My abbreviated theory for the Knights Templar treasure in Nova Scotia

[lokiblossom]

More totally unrelated trivia unrelated to the subject of Templars on Oak Island.
The "famed Shepherdess Parchment" never mentions the Templars, but mentions Poussin, which Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln force fit his Acadia painting into their pulp HBHG unproven alternative cryptohistory, which others attempt attaching to their Templar voyage to Nova Scotia premise without any solid documented connection beyond imagination.

Umm, the Shepherdess Parchment also predates Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln's 1982 book, and Marie's Stele was, at the least, created 76 years earlier.

And, it mentions David Teniers as well as Nicolas Poussin, Poussin having been known as "the keeper of secrets". The parchment also invokes "the horse of God", which appears in the Teniers painting that shows an exact location near Annapolis Basin!

I did notice the spelling of "Acadia" you used, does that mean you now agree that Poussin, with his "Et in Arcadia Ego" painting, was attempting to point that direction? Or perhaps you will edit it by putting the "R" back in that Poussin had the kneeling Shepherd pointing to.

But, I digress, as of yet the only part of the story I can show proof of is a Templar visit to Oak Island.

Cheers, Loki

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[DaveVanP]

But, I digress, as of yet the only part of the story I can show proof of is a Templar visit to Oak Island.

Cheers, Loki

You've lost me there, Loki...I have read and re-read the 58+ pages of your posts on this topic, and have found not one item of PROOF - the only scientific "evidence" I find is that of the C14 testing...and that is not PROOF. Everything else is conjecture, interpretation, unsubstantiated claims, and outright falsehoods perpetrated by charlatans looking to make a few bucks selling books and YouTube videos.

I even checked some of the other threads in the OI forum to see if possibly you were referring to some gem of "proof" you had hidden away there....nope.

 

[ECS]

... The parchment also invokes "the horse of God", which appears in the Teniers painting that shows an exact location near Annapolis Basin!

You need to explain how a 17th century Flemish artist was able to paint the landscape of "an exact location near Annapolis Basin" when Teniers NEVER left the European continent.

 

[lokiblossom]

You need to explain how a 17th century Flemish artist was able to paint the landscape of "an exact location near Annapolis Basin" when Teniers NEVER left the European continent.

Not a landscape, a map. By the early to mid 17th century Champlains maps of New France were all over Europe, particularly in France where Teniers visited quite often. He never specifically painted a landscape of the New World that I know of, but did hide a map in one specific painting that hung in the Louvre.

For some reason Teniers also referenced Poussin in this same painting.

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

Are you claiming that David Teniers incorporated an actual map in his painting that is visible and obvious to all that look at this painting?
...And referenced that "keeper of secrets" Poussin in the same painting?
Loki, without any direct connection to Oak Island or the Templars, this just more unrelated trivia thrown upon a heap of nonsense posted as "evidence" of a voyage that never occurred.

THE SHEPHERDESS PARCHMENT (English translation)
"Shepherdess no temptation.
That Poussin, Teniers keep the key. Peace 681
By the cross and this horse of God
I finish off this Guardian Daemon at midday, blue apples"

Loki, how does "horse of God" refer to this Teniers painting that "shows an exact location near Annapolis Basin" as to stated as fact on POST#881?
In the same POST#881, you state, "I can show proof of is a Templar visit to Oak Island".
Its time to do just that.
So far all you have presented is, as DaveVanP noted, "is conjecture, interpretation, unsubstantiated claims, and outright falsehoods perpetrated by charlatans", and Loki, that pulp pseudohistory is NOT proof or evidence of anything, much less a Templar voyage to Nova Scotia to hide treasure or the Grail.

 

[lokiblossom]

You've lost me there, Loki...I have read and re-read the 58+ pages of your posts on this topic, and have found not one item of PROOF - the only scientific "evidence" I find is that of the C14 testing...and that is not PROOF. Everything else is conjecture, interpretation, unsubstantiated claims, and outright falsehoods perpetrated by charlatans looking to make a few bucks selling books and YouTube videos.

I even checked some of the other threads in the OI forum to see if possibly you were referring to some gem of "proof" you had hidden away there....nope.

Five collaborating C-14 test by at least two different and reliable Labs (Beta Analytic and Woods Hole) on a material found at Oak Island, that with that dating could have only been transported to that site by the Knights Templars is "proof" of a Knights Templar presence on Oak Island!
Sorry you can't agree, but of course that is your prerogative.

