sasquash
Sr. Member
I have to ask ...
Someone had read his book ?
Someone had read his book ?
Randall Sullivan's book
- Thread starter sasquash
- Start date
I'm reading it now. Only on chapter 14 and it's all history of the previous attempts. I have learned a few things I didn't know but nothing earth shattering. His interviews with Dave Restall, Lee Lamb, Dan Blankenship and Fred Nolan are interesting but like I said, not earth shattering. I'll try to remember to post a review when I'm done.
I'm a bit more than half way after reading more last night. The answer to this is no. Probably the worst thing about the book. It doesn't challenge anything, just like the show. The author just takes as fact that there even was a 90 foot stone or oak logs every 10 feet, or that there are actual flood traps and box drains etc. It doesn't question anything. It's just a recount of past digs and then gets in to the various theories. I have no doubt that Sullivan will make some bank from people that watch the show but for anyone that has spent time researching more than the OI fluff, it's not a good book. That's my partial review at this point. I'll finish it and keep an open mind but that should answer your question.
So I just finished Sullivan's book. I'll take back a few things that I said earlier. In the latter half of the book, he does challenge many of the theories as well as how the show and Lagina's have handled some things. He isn't disparaging but does at least share his own opinions on some matters. For example, he's quite down on Zena Halpern and states that he quickly learned that he should do more listening then trying to share his opinions while on the island. That being said, he doesn't challenge much of the Oak Island mystery itself. Like I said previously, he seems to just assume that the stone is real and had markings, that there were oak timbers every 10 feet etc.
The book is laid out with a pretty decent history of all of the previous attempts. Then covers primarily the Templar, Spanish, Free Mason and Petter theory. He spends less time on the less accepted theories but does cover many of them briefly. He spends most of his time on the Bacon theory including some weird delving in to alchemy which was somewhat interesting.
He then discusses for a chapter the "negative vibes" people get from the island including some recent encounters people have had including a psychic. Expressing himself that he has been creeped out by the island and recounts a story from Marty where he heard a loud shriek from the money pit area when he was alone there one evening.
Overall, it's a pretty short book that spends most of the time on variations of the Francis Bacon theory and has a pretty good history of what's happened on the island to date. Other than some "behind the scenes" look, it doesn't add anything new to the discussion and is just rehashes of the many things we've all heard before.
A small thing that bugged me and is indicative of my overall feeling that he didn't question much or add to the discussion is in the back of the book, he has a timeline and pictures of artifacts and people etc. For Samuel Ball, he uses the same "Memories of Liberia" artwork that the show used for many years. Which..is fine but you should at least put an asterisk by it and say "not an actual picture of Mr. Ball". I would love to see a book that is just facts and not filled with blind faith and re-use of previous renditions. That's how future historians are going to get confused and not know what was actually real or not.
Last example of why I didn't like his style or "research". In the Templar section, he has a good alternate reason as to why the mi'kmaq flag could be the same as the Templar flag. I have never seen any proof that that is actually even a mi'kmaq flag. I've looked for that for years. If there is proof that they use or used that flag, I'd love to see it and I think a decent researcher would have covered that in their book. By first approaching everything assuming it's not true and if it is, cite the sources they found.
At any rate, it's a decent read if you're interested in OI but don't expect to get much new info from it. If you are a big fan of the show, it's probably worth a read as it does describe quite a bit behind the scenes over the past few years.
The book is laid out with a pretty decent history of all of the previous attempts. Then covers primarily the Templar, Spanish, Free Mason and Petter theory. He spends less time on the less accepted theories but does cover many of them briefly. He spends most of his time on the Bacon theory including some weird delving in to alchemy which was somewhat interesting.
He then discusses for a chapter the "negative vibes" people get from the island including some recent encounters people have had including a psychic. Expressing himself that he has been creeped out by the island and recounts a story from Marty where he heard a loud shriek from the money pit area when he was alone there one evening.
