Oak Island the Strange, the Bizarre, and Maybe the "Truth!

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Let me get this clear.

By pointing out the fallacy of the reasoning that by not proving treasure does not exist in a specific place it could reasonably be assumed that it therefore does exist there the disbeliever is by default a Nazi . . . or at least a horrible person intent on purifying the race and subjugating or even exterminating other people?

Wow!

Freedom of Thought does not mean that all your thoughts will be good ones. ;-) Enjoy. No one is telling you not to be happy being wrong. Have at it.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Carl-NC]

I guess the same can be said for you as well? People that use generalities to put other people into a categories they deem as dangerous was used by a certain party in the 1930s and we all know how that turned out.

I think you confuse dangerous ways of thinking with being a dangerous person. People who discount critical thinking skills are mostly a danger to themselves. They are more likely to be taken by a con man, or to choose a bogus health treatment. Losing a bunch of money is a good education, losing your life not so much. I know people who have done both.

With the explosion of fake information put out on the Internet, keeping well-honed critical thinking skills is more important than ever. Since it's not a skill taught in high school -- and, besides, most of the kids are staring glassy-eyed at cell phones -- I'm not too hopeful, and national trends suggest things will get far worse. Too many people who are saying, "I believe it, so it is true." Or, in your words, "It is fact until disproved." Yes, it bothers me tremendously that many people have simply stopped thinking.

With OI or any of the other hundred "legends" that get discussed on TNet, it's mostly just a waste of time so little harm done, unless you consider time to be valuable. I'm here doing research for a book, so watching people argue all the non-evidence has value to me. Your quote so succinctly illustrates the kind of fallacious thinking that goes into these legends that I'm sure I'll use it in my book. I don't know your real name and since you probably wouldn't want anyone to know you said this, I'll simply credit your alias.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... I'm here doing research for a book, ....

.....the kind of fallacious thinking that goes into these legends....

I'll buy one

Md'ing forums, (T'net for instance) is a good place to see the way each persuasion thinks. I respect b3yond3r , and treasure legend believers, for trying to answer a skeptical point of view. Otherwise, without knowing the "pushbacks" of each side, it's too easy to toss out "platitudes" (both for the believer side, and the skeptic side alike).

 

[b3y0nd3r]

I think you confuse dangerous ways of thinking with being a dangerous person. People who discount critical thinking skills are mostly a danger to themselves. They are more likely to be taken by a con man, or to choose a bogus health treatment. Losing a bunch of money is a good education, losing your life not so much. I know people who have done both.

With the explosion of fake information put out on the Internet, keeping well-honed critical thinking skills is more important than ever. Since it's not a skill taught in high school -- and, besides, most of the kids are staring glassy-eyed at cell phones -- I'm not too hopeful, and national trends suggest things will get far worse. Too many people who are saying, "I believe it, so it is true." Or, in your words, "It is fact until disproved." Yes, it bothers me tremendously that many people have simply stopped thinking.

With OI or any of the other hundred "legends" that get discussed on TNet, it's mostly just a waste of time so little harm done, unless you consider time to be valuable. I'm here doing research for a book, so watching people argue all the non-evidence has value to me. Your quote so succinctly illustrates the kind of fallacious thinking that goes into these legends that I'm sure I'll use it in my book. I don't know your real name and since you probably wouldn't want anyone to know you said this, I'll simply credit your alias.

I agree with most of this statement. However, a person with dangerous ways of thinking does equate to a dangerous person. Some people act on the way the think and most have restraint to resist their impulses.

"Or, in your words, Yes, it bothers me tremendously that many people have simply stopped thinking."

...your way? It seems to me plenty of people here who are believers and are thinking. Just not your way of thinking. You and other skeptics here use common sense to debunk the topic rather than facts.

Like I said, a man walks into a bank with a ski mask and what appears to be a real shotgun, Your common sense would tell you here is there to rob the bank, rather than the fact the he was on his way to a Halloween party with a toy shotgun and needed some cash for the night.

Let me further explain: "It is fact until disproved."

That was said in the context of this particular OI discussion and no other context. The other skeptics and yourself, STILL failed to disprove anything in regards to the legend or the physical evidence. Where is the scientific analysis of the the evidence? Where is the eye witness testimony? Interviews? Proof of scams or hoaxes?

I know I know, the proof is on the believers to provide. IMO, we have. it just isn't good enough evidence to feel you need to debunk it. So it isn't worth pursuing anymore.

So from that stand point, I used "It is fact until disproved." because it seems, skeptics would rather speculate than do the foot work.

It seems skeptics here are more interested in the believers than OI mystery.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

I'm just curious as to why anyone believes there is a "mystery" left on Oak Island.

Maybe if the "curse" said "there must be 30 unsuccessful digs before the treasure will be found" we'd be close. Because the first 28 digs/drills/strip mines crashed.

