Season 4

[n2mini]

Singlestack-- Apparently alot of folks disagree with you and have been disagreeing with you for hundreds of years. Doesn't make it true but hard to believe everyone else was wrong.

.
Fred Nolan surveyed the cross, so I believe him. I'd think there is paperwork on that somewhere and that SHOULD be proof enough as to where they are and line up. Granted that doesn't mean that they mean anything just that their location has been documented... No disputing that. Not sure what proof you need...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Quisp]

Fred Nolan surveyed the cross, so I believe him. I'd think there is paperwork on that somewhere and that SHOULD be proof enough as to where they are and line up. Granted that doesn't mean that they mean anything just that their location has been documented... No disputing that. Not sure what proof you need...

Proof is Proof. It's not saying there is proof. It's not hear-say, legends, stories or forum posts. Show me a survey map with the stones precisely lined up to within 1 percent, but also show me the other stones that are on the island that were disregarded. He must have mapped all the stones before he realized that some of them lined up to make a cross.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Singlestack-- Apparently alot of folks disagree with you and have been disagreeing with you for hundreds of years. Doesn't make it true but hard to believe everyone else was wrong.

So far Singlestack has "hundreds of years" of statistics in his favor that nothing is there. "Everyone else" does not include the billions of people on Earth who don't believe there is any treasure there vs