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

[sasquash]

What's my prize

Sorry 2 guys drop it in the $$$ pit

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Robot]

Your Prize... Etex!

What's my prize

It Is an All Expense Trip for Two...To Oak Island...For the Unavailing of...The Freemason`s Treasure Vault.

This prize is non transferable and must be taken by the year 2095 ad.



Have a safe and happy trip!

 

[xaos]

The Curse of Oak Island, ...Season 40..

 

[Tom_in_CA]

The Curse of Oak Island, ...Season 40..

View attachment 1675368

Which won't prove "not there". It will be: A little more to the right. A little more to the left. A little deeper.

And if someone tries to object to the "a little deeper" notion, by pointing out that the persons in the 1700's were digging by MANUAL LABOR (hand-tools, primitive tech, etc...). Thus: HOW IN THE WORLD was someone supposed to have ever dug that deep ?? The "faithful" will merely point out:

a) They built the Egyptian pyramids with manual primitive means, didn't they ?

b) Cornish miners historically dug that deep in their mining. Right ?

Thus: Given enough slaves, and given enough time, SURE , you can Build or Dig ANYTHING. Thus: Unless you can DIS-prove that this wasn't possible, then therefore: Presto: The treasure exists.

 

[b3y0nd3r]

So where to begin. I see this closed minded disinformation campaign is firing on all cylinders this week.

Firstly, a person's interpretation of evidence is just that. Their interpretation. When several people agree on that same interpretation, it becomes factual(regardless if it's true). I have no doubts people make mistakes and interpret things incorrectly. The mind is a very tricky organ. You can mis-remember things. You can misinterpret things.

But some things are just too peculiar to simply write-off.

Coconut fibers on a non-tropical island-regardless of how they got there. they are there.

Strange carvings.

Underground anomalies.

The story itself.

People died trying locate a treasure or an answer to OI and you are saying, it was all part of a hoax or a bad interpretation of the available facts? I wouldn't risk my life for either. Would you?

Second, Tom I admire the heck out of you, but all you do in this OI debate is side track and talk about such silly hypotheticals, that I don't even care to get involved in.

Third. you talk about what is more probable and plausible. That is totally irrelevant. Totally. It's more probable that someone won't win the lottery, but someone always does don't they? It's more plausible that if you eat something, you won't get sick. However, it does happen time to time.

Lastly, when will the answer to whether there is a treasure or not. That depends on a person's belief now doesn't it. The dubunkers don't believe there was a treasure. That is why I am so confused as to why the debunkers are still hanging around unless of course you really are trying to convince yourself it isn't true. If not, then congrats, you've won! Why stick around?

For me, I feel the treasure(if there is, was, or wasn't) would be found around 200 feet with the collapse. At 90 feet the stone read "40 feet below". That puts it at 130 feet. Then the searchers dug underneath adding another ten feet the "vault" fell into. With the casons, drilling, digging and filling as well as water erosion, 200 feet would satisfy me provided they are digging in the right spot.

 

[xaos]

For me, I feel the treasure(if there is, was, or wasn't) would be found around 200 feet with the collapse. At 90 feet the stone read "40 feet below". That puts it at 130 feet. Then the searchers dug underneath adding another ten feet the "vault" fell into.

Read post 1379.

Given all of the excavations, it in essence is that same as this.. in post 1403...

In the last episode I saw, they dont even know where the original money pit is.

 

[b3y0nd3r]

Read post 1379.

Given all of the excavations, it in essence is that same as this.. in post 1403...

In the last episode I saw, they dont even know where the original money pit is.

So you are saying the box drains are real?

 

[petetherocker]

Which won't prove "not there". It will be: A little more to the right. A little more to the left. A little deeper.

And if someone tries to object to the "a little deeper" notion, by pointing out that the persons in the 1700's were digging by MANUAL LABOR (hand-tools, primitive tech, etc...). Thus: HOW IN THE WORLD was someone supposed to have ever dug that deep ?? The "faithful" will merely point out:

a) They built the Egyptian pyramids with manual primitive means, didn't they ?

b) Cornish miners historically dug that deep in their mining. Right ?

