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

[ECS]

... Why would you want me to list all of the Templars sea battles, which were many btw?

Try listing 3 in which the Templars actually engaged in combat at sea with the Saracens, the dates and locations, what ships were employed by both sides, and the outcome.
If de Flor's Falcone was not an single sale oar powered flat bottom galley, please provide evidence that proves otherwise and cite your source.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[ECS]

...
The type of vessels that brought de Molay and his 60 Knights along with their retinue and treasure from Cyprus to La Rochelle seems to be lost to history.
Perhaps a study of inquisition records could turn up something, what do you think?

Those unrelated quotes are only used to answer your many unrelated questions...

I think if you research works written by real professional historic academics concerning the Templars instead of the pulp speculative alternative history churned out by overnight quasi historians, you would quickly realize that the galleys de Molay departed Cyprus were the same flat bottom galleys that brought them to the Middle East.
What treasure did the Templars bring to La Rochelle from Cyprus?
Where is the documented proof that they transported this alleged treasure?
Even your vaulted Lord and Read did not devote their field of study solely to Templars, Lord has a really interesting book on the HELLFIRE CLUB, Read on the SA soccer that crashed in the Andes and reverted to cannibalism.
A true academic scholar devoted his entire field of research, study, and after a review and acceptance by peers, published works.

As for oft repeated quotes by Lord and Read, Loki, you realized that these same quotes have appeared as footnotes, in several of these Templar pseudohistory pulps, including those by Henry Soskin, BBC scriptwriter for DR WHO , who changed his surname to Lincoln, when he team with fiction writer, Baigent, and photographer and Freemason to create HOLY BLOOD HOLY GRAIL.

Prominent British Medieval Historian, Richard Barber, FRSL,FSA, FRHistS, stated:
"The Templar -Grail myth is at the heart of the most notorious of all the Grail pseudo-histories. The HOLY BLOOD AND HOLY GRAIL which is a classic example of the conspiracy theory of history.
It is essentially a text which proceeds by innuendo, not by refutable scholarly debate.
Essentially, this whole argument is an ingeniously constructed series of suppositions combined with forced readings of such tangible facts as are offered"
*NOTE* Piers Paul Reed also stated Templars possessing the Grail was a myth.

Loki, you realize, that Barbers remarks about "ingeniously constructed series of suppositions combined with forced readings of such tangible facts " also describe your coir- Templar-missing La Rochelle 18 galleys fantasy premise.
PS: I listed his academic letter credentials, remembering your statement of having credentials but being afraid to list them as it would compromise your anonymity on these threads.

Cambridge educated literary editor if THE OBSERVER and GUARDIAN contributor, Robert McCrum comments concerning the difference between history books authored by academic scholars and those authored by pulp quasi-historian writers:
"There is something called historical evidence-there is something called historical method, and if you look around the shelves of bookshops there is a lot of history being published and people mistake this type of history for the real thing.
These kind of books do appeal to an enormous audience who believe them to be 'history', but actually they aren't history, they are a kind of parody of history".

British Historian Dame Marina S Warner, DBE, FBA,FRSL, comments on this rash of pseudo history:
"There is harm in strings of lurid falsehoods and distorted reasoning. The method bends the mind the wrong way, an insidious and real corruption"

On POST#2671, Loki, you state I lost another point in your perceived debate/argument, but it is not me that is losing credibility in this discussion.

 

[lokiblossom]

I think if you research works written by real professional historic academics concerning the Templars instead of the pulp speculative alternative history churned out by overnight quasi historians, you would quickly realize that the galleys de Molay departed Cyprus were the same flat bottom galleys that brought them to the Middle East.
What treasure did the Templars bring to La Rochelle from Cyprus?
Where is the documented proof that they transported this alleged treasure?

On POST#2671, Loki, you state I lost another point in your perceived debate/argument, but it is not me that is losing credibility in this discussion.

An interesting statement from someone who allegedly relies only on proven evidence,

"I think... you would realize... were the same flat bottom galleys that brought them to the Middle East"
How do you know that? Where is your evidence for this statement?

As for the treasure they brought with them to France, Addison and the more recent historian Dr. M.D. Magee mention it, but an earlier reference was this from "The Museum of Foreign Literature and Science, History of the Knights Templar pg 395, vol xv July to Dec. 1829", "He [de Molay], left Cyprus with a train of 60 knights and a treasure of 150,000 florins of gold and a great quanity of silver".

Another point lost by you!

Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

The type of vessels that brought de Molay and his 60 Knights along with their retinue and treasure from Cyprus to La Rochelle seems to be lost to history.

