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

[ECS]

Odd when the Coelbren has been around for over 4,000 years?

What is your source of information that the Coelbren alphabet "has been around for over 4,000 years"?
Is that misinformation from those British noncredible self proclaimed "historian" charlatans, Alan Wilson & Baram Blackett/aka Andrew Terry?
Basic research in a encyclopedia or a legitimate history site will quickly prove that the Coelbren alphabet is a hoax, created in 1791, as I have stated in POST# 3037.
It really reveals volumes that you dismiss the finding of the Smithsonian and other professional historian scholars and academics to constantly to promote this junk pseudo history as fact, becoming obvious why you rarely if ever cite the sources of this haphazard misinformation, while you decree others and their facts are wrong.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[franklin]

What is your source of information that the Coelbren alphabet "has been around for over 4,000 years"?
Is that misinformation from those British noncredible self proclaimed "historian" charlatans, Alan Wilson & Baram Blackett/aka Andrew Terry?
Basic research in a encyclopedia or a legitimate history site will quickly prove that the Coelbren alphabet is a hoax, created in 1791, as I have stated in POST# 3037.
It really reveals volumes that you dismiss the finding of the Smithsonian and other professional historian scholars and academics to constantly to promote this junk pseudo history as fact, becoming obvious why you rarely if ever cite the sources of this haphazard misinformation, while you decree others and their facts are wrong.

You have fallen in the Pit of the Academics and you will never climb out. There is no need of giving you any proof as you always say PSEUDO CRAP. Do you ever read anything for yourself or do you always take the word of some historian? You question every post we put up, have you ever questioned the Historians and Academics. The Historians and Academics have to believe the way they do even though they know better. Most of them have families to feed and a status in the public eye. They can not go against the system. For once, read the 9 books of Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, at least read one of them, "The King Arthur Conspiracy." Make up your own damn mind and do not let the Academics control your mind by their wanting to keep their jobs. About like butt kissers on a job. I have never followed the crowd. I always pave my own road and let the others follow or get lost in the Academic World of butt kissers.

 

[n2mini]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof (Carl Sagan). It is not up to the folks who are unconvinced any treasure has or does exist under Oak Island to prove the existance of nothing. Because the normal state of places in general is that treasure is not all present in them. Treasure is exraordinary (literally - "above the ordinary"). Those who claim something unusual exists are obligated to prove something exists. If I ask you to prove a live ostrich is NOT standing behind me right now there is no way you could. You could drive here but I'd simply say "it just left for a burger." That is why if I make the etraordinary claim it is up to me to prove it.

You can show something and prove it exists.

How do you prove the non-exiatance of something.

On the other hand - in my recycling bin is an empty cardboard box. Contains only air. So that proves there is nothing of value buried under Oak Island because they contain the same nothing. See how that doesn't work?

That's just it, it is NOT an Extraordinary Claim. It is in every story about OI in history. EVER!! So if you and the others want to go against history you have to show proof that it is wrong.. You can't just say the 3 guys were drunks and made up the story to explain where they had been as one of you thinks...and the rest of us take that as fact. Doesn't work that way...

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

That's just it, it is NOT an Extraordinary Claim. It is in every story about OI in history. EVER!! So if you and the others want to go against history you have to show proof that it is wrong.. You can't just say the 3 guys were drunks and made up the story to explain where they had been as one of you thinks...and the rest of us take that as fact. Doesn't work that way...

That’s the point. There is no factual history that anyone (including the original 3) found a “money pit”.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

One thing that the lagina’s show has provided over 8 seasons is factual evidence that there was never a money pit or any other treasure on the island.....

 

[n2mini]

That’s the point. There is no factual history that anyone (including the original 3) found a “money pit”.[/QUOT

History says they did. Up to everyone else to prove other wise..

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

That's just it, it is NOT an Extraordinary Claim. It is in every story about OI in history. EVER!! So if you and the others want to go against history you have to show proof that it is wrong.. You can't just say the 3 guys were drunks and made up the story to explain where they had been as one of you thinks...and the rest of us take that as fact. Doesn't work that way...

.

Every story about the Easter Bunny agrees that he hides candy for kids to find on Easter Morning. Most stories about Superman agree he can fly and stop trains and was born on Planet Krypton.

That's why they call them "stories" and not accounts.

Be really easy to get me to believe in Oak Island Treasure. Show it. 28 groups have tried various methods and so far there is no compelling evidence. Robert Dunfield pretty much dropped the mic on digging when he ended his excavations and sensible folk would have said "that's that."

 

[n2mini]

You for got to bring in Sherlock Holmes. He and your other 2 examples are all fictional characters made up by authors. Just because Dunfield dug his big hole does not mean there never was a hole the original 3 dug. Remember it doesn't have to have treasure in it to be their hole...That is all I'm saying here. That they did dig a hole. That is how this whole 250 years adventure got started. If they never dug a hole this would not have ever happened. All the treasure stories/tells started later..We would not be in this fourm if not for them digging a hole to start with..How hard is that to realise and agree with. I'm not asking ya'll to agree there is/was treasure in it... If they did not ever dig a hole, hole did this all get started?