Thus: Given enough slaves, and given enough time, SURE , you can Build or Dig ANYTHING. Thus: Unless you can DIS-prove that this wasn't possible, then therefore: Presto: The treasure exists.

You forgot to mention that all of this would have to be done UNSEEN by anyone...

 

[rabidus]

It's kinda funny on T'net, if/when someone tries to draw an analogy to something "totally off the radar", to illustrate how UN plausible something might be. To say "Bigfoot" or "Elvis seen alive" or "Aliens held captive in Roswell", then .... be prepared : Someone will actually believe various things like that. And so the example doesn't hold water. So I switched to "leprechauns". So far so good with that one. Haven't had a leprechaun believer yet

Hate to break it to you but that house with the well they visited in Season 3? (could be 4). The one with nothing special but they highlighted a mason triangle anyway? Well the previous owners of the house have reported seeing leprechauns on several occasions. Sometimes even taking their family car out for a joy ride. I kid you not.

 

[xaos]

Notice that throughout the history of Oak Island...who has been involved with the excavations?



So, if the Masons are the modern day evolution of the Knights Templer...

Why would they be helping find the Treasure...

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... closed minded .....

Don't forget: That finger points both ways.

Ie.: In the same way you would accuse the disbelievers of being "close-minded" , well, ....... so too, figure that: The disbelievers would be 'pointing that same finger' back at believers, for failing to take into consideration the counter-evidence.

.... a person's interpretation of evidence is just that. Their interpretation. .....

This statement seems to promote the notions that "all interpretations are equal". And that "truth" is utterly "subjective" and "personal". Eh ? However: I'm sure you'd be the first to agree that some "interpretations" can be erroneous. There are people who come up with conclusions (aka "interpretations"). That hold utterly no water, and are totally full of holes. Right ?

Hence why are you appealing to this ? To suggest that someone's interpretation here can't be true, simply because it's merely a "interpretation" ? If that were true, then the finger would point both ways: Your stance too, is *merely* an "interpretation". Right ?

.... I have no doubts people make mistakes and interpret things incorrectly. The mind is a very tricky organ. You can mis-remember things. You can misinterpret things.....

Great. Agreed. Ok, so why did you make your aforementioned claim then ?

.... But some things are just too peculiar to simply write-off......

There's not a spot on earth where similar "strange things" can't be woven around innocuous mundane things. That .... if you get glossy-eyed enough, you couldn't likewise begin to weave fabulous "what if?" scenarios, around random "mysterious" things. I have no doubt, that if I went into my backyard (1 acre in Monterey, CA), that ... given enough time and speculations (add in some local legends and conjectures) that I couldn't weave a similar story. AND EVEN GET IT INTO THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER to further-substantiate it.

If you'd like a true local example of how such "newspaper worthy" stories, launched a local legend, I can let you know such-an-example. And even well-meaning intelligent people went "looking for it", despite the innocuous explanation that would/could have shown "no treasure".

.... talk about such silly hypotheticals, ....

Interesting that only counter explanations get labeled as "hypothetical". Yet notions of "treasure" can't be labeled as hypothetical or "opinion" . Convenient, eh ?

....People died trying locate a treasure or an answer to OI and you are saying, it was all part of a hoax or a bad interpretation of the available facts? I wouldn't risk my life for either. Would you?.....

This is along the lines of "where there is smoke, there is fire" line-of-reasoning. Right ? Ie.: there HAS to be something there, otherwise .... all those people wouldn't be looking for it. Sinking $$ into it, risking their lives for it, etc.... Am I understanding you correctly ? If so, I would be more-than-happy to discuss whether-or-not that validates any given claim, as necessarily being a given "true".

.... to whether there is a treasure or not. That depends on a person's belief now doesn't it. .....