I'm still leaning towards "natural topography & geology and no man-made treasure" as the answer. Has held up so far.

 

[Raparee]

I'm still leaning towards "natural topography & geology and no man-made treasure" as the answer. Has held up so far.

Yep, and it's a fact until it's been disproved.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

It's the simplest answer, anyhow.

10% of the structures & remains on the island are run-of-the-mill daily work remains of residents and passers-by and the other 90% are from the teams and teams of treasure hunters and their carnage.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.....many people have simply stopped thinking." ....

was said by Carl in-lieu of :

...Let me further explain: "It is fact until disproved."...

Thank you for clarifying that you meant: For JUST this one particular subject of O.I. And that you don't say it applies to anyone who waltzes up to you on the street announcing: "I have a bridge to sell ".

Still though: Even for O.I., I too find the "fact-till-disproved" statement to be lacking proper thought. I mean, I would consider the O.I. treasure legend to be just as subject to disbelief, as the "bridge to sell" statement. Thus: In the same way I would tell the bridge seller "prove it". So too would I say to the O.I. treasure legend: "prove it". See ?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...The other skeptics and yourself, STILL failed to disprove anything in regards to the legend or the physical evidence....

And as I have said many times :

A) even if we/they GRANT all the points (fibers, logs, little boys & lights, gold links, etc..) it STILL doesn't necessarily mean "treasure". And even you have acknowledged this. Right ? Hence, if YOU TOO acknowledge this, then it seems that ..... yes ........ we have "proved" something. And that is: No treasure without proof. Right ?

B) Whenever a skeptic DOES try to show more plausible explanations to the various details, then the believer merely pushes back with remote extreme contingencies, on how some detail or point *could* be possible (given enough slaves, enough years, enough conspiracies, etc....). Ie.: the wack-a-mole game . As if ....... any of that proved "treasure", in the first place. Which we both agree: Does not.

 

[Carl-NC]

Let me further explain: "It is fact until disproved."

That was said in the context of this particular OI discussion and no other context. The other skeptics and yourself, STILL failed to disprove anything in regards to the legend or the physical evidence. Where is the scientific analysis of the the evidence? Where is the eye witness testimony? Interviews? Proof of scams or hoaxes?

I know I know, the proof is on the believers to provide. IMO, we have. it just isn't good enough evidence to feel you need to debunk it. So it isn't worth pursuing anymore.

So from that stand point, I used "It is fact until disproved." because it seems, skeptics would rather speculate than do the foot work.

It seems skeptics here are more interested in the believers than OI mystery.

B, it is absolutely impossible for anyone, anywhere, to disprove a buried treasure on OI. Can't do it. No matter what individual pieces of evidence are debunked, there will always be more "yeah, but what about...". Your continual asking for disproof ain't gonna change this basic fact: it's never gonna happen. If you think it is possible, then please explain how.

Given that the treasure cannot be disproven, the best we (everyone, skeptics & believers) can do is view the available evidences and judge them on merit. The baseline for this process depends on the viewee. I don't start with the assumption that everything is true; I start with the assumption that everything is questionable, so my baseline is clearly on the skeptical side. Evidences have to rise to a certain threshold before I would consider them even to be interesting. The threshold I use is generally Occam's Razor: what is the more likely explanation for this piece of evidence? Other people start with the assumption that everything is true. When that's the starting point, it's difficult to move forward because they start with a logical fallacy.

Let's take 2 examples.

The 90ft stone
This is a piece of evidence that even the people who found it thought so little of that they basically discarded it. While a later story came out that the stone had symbols on it that translated to a treasure message, that later story is completely inconsistent with earlier (and even eye-witness) accounts that said there were only scratches on the stone, and those probably from digging tools. The story of the symbols is very highly suspect, and the most likely explanation is they dug up an unremarkable stone.

If you start out assuming that the stone was real, had the carved symbols on it, and the symbols translated as claimed, then what would it take to convince you that these claims are likely false?

Coconut fibers
This is, perhaps, the only piece of evidence that even interests me. It may very well be true that there are coconut fibers on OI, but so far no one seems to be interested in a proper retrieval & analysis. If they are real, then extending the search to other nearby islands to see if they have similar deposits would answer the question as to whether they are unique to OI. If they are real; if they are unique; if they are old; what then? We would want to postulate why they are there. That might include a buried treasure, but it would also include other theories that might be far more plausible. But right now, there is little to go on except pure speculation. There is nothing to work with, and the people who should want to know, apparently don't.

You can take every piece of "evidence" and inspect it in a similar way. If you start out with a skeptical view, then (IMO) nothing rises to the level of even interesting, except maybe the coconut fibers. Other skeptics may differ. If you start out believing everything is fact and true, then I'm not sure where you go from there.

But the bottom line is still the bottom line: in 225 years nothing has been found. And that end of the island has been ripped to shreds. That remains the most overwhelming evidence of all.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Good analysis.