Cheers, Loki

 

[Raparee]

...could have only been transported to that site by the Knights Templars is "proof" of a Knights Templar presence on Oak Island...

Nonsense. Amazingly flawed, intentionally blind conclusion.

 

[ECS]

THE SHEPHERDESS PARCHMENT

Are you claiming that David Teniers incorporated an actual map in his painting that is visible and obvious to all that look at this painting?
...And referenced that "keeper of secrets" Poussin in the same painting?
Loki, without any direct connection to Oak Island or the Templars, this just more unrelated trivia thrown upon a heap of nonsense posted as "evidence" of a voyage that never occurred.

THE SHEPHERDESS PARCHMENT (English translation)
"Shepherdess no temptation.
That Poussin, Teniers keep the key. Peace 681
By the cross and this horse of God
I finish off this Guardian Daemon at midday, blue apples"

Loki, how does "horse of God" refer to this Teniers painting that "shows an exact location near Annapolis Basin" as to stated as fact on POST#881?
In the same POST#881, you state, "I can show proof of is a Templar visit to Oak Island".
Its time to do just that.

So far all you have presented is, as DaveVanP noted, "is conjecture, interpretation, unsubstantiated claims, and outright falsehoods perpetrated by charlatans", and Loki, that pulp pseudohistory is NOT proof or evidence of anything, much less a Templar voyage to Nova Scotia to hide treasure or the Grail.

Loki, I reposted this for it appears you either missed it or are deliberately avoiding a reply to the questions posed, because there exists NO connection to Templars on Oak Island and/or Annapolis Basin or a direct line connection from Poussin and Teniers to Anson's Shugborough garden folly that you often include as "evidence" for fabricated Templar voyage to hide the Grail.

 

[lokiblossom]

Nonsense. Amazingly flawed, intentionally blind conclusion.

In your own humble opinion!

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Loki, I reposted this for it appears you either missed it or are deliberately avoiding a reply to the questions posed, because there exists NO connection to Templars on Oak Island and/or Annapolis Basin or a direct line connection from Poussin and Teniers to Anson's Shugborough garden folly that you often include as "evidence" for fabricated Templar voyage to hide the Grail.

I have answered all of your questions at least 38 times in this thread. From now on I think I will post what I think is relevant to my premise's on any particular day.

One question I should ask you though is, how do you consider the dating of the "coconut coir" to before the 14th century to be pseudohistory?

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Over the last several years I have posted quite a bit of evidence of what I consider was a voyage by a few members of the Catholic order of the Knights Templar's escaping persecution in France by sailing to Nova Scotia and landing at some point on Oak Island. The comments from the main detractors to this premise almost always end with comments such as "heap pf nonsense posted as 'evidence' of a voyage that never occurred", "nonsense, blind conclusion" or "more 'pseudohistory' " ,in other words, "impossible".

What I don't seem to read are the words, doubtful or not likely (except for one detractor). With this in mind I would like to ask any of my detractors, what evidence they have that shows this voyage couldn't have happened because that is basically what they are writing in response.


Cheers, Loki

 

[Raparee]

Over the last several years I have posted quite a bit of evidence of what I consider was a voyage by a few members of the Catholic order of the Knights Templar's escaping persecution in France by sailing to Nova Scotia and landing at some point on Oak Island. The comments from the main detractors to this premise almost always end with comments such as "heap pf nonsense posted as 'evidence' of a voyage that never occurred", "nonsense, blind conclusion" or "more 'pseudohistory' " ,in other words, "impossible".

What I don't seem to read are the words, doubtful or not likely (except for one detractor). With this in mind I would like to ask any of my detractors, what evidence they have that shows this voyage couldn't have happened because that is basically what they are writing in response.


Cheers, Loki

Over the past several years, and in hundreds of posts, you have posted not one piece of evidence that would lead one to reasonably speculate (let alone conclude) that the KT made it to NS. You have repeated your story over and over, and seem to believe that the story itself is proof. It isn’t.

Until concrete material evidence exclusive to the KT is found in situ by credible archaeologists, no one can state that they were here.

 

[ECS]

I have answered all of your questions at least 38 times in this thread...

Actually, Loki, answering with more speculation, supposition, and undocumented nonsense is NOT considered as any type of legitimate answer to the questions that have be posed by me and others on this thread.

 

[ECS]

...
One question I should ask you though is, how do you consider the dating of the "coconut coir" to before the 14th century to be pseudohistory?