 

[ECS]

You have fallen in the Pit of the Academics and you will never climb out. There is no need of giving you any proof as you always say PSEUDO CRAP.
Do you ever read anything for yourself or do you always take the word of some historian?
You question every post we put up, have you ever questioned the Historians and Academics.
The Historians and Academics have to believe the way they do even though they know better.
Most of them have families to feed and a status in the public eye. They can not go against the system...
Make up your own damn mind and do not let the Academics control your mind by their wanting to keep their jobs. About like butt kissers on a job.
I have never followed the crowd. I always pave my own road and let the others follow or get lost in the Academic World of butt kissers.

Quite a tirade, Franklin, that relates more about you that highlights your disdain for of true professional historians and why you constantly champion the non-historian amateur purveyors of fact less "PSEUDO CRAP"
You accuse those who research and document historical evidence utilizing proper established methods, which involve the questioning of all the gathered information before an accurate conclusion is presented for a review of peers before publication.
You may not follow the "crowd", but you taken a left turn done a wrong path by promoting these history pulp writing charlatans- Muir, Halpern, Wilson, Blacknett/Terry, Amundsen, etc- and their fabricated alternative unproven gossamer speculations of minimal fact.

 

[ECS]

Odd when the Coelbren has been around for over 4,000 years?

Once again, Franklin, Coelbren is not a real alphabet, never existed for 4000 years, but created in 1791 by Edward Williams under his "druid" pen name, Lolo Morganwg.
The first appearance of the ancient Welsh was between 2000-1001 BCE, the middle to late Bronze age, and the language and primitive alphabet was called CUMBRIC.
If you can prove this wrong, please by all means bring your evidence forth and state the source if its not from Alan Wilson & Andrew Blackett who are not taken seriously or respected and considered as a joke in their native Britain.

 

[franklin]

I have nothing to prove. You believe what you want and I will believe what I want.

 

[Al D]

Some things you just can’t fix, smh

 

[ECS]

I have nothing to prove. You believe what you want and I will believe what I want.

Belief is not the issue, but when you post information that you believe as "FACT", which is totally diametrically opposed to documented with evidence that is accepted by the professional academic community, proof is required to support the validity of the presented information.
Without that evidential support and citation of the source, doubts as to the credibility of the presented statement are raise, and rightly so.
Believing is one thing, the presentation of fact one claims as accurate and legitimate is a very different matter.

 

[DaveVanP]

History says they did. Up to everyone else to prove other wise..

"History" is not based on stories, rumor, "yarns" or hearsay...not even if it is printed in a newspaper. Even "official", notarized, sworn documents need corroborating support to be considered FACT; otherwise it is simply "alleged".

 

[DaveVanP]

You for got to bring in Sherlock Holmes. He and your other 2 examples are all fictional characters made up by authors. Just because Dunfield dug his big hole does not mean there never was a hole the original 3 dug. Remember it doesn't have to have treasure in it to be their hole...That is all I'm saying here. That they did dig a hole. That is how this whole 250 years adventure got started. If they never dug a hole this would not have ever happened. All the treasure stories/tells started later..We would not be in this fourm if not for them digging a hole to start with..How hard is that to realise and agree with. I'm not asking ya'll to agree there is/was treasure in it... If they did not ever dig a hole, hole did this all get started?

All that is necessary is for someone to CLAIM they dug a hole....whether or not they did. Having dug a hole, there is only the requirement to CLAIM there was treasure in order to be labeled a "money pit". The existence of the "pit" is really not in dispute - it's the "MONEY" part that is being questioned.

 

[franklin]

Belief is not the issue, but when you post information that you believe as "FACT", which is totally diametrically opposed to documented with evidence that is accepted by the professional academic community, proof is required to support the validity of the presented information.
Without that evidential support and citation of the source, doubts as to the credibility of the presented statement are raise, and rightly so.
Believing is one thing, the presentation of fact one claims as accurate and legitimate is a very different matter.

You have your facts and I have my facts. I can not post volumes of books it requires for you to read to see things my way. You have to do that for yourself. Good luck.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

You have your facts and I have my facts. I can not post volumes of books it requires for you to read to see things my way. You have to do that for yourself. Good luck.

You have made many claims that you have found treasures yet not once have you shown any of the treasures. Then there are the ones you state that you found that were not accessible because they are in Arlington National Cemetery.

I for one would be excited to see one of the treasures you found as I’m sure others here would be too.

Please show us some of them. It would go a long way in confirming the credibility of your statements.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

That’s the point. There is no factual history that anyone (including the original 3) found a “money pit”.

History says they did. Up to everyone else to prove other wise..

I did prove they did not. So it's up to you to prove that I did not prove that they did not.

Can you show the "history" that states three kids dug a pit? Some accounts say it was three adults who owned lots on the island. First mention in print of three kids digging in 1795 was (I believe) in 1862. By then there had been at least three groups searching for, allegedly, William Kidd's "treasure" (it's debatable what, if any, Kidd may have had as the Quedagh Merchant "loot" was mostly cotton, silks, brown sugar and other perishable items and was pretty much accounted for).

 

[n2mini]

and one of the original 3 was part of one or more of those searches, which is how those people came to know of the area to search. Hence the hole the 3 dug to start with. Again. I ask you if not for the original 3 how did those who searched concentrate on the area known as the Money Pit...

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

and one of the original 3 was part of one or more of those searches, which is how those people came to know of the area to search. Hence the hole the 3 dug to start with. Again. I ask you if not for the original 3 how did those who searched concentrate on the area known as the Money Pit...

That's one of the other known problems with the story line. Each and every digger for 200+ years dug in a different place as no location was ever documented for the fictional money pit. Just look at the lagina's hole count.....