Cheers, Loki

Any number of types of sailing vessels could have been used for transport within the Mediterranean - galleys, dhows, dromons... the only "real ocean going" (outside the Mediterranean "lake") ship of the time (pre-1400) was the cog, which was common in Northern Europe (Low Countries, Scandinavia, Hanseatic League). Carracks, caravelles, galiots/galliots/galleons, xebecs would not show up for another 150-200 years. The average cog was between 15-20m (48-70 ft) and the largest could carry up to 200 tons (avg was about 140T).

 

[ECS]

An interesting statement from someone who allegedly relies only on proven evidence,
"I think... you would realize... were the same flat bottom galleys that brought them to the Middle East"
How do you know that? Where is your evidence for this statement?

As for the treasure they brought with them to France, Addison and the more recent historian Dr. M.D. Magee mention it, but an earlier reference was this from "The Museum of Foreign Literature and Science, History of the Knights Templar pg 395, vol xv July to Dec. 1829", "He [de Molay], left Cyprus with a train of 60 knights and a treasure of 150,000 florins of gold and a great quanity of silver".

Another point lost by you!

Loki, the treasure being discussed in my POST# 2682 concerns the Grail which you have claimed many times the true purpose of your alleged Templar voyage to Oak Island/Annapolis Basin/Nova Scotia.
The use of the word "treasure" you reference does not denote a discovered cache hoard of gold, silver, and religious relics which you have attempted to allude by imaginative inclusion, but stored up wealth held in reserve as the mentioned list proves.

Loki, you don't seem to realize that there are colleges and universities in England, Scotland, France that have Departments of Medieval studies with extensive archives of period documents and records, and scholarly researched works peer reviewed for accuracy before publication in their private libraries. Some of these works are available online from the universities sites, or can be purchased from a catalog, most those are NOT available to the general public.
Loki, if you want to research real documented history of the Templars and their flat bottom transport galleys and other facts, BOYER & BREWER ACADEMIC PRESS, Woodbridge, Suffolk, England, UK, has published many of these university academic works, written with true method of historical research from real historical evidence.

PS: Loki, you seem to award yourself points for ignoring quotes by real professional historians with real credentials that dispute the alternative pseudohistory nonsense promoted by charlatan historian quacks, like Henry Soskin now Lincoln, who totally disregard professional research methods of historical evidence by rely totally upon innuendo, misrepresented facts, maybes, what ifs, suppositions, unrelated events, random non sequitur quotes and outright fabrications.
I hope your fantasy scoreboard fills that hollowness of NOT having actual real evidence or proof that supports a fantasy Templar voyage to Nova Scotia to hide the Grail.

 

[Honest Samuel]

Unlike most of you, I believe the story. If there was no buried treasures, there were be no tunnels. Who build them and why?

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Natural subduction spots where buried glacial ice melted and left voids that were later poked by fortune seakers.

225 years of diddly squat by 28 groups of diggers back up my explanation.

 

[renantagum30]

 

[ECS]

... But please keep up your good work, it all helps.

Reckon my "good work" and recommendations for sources of real archived Templar documented history finally convinced you .Loki, that flotsam jetsam coir found on Oak Island is NOT proof of a Templar voyage to Nova Scotia.

 

[lokiblossom]

Reckon my "good work" and recommendations for sources of real archived Templar documented history finally convinced you .Loki, that flotsam jetsam coir found on Oak Island is NOT proof of a Templar voyage to Nova Scotia.

Lol, you haven't convinced me of anything yet but keep trying.

It is documented that many Templars escaped France in 1307 to a relative early safety in England and later that year to Scotland. Those captured in England faced some five years of imprisonment and torture (look it up).

It is documented that the Templars had vessels in port in La Rochelle in 1307 (look it up).

It is also documented those vessels disappeared in 1307. There is testimony that Gerard Villiers led some of those vessels from port shortly before the arrests of the French Templars on October 13, 1307 (look it up).

It is documented that the Templars were called to France in early 1307 by their boss, the Pope (look it up).

There is documentation that coconut coir was used in all vessels of the Eastern Mediterranean where the Templars had been based in very early 1307 before being called to France and for the 200 years previously (look it up). It is certain they would have used the coir in their own vessels.

It is a known fact that coconut coir was not used anywhere else around the Mediterranean during that same period (look it up).

Coconut coir was found on Oak Island and dated by reliable sources to before the 14th century (this you already know ).

This is convincing evidence that the Templars visited Oak Island and in my own opinion actually proof of such a visit.