One question you keep avoiding concerning these coir testing dates, is the chain of possession from in situ to the testing labs, which were not a pristine delivery, and were subject to outside contamination and possible tampering or even substitution from another source.
The "pseudohistory" is your claim that it was brought there by Templars, when there is NO documented record of this voyage ever being made.
Savvy? 'Nuff Said!

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

One question I should ask you though is, how do you consider the dating of the "coconut coir" to before the 14th century to be pseudohistory?

Cheers, Loki

No history, pseudo or otherwise. May have been coir. May have been dated to within +/- 200 years. Who really gives a crap about some fibers. They just prove old fibers if all else lines up. No evidence of how they arrived. Fibers don't have much value - then or now.

Is the haze a smoking gun or a pipe dream?

 

[lokiblossom]

Until concrete material evidence exclusive to the KT is found in situ by credible archaeologists, no one can state that they were here.

That's what they said about "L'Anse aux Meadows", and the Ingstads, who always accepted the Icelandic Sagas, eventually found the site.

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

One question you keep avoiding concerning these coir testing dates, is the chain of possession from in situ to the testing labs, which were not a pristine delivery, and were subject to outside contamination and possible tampering or even substitution from another source.
The "pseudohistory" is your claim that it was brought there by Templars, when there is NO documented record of this voyage ever being made.
Savvy? 'Nuff Said!

Again, why would such a voyage have been impossible, as you claim?
Savvy? 'Nuff Said!

Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

=lokiblossom;6523698
With this in mind I would like to ask any of my detractors, what evidence they have that shows this voyage couldn't have happened because that is basically what they are writing in response.

Cheers, Loki

The very LACK of CREDIBLE evidence supports the "detractors".
As was stated previously, the only 'credible" scientific evidence you have presented is the results you have provided form "two reliable labs" (while ignoring the results of the SAME labs, and others, that call the results you provide into question).
All the "documentary "evidence" you have provided is of questionable provenance; stories based on conjucture and "interpretation" of ambiguous or unrelated material. The only "weight" these claims posses is that they cannot be DIS-proven - which is EXACTLY why they are made.

Example: I was in Dallas. TX on Nov 22, 1963
I was at Dealey Plaza on that day, between the hours of 11:30 AM and Noon.
I once owned an Italian 6.5mm Carcano.
I qualified as a rifle "Expert" in marksmanship in the USMC.
I served in the USMC at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan - same base Oswald served as a radar operator.

Unlike your "evidence", these FACTS of evidence can be documented, with undeniable, authentic evidence:
I still have my ticket stub from the train trip to Dallas, on 20 Nov 1963, with a return on Nov 25th.
I can be seen on the Magruder film - with my hand raised, pointing towards the Presidential limousine.
There are photographs of me firing a 6.5mm Carcano . I still have some ammunition for it.
I have my original military Service Record Book, showing my marksmanship qualifications.
I have copies of my orders assigning me to MCAS Iwakuni, Japan, as well as photographs of me, near the Control Tower in which Oswald worked.

Now - "PROVE" I was NOT involved in the JFK assassination...

(Just as you IGNORE evidence that conflicts with your story, you must also ignore the fact that I was 7 years old in 1963)

 

[DaveVanP]

...what evidence they have that shows this voyage couldn't have happened because that is basically what they are writing in response.


Cheers, Loki

One item of "evidence" I would like to present is the FACT that of the DOZENS of C14 tests Beta Analysis has performed over several years, OVER HALF have returned results of "Indeterminate" or "Unreliable", several more show "95% reliable" for dates ranging from 200 YBP (years before present) to 10,000 YBP for samples taken from the SAME specimen...yet because a very few appear to agree with each other, you accept ONLY those as being "PROOF". No - "proof" might be considered if ALL of the tests had the same results, not a fraction. It is acceptable in research to reject a fraction of test results as an "aberration", but UNACCEPTABLE to accept only the fraction as "apparent" (or "FACTUAL" as you wish to do).

But then again, there are those who accept as fact the Royal Family as being made up of Reptilians, too....God Bless 'Em...

 

[ECS]

Again, why would such a voyage have been impossible, as you claim?
Savvy? 'Nuff Said!

Loki, there you go again bearing false witness by attributing statements to me that I never made.
What I have stated many tomes on these threads is : THERE IS NO RECORD OF A TEMPLAR VOYAGE TO NOVA SCOTIA.
Savvy, Loki? 'Nuff Said