival period of the early 17th century. Once into the internal "initiated" narratives of fraternal organizations it survived there until it was popularized again in the mid 19th century when there was a great esoteric revival period in NA. Nova Scotia was a hotbed of Freemasonry. It would be impossible to not think that Templar legends would surface again then. They did. New literature was created in this period that exploited these myths in new allegories. It is for us to sort that out.

 

[ECS]

Allegories in literature and symbols in art were never meant to be clues, maps, directions, or instructions to discover buried material treasure.

 

[SSR]

Allegories in literature and symbols in art were never meant to be clues, maps, directions, or instructions to discover buried material treasure.

That's true enough. They are always symbolically telling you to do something else, as in to go looking further into the meaning and origin of the symbolism which is really addressing the individual and his relationship to the great unknowns. If you joined a fraternal group in the 19th century you would have been walked down a long procession of steps to "inform" you about all that stuff in bite sized pieces. But even with freemasonry the game was about inner development and bettering yourself for the advancement of mankind. The "secret" in it was basically a ploy to get the average Joe to join into a progressive movement. By the time the thing got mainstreamed in NA it has lost most if not all pretense of what it may have originally intended to do. Today you have so-called "Masons" who are writing all sorts of nonsense that tries to exploit the possibility of confusing the mythology completely. That's often what happens with myth when it loses its context. I still consider OI as a place where a relevant story was being told. It's just great literature, though. If it gets you reading about why anyone would want to represent Enoch's mythology on an island in Nova Scotia then all the better. You will have gained in knowledge and will be better informed to not be led into accepting bad suggestions by P.T. Barnum-types. The good news is the "treasure" of OI is available to you with a bit or reading. You don't have to dig a shaft and have it fill with water and collapse on your head to be the wiser. You might disagree with the intended message. Not everyone agrees that the way to knowledge about our true identities is through the cross of crucifixion at final judgment. One has to recognize that that is a relic of how Europeans thought when esotericism was popularized and during the colonial period in Canada. In that regard the OI mystery probably still has more appeal to Christians who still promote the same old message taken from the same old book.

As a story the OI narrative is also a relic of the past. Future stories about an inner quest may be written to send you through some technological symbolic equivalent of the cross. One may already have been written when we were given the "Matrix" movies. Those are tales about awakening to new realities that also were based on a self-raising effort to come to overpower the bullshit before your eyes. The message there is that you have the inner power to define who you are and work things out for yourself. You don't need to be spoon fed stories that you must accept or be tapped for your energies in exchange for a bit of comfort. Use your abilities to make yourself who you want to be and don't be afraid of thinking. That's a bit more Buddhist than Christian, but it's the same sort of allegory. All ages must rewrite their myths to make them relevant again.

 

[ECS]

...Templar myths were all the rage in medieval Europe.
They therefore made it into the esoteric revival period of the early 17th century. Once into the internal "initiated" narratives of fraternal organizations it survived there until it was popularized again in the mid 19th century when there was a great esoteric revival period in NA.
Nova Scotia was a hotbed of Freemasonry. It would be impossible to not think that Templar legends would surface again then. They did. New literature was created in this period that exploited these myths in new allegories. It is for us to sort that out.

There is a major difference between myths and legends utilized as allegories in literature and the fabrications of pseudohistory by quasi-historian charlatans that mix unconnected fact with fantasy with their secret revealed pulp history novels portrayed as true.
Returning to the "Templar theory" of this threads title, one has attempted to provide a constant connect over several centuries among many people unconnected to each other providing clues in literature, artworks, and monuments of a great secret treasure buried either on Oak Island or Annapolis Basin by Templars.
What is amazing is how this great "secret" was kept secret with all this various unrelated individuals knowing this secret to include these hidden clues in their various endeavors.
What has been presented as "evidence" is this fabulous fantasy tour through history that includes the Medieval Grail romance tales, the Cathars including a side trip with Otto Rahn, the Templar's alleged discovery in the Holy Land, banking and merchant activities, and their fall from grace arrests with 18 galleys setting to sea from La Rochelle, paintings by Poussin and Teniers, Anson's Shugborough garden folly, Priory of Sion and so on with other unrelated side trips, that cumulate with the discovery of coconut coir fibres on Oak Island that "prove" Templars, like Killroy, were here.
Even the casual history researcher know that none of these people or events are remotely connected in any way or that there was a flow of "secret" knowledge passed on to various unrelated people through the centuries and still remain secret, and realize
this is a modern phase phenomenon of created speculative pulp history published for profit to the gullible conspiracy minded.