For treasure hunters, there are 10 easy to follow clues that eventually lead to an exact location near Annapolis Basin where I premise the Templars left an object they had recovered from the Cathar fortress of Monsegur on March 14, 1244.

There is no record of any vessels from any other nation visiting Oak Island before the 15th century, a voyage which any nation would have recorded as did Portugal when it began ocean exploration several years later (look it up). Even the Vikings left records of where they went (look it up).

Of course as anybody would understand the Templars running from certain imprisonment and torture left no record of where they went, but the fact is they did leave.

Also, you have claimed that Mediterranean galleys could not have made such a voyage, maybe, maybe not, but there were many other types of vessels in use besides these large galleys, such as the Mediterranean Caravel and its Muslim counterpart it had evolved from (look it up). There is no record of which type of vessels de Molay and his 60 knights with all their retinue and treasures sailed from Cyprus to France in obedience to the Pope's order.

Cheers, loki

 

[DaveVanP]

All of your documentation indicates Templars were in La Rochelle and elsewhere in France in 1307.

NOTHING DOCUMENTS they were ANYWHERE other than Europe after that.
NOTHING DOCUMENTS Templars used coconut coir for their ships...only that "they COULD have".
NOTHING DOCUMENTS Templars were the ONLY ONES to use coconut coir on their ships...or even that "they could have" been the ONLY ones.
(this exclusivity is VITAL to your theory that the existence of coconut coir on OI can be considered "evidence" of a Templar presence)
NOTHING DOCUMENTS Templars traveled to North America...other than published claims that have NO historical or documentary support, and largely debunked.

 

[ECS]

Loki, your list on POST# 2690 of random and circumstantial facts proves that, like Henry Soskin now Lincoln, you are able to create fiction from random circumstantial facts, which proves absolutely nothing.

 

[franklin]

Loki, your list on POST# 2690 of random and circumstantial facts proves that, like Henry Soskin now Lincoln, you are able to create fiction from random circumstantial facts, which proves absolutely nothing.

ECS, you are quick to point out how researchers are wrong about Knights Templar coming over to Nova Scotia in the 14th Century or before. But you have no evidence by yourself or anyone else that can verify that the Knights Templar did not come to Nova Scotia during that time frame. There is enough circumstantial evidence to verify a voyage. There was not many places the Knights Templar could go for safety from the Pope and the King of France except to Scotland or to the New World. We know they went to both. But for some people like you, you have to have a strong open and shut case. That may happen someday but right now we have strong circumstantial evidence. You must remember people have been found guilty with circumstantial evidence and many are still serving time in prison by being convicted with strong circumstantial evidence. So instead of keep posting back and forth, why do we not wait until we see enough evidence to make it an open and shut case, shall we.

 

[ECS]

ECS, you are quick to point out how researchers are wrong about Knights Templar coming over to Nova Scotia in the 14th Century or before. But you have no evidence by yourself or anyone else that can verify that the Knights Templar did not come to Nova Scotia during that time frame. There is enough circumstantial evidence to verify a voyage. There was not many places the Knights Templar could go for safety from the Pope and the King of France except to Scotland or to the New World. We know they went to both. But for some people like you, you have to have a strong open and shut case. That may happen someday but right now we have strong circumstantial evidence. You must remember people have been found guilty with circumstantial evidence and many are still serving time in prison by being convicted with strong circumstantial evidence. So instead of keep posting back and forth, why do we not wait until we see enough evidence to make it an open and shut case, shall we.

Franklin, circumstantial evidence does NOT "verify" a Templar voyage, but the total absence of any 14th century contemporary mention of such a voyage is enough verification that such a voyage occurred.
PS: Your "Strawman Argument" of circumstantial guilt conviction is not applicable or germane to this discussion of a Templar voyage to Oak Island/Annapolis Basin/Nova Scotia, just another side step for lack of actual real proof of "We know they went to both" (Scotland and the NEW WORLD)
Please list the "we" that know this, and the source of this knowledge.

 

[franklin]

Franklin, circumstantial evidence does NOT "verify" a Templar voyage, but the total absence of any 14th century contemporary mention of such a voyage is enough verification that such a voyage occurred.
PS: Your "Strawman Argument" of circumstantial guilt conviction is not applicable or germane to this discussion of a Templar voyage to Oak Island/Annapolis Basin/Nova Scotia, just another side step for lack of actual real proof of "We know they went to both" (Scotland and the NEW WORLD)
Please list the "we" that know this, and the source of this knowledge.