Re: the coconut fibers - I question what other sites of interest have used coconut fibers and to what purpose? Near as I can tell they were used for cordage, sleeping mats (ashore and on ships) and flotation.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... and to what purpose? Near as I can tell they were used for cordage, sleeping mats (ashore and on ships) and flotation.

No no no no. You forgot the most IMPORTANT purpose: TREASURE.

I'm sure that those-that-agree, will have links of other treasures, around the world, that were likewise found in conjunction with "coconut fibers". Since, of course, it's a "given". Then there should be references to other-such treasures that ...... likewise ..... had coconut fibers involved in the finding of said treasures. Which will then lend credence to this story, as well.

 

[lokiblossom]

Good analysis.

Re: the coconut fibers - I question what other sites of interest have used coconut fibers and to what purpose? Near as I can tell they were used for cordage, sleeping mats (ashore and on ships) and flotation.

Ships lines, and packing was the main use of the Indian 'coir' as used be the Arab nations of the Middle East. Dated to before 1400 it could not have appeared on Oak Island by any historically accepted means. Its as simple as that, I would think, even a caveman could figure it out. I'm sure you guys could grasp the significance, or maybe not! As has been noted, there is some discussion as to whether the material actually is Coconut fibre. Although two out of four tests have said it definitely was, I think most will agree that at least the dating of the material was consistent to have been before 1400. Oh, and not necessarily any treasure on Oak Island!

Cheers, Loki

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Re.: Coconut fibers :

.... I'm sure you guys could grasp the significance, or maybe not! ....

.... Oh, and not necessarily any treasure on Oak Island! ....

Then I wonder why it keeps coming up over and over again, in context with the O.I. treasure legend ? If the "significance" (that you speak of) has anything to do with treasure , then : Do you have any other example, world-wide, where coconut fibers were the clue that led someone to (or were associated in some fashion) to any other treasure that's been found ?

 

[lokiblossom]

Re.: Coconut fibers :






Then I wonder why it keeps coming up over and over again, in context with the O.I. treasure legend ? If the "significance" (that you speak of) has anything to do with treasure , then : Do you have any other example, world-wide, where coconut fibers were the clue that led someone to (or were associated in some fashion) to any other treasure that's been found ?

Your the only one in this discussion talking treasure!
Although I guess it would depend on a persons definition of treasure and some on here might actually identify the coconut fibre with an Oak Island treasure.
I keep bringing it up because a few posters consider the idea of coconut fibre some kind of joke!

Cheers, Loki

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Your the only one in this discussion talking treasure! ...

Ok, fair enough. Yes: That is my interest in the subject : "Is there evidence of a possible treasure on O.I. ?"

Curious then : What is your interest in O.I. ?

 

[lokiblossom]

Ok, fair enough. Yes: That is my interest in the subject : "Is there evidence of a possible treasure on O.I. ?"

Curious then : What is your interest in O.I. ?

That a few of the Templars stopped there in 1308 after escaping from France the year before. It is documented that a large number of the Knights left Cyprus in early 1307 at the request of Pope Clement V landing at a French Port, more than likely La Rochelle which they controlled. Templar historian Charles Addison claims there were 60 Knights 160,000 florins of gold and a large amount of other treasures. Sometime in September these ships and a few others left France and along with the new Grand Master Gerard de Villers, were never seen again. Villers becoming the most wanted man in France.

Cheers, Loki

 

[Tom_in_CA]

That a few of the Templars stopped there in 1308 after escaping from France the year before. It is documented that a large number of the Knights left Cyprus in early 1307 at the request of Pope Clement V landing at a French Port, more than likely La Rochelle which they controlled. Templar historian Charles Addison claims there were 60 Knights 160,000 florins of gold and a large amount of other treasures. Sometime in September these ships and a few others left France and along with the new Grand Master Gerard de Villers, were never seen again. Villers becoming the most wanted man in France.

Cheers, Loki

Thanx very much for answering that . Then if we had Europeans, in #'s that large, leaving Europe , with all the gold and treasure that you speak of (bold italics in your own quote above), then ....... You've got me confused. Because .... on the other hand ... you keep saying that your interest in O.I. isn't treasure .

So please clarify : Is there a tid-bit of hope for possible treasure , as the basis of interest in O.I., or not ? Your last post seems to suggest that it is indeed about treasure. Yet in post # 2015, you said that I'm the only one talking about treasure. See the apparent contradiction ?

 

[ConceptualizedNetherlandr]

Give me three months on Oak Island and I will find more treasure than all of the other treasure hunters have found combined for the past 220 years, guaranteed.

Go for it. take your time. get back to us?

 

[franklin]

Go for it. take your time. get back to us?

Need a shack and permission. Maybe I could stay at the Lagina's Headquarters where all the research is now stored. May learn while recovering treasure.