Overall, it's a pretty short book that spends most of the time on variations of the Francis Bacon theory and has a pretty good history of what's happened on the island to date. Other than some "behind the scenes" look, it doesn't add anything new to the discussion and is just rehashes of the many things we've all heard before.
A small thing that bugged me and is indicative of my overall feeling that he didn't question much or add to the discussion is in the back of the book, he has a timeline and pictures of artifacts and people etc. For Samuel Ball, he uses the same "Memories of Liberia" artwork that the show used for many years. Which..is fine but you should at least put an asterisk by it and say "not an actual picture of Mr. Ball". I would love to see a book that is just facts and not filled with blind faith and re-use of previous renditions. That's how future historians are going to get confused and not know what was actually real or not.
Last example of why I didn't like his style or "research". In the Templar section, he has a good alternate reason as to why the mi'kmaq flag could be the same as the Templar flag. I have never seen any proof that that is actually even a mi'kmaq flag. I've looked for that for years. If there is proof that they use or used that flag, I'd love to see it and I think a decent researcher would have covered that in their book. By first approaching everything assuming it's not true and if it is, cite the sources they found.
At any rate, it's a decent read if you're interested in OI but don't expect to get much new info from it. If you are a big fan of the show, it's probably worth a read as it does describe quite a bit behind the scenes over the past few years.
etex
Bronze Member
What does he say about the Roman sword? 
What does he say about the Roman sword?
Zero mention of the sword. He does take a couple of subtle shots at Pulitzer, clearly not a fan of his 'work'.
This has surfaced previously as well but he does mention that both Rick and Marty separately grilled the producers about planting finds. They were worried the piece of 8 they found at the end of season one was planted. They were satisfied that it wasn't but told Prometheus that if they ever found out anything was planted, the show would be over immediately.
gazzahk
Bronze Member
- Nov 14, 2015
- 1,718
- 2,580
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
They seemed to have changed their minds with the stone...
Robot
Bronze Member
- Mar 10, 2014
- 2,039
- 1,740
- Primary Interest:
- Other
Last edited:
I'm not sure about that. I believe the stone was purchased from someone privately. It of course wasn't found at the old book bindery. That was pure television. But the stone itself is "legitimate", they just staged where they obtained it for whatever reason. It's a fine line and I don't like it but I also think it's a far cry from creating a fake stone and planting it. It's very possible that the stone they obtained was the stone shown in the book store window until 1909. It just never came from the money pit and was a creation of the Oak Island Association.
gazzahk
Bronze Member
- Nov 14, 2015
- 1,718
- 2,580
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
How do we know that?
They have not told us it came from a private collector. If there is no provenience for the stone it could of come from anywhere... Maybe the guy who sold it to them just made one in order to try to get some money from the Laginas. Maybe the TV show producers made it. How can we possibly trust that it is the one from the bookshop without the back story.
The fact that they are also lying about what initials have been reported on the stone also suggest that they do not really believe it is the original stone. Otherwise why not tell the truth.
If they are not willing to tell the truth of how they come in possession of the stone (or more to the point lie about it) why should anyone assume the cross was not also moved to make a better story.
I would love the stone to be real... But they are lying... Why? It makes zero sense if they believe it was the actual stone. They could of told the real story without revealing the persons name they got it from. They could of just said "we have come into possession of the stone but cannot reveal the source due to confidentiality agreement"
Everything else about the origin of there stone is now pure speculation... Who started the rumor is was purchased from a private collector?
Was it the show?
The point being they are lying and planting evidence... The stone was not found sitting in the shop basement.. Therefore it was planted... Right?
Top Member Reactions
-
3424 -
1940 -
1877 -
1121 -
1070 -
995 -
868 -
854 -
851 -
749 -
736 -
675 -
648 -
567 -
504 -
455 -
444 -
412 -
398 -
396
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest Discussions
-
-
THE Random Chat Thread - AKA "The RCT" - No shirt or shoes required - Open 24 / 7
- Latest: Treasure_Hunter
-
-
-
-