No. I doesn't depend on a "person's belief". That would make truth or error subjective. Instead of objective. "Truth" does not depend on whether or not persons "believe" in it, or not. Truth depends on whether it's true or not. Ie.: Objective, not subjective.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... reported seeing leprechauns on several occasions. Sometimes even taking their family car out for a joy ride. I kid you not.

Haha, ok, then how about using Unicorns as an example of something that's "off the radar" and "silly superstition". ?

 

[releventchair]

Haha, ok, then how about using Unicorns as an example of something that's "off the radar" and "silly superstition". ?

Weighing up to 5 tons , one of these could spoil a detecting hunt...

https://www.sciencealert.com/were-unicorns-real-fossilised-skull-reveals-siberian-date-last

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Weighing up to 5 tons , one of these could spoil a detecting hunt...

https://www.sciencealert.com/were-unicorns-real-fossilised-skull-reveals-siberian-date-last

Yup. And someone on T'net will suggest that they are still alive. Yet hiding and elusive to cameras. Thus we can not use Unicorns as an example of something "beyond the pale" or "off the radar" , for purposes of illustration. I give up. Is there ANYTHING that's strictly folklore and admitted-by-all, to be make-believe ??

 

[Stretch Da Truth]

Did you guys hear about the Roman coin, dated AD 100-ish, that was found by an MD'r in a Monterey CA old-town demolition site tearout ?

Proves the Romans were in CA after dropping a sword in the bay by Oak Island!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Did you guys hear about the Roman coin, dated AD 100-ish, that was found by an MD'r in a Monterey CA old-town demolition site tearout ?

Proves the Romans were in CA after dropping a sword in the bay by Oak Island!

Yup. Heaven forbid that someone might explain it as a pocket loss by someone in modern times. I even knew a guy who found a seated quarter in the dry-sand of Carmel, CA beach, while angling for clad and jewelry. How did he know it was a modern pocket loss ? It was still in the plastic sleeve with the coin-store price on it . Doh !

And reminds of the archies in the Pacific northwest (OR ? WA?) who were digging in some pre-contact Indian midden sites up there. Lo & behold they found a Chinese cash coin. They had it translated, and found the date to be something like 1600's. They were BESIDES THEMSELVES WITH GLEE ! Believing/thinking that they'd found proof that the Chinese were plying the Pac. NW coast as early as the 1600s.


But if they'd asked ANY md'r around here, they would have learned that the dates on those cash coins have NOTHING to do with when they were circulated or carried to America. Like .... apparently they were stored in Barrells in China, and not broken open for distribution till long-distance travel or whatever, up-to- centuries later. So those silly coins show up in gold rush sites, and china-town sites all over western states, with dates back to even the 1500s. Yet clearly in later contexts.

But none of that mattered. It still made its way into respectable archie journals, as a "great mystery" blah blah.

 

[releventchair]

Yup. And someone on T'net will suggest that they are still alive. Yet hiding and elusive to cameras. Thus we can not use Unicorns as an example of something "beyond the pale" or "off the radar" , for purposes of illustration. I give up. Is there ANYTHING that's strictly folklore and admitted-by-all, to be make-believe ??

World Peace!

 

[Robot]

What Do All The Nay Sayers... Not See In This Picture?

The Curse of Oak Island, ...Season 40..

All the Nay Sayers who state that you cannot dig a hole near water without flooding...Look how close to water this hole has been dug...Any water in it?

 

[xaos]

Sorry, but that is the lined tailings pond for the project.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Firstly, a person's interpretation of evidence is just that. Their interpretation. When several people agree on that same interpretation, it becomes factual (regardless if it's true). I have no doubts people make mistakes and interpret things incorrectly. The mind is a very tricky organ. You can mis-remember things. You can misinterpret things.

You are confusing assumptions and popular opinion with facts or truth. "Facts" are information that is proven to be true. "Truth" is what exists in accordance with facts and reality. Both vastly different than opinions.