We have given our proof what do you have? NOTHING

 

[ECS]

We have given our proof what do you have? NOTHING

All your "we" have given are unrelated random facts and events compiled in a conglomeration of pure speculation.
As with your Sir Henry Sinclair, I posted several contemporary documents that prove he NEVER left Scotland or the Orkneys during the time of the alleged voyages and information on the true origin of this story and source of Muir's fraudulent lost Sinclair journals.
There is real history, and then there is this current flood of pseudohistory which does a great disservice to professional academic documented research that goes through a historical verification process.
Once again, Franklin, saying one can not prove that an event didn't happen, does not prove that it did.
You, like our good friend Loki, have not presented any hard documented evidence that a Templar voyage to the New World.
Nothing but maybe, could be speculation and poor strawman arguments.

 

[lokiblossom]

Lol, you haven't convinced me of anything yet but keep trying.

It is documented that many Templars escaped France in 1307 to a relative early safety in England and later that year to Scotland. Those captured in England faced some five years of imprisonment and torture (look it up).

It is documented that the Templars had vessels in port in La Rochelle in 1307 (look it up).

It is also documented those vessels disappeared in 1307. There is testimony that Gerard Villiers led some of those vessels from port shortly before the arrests of the French Templars on October 13, 1307 (look it up).

It is documented that the Templars were called to France in early 1307 by their boss, the Pope (look it up).

There is documentation that coconut coir was used in all vessels of the Eastern Mediterranean where the Templars had been based in very early 1307 before being called to France and for the 200 years previously (look it up). It is certain they would have used the coir in their own vessels.

It is a known fact that coconut coir was not used anywhere else around the Mediterranean during that same period (look it up).

Coconut coir was found on Oak Island and dated by reliable sources to before the 14th century (this you already know ).

This is convincing evidence that the Templars visited Oak Island and in my own opinion actually proof of such a visit.

For treasure hunters, there are 10 easy to follow clues that eventually lead to an exact location near Annapolis Basin where I premise the Templars left an object they had recovered from the Cathar fortress of Monsegur on March 14, 1244.

There is no record of any vessels from any other nation visiting Oak Island before the 15th century, a voyage which any nation would have recorded as did Portugal when it began ocean exploration several years later (look it up). Even the Vikings left records of where they went (look it up).

Of course as anybody would understand the Templars running from certain imprisonment and torture left no record of where they went, but the fact is they did leave.

Also, you have claimed that Mediterranean galleys could not have made such a voyage, maybe, maybe not, but there were many other types of vessels in use besides these large galleys, such as the Mediterranean Caravel and its Muslim counterpart it had evolved from (look it up). There is no record of which type of vessels de Molay and his 60 knights with all their retinue and treasures sailed from Cyprus to France in obedience to the Pope's order.

Cheers, loki

Another interesting fact is that although "some" of this evidence is circumstantial, circumstantial evidence has convicted murderers!

Cheers, Loki

 

[DaveVanP]

We have given our proof what do you have? NOTHING

LACK OF PROOF is, in itself proof.

You have much circumstantial "evidence", but ZERO proof. NONE of this evidence is "unquestionable"; NONE of this evidence is "irrefutable"; only the radiocarbon dating evidence even approaches the level of "acceptable"...and even that the laboratory itself claims is NOT 100% accurate or reliable - the standard necessary for evidence to be considered "proof". Even DNA evidence is called that - not "DNA PROOF". EVERY other bit of "evidence" that has been presented here, AS WELL AS 99.9% of that which has been written about the Templars visiting North America, is ALL based on the acceptance of the premise, "they COULD have happened, therefore, they DID."...well, I bought a Lotto ticket last Monday, therefore it is "possible" that I "could have" won millions...using the formula you, Loki, and others have presented, I AM rolling in dough right now..."it COULD HAVE happened, therefore it did"...right? BTW - prove I DIDN'T win the Lotto...

"Prove it DIDN'T happen" is the lame fall-back of every "fringe" proponent and wacko conspiracy theorist in existence, past and present.

Just as we have seen with the "commitment" doctors have advised the public during the past few months, we have seen that NONE of them agree, nor do ANY of them offer ANY sort of definitive answer as to proper procedures, or treatments...WHY? Easy answer - NO PROOF.

 

[ECS]

...
"Prove it DIDN'T happen" is the lame fall-back of every "fringe" proponent and wacko conspiracy theorist in existence, past and present...

Yes indeed, including the strawman comparisons and pretzel logic utilized due to lack of actual facts or hard evidence, but this lack of real proof is a great impetus for pseudohistory creative writing.
'NUFF SAID!

 

[lokiblossom]

LACK OF PROOF is, in itself proof.

An interesting statement, Lol!

Cheers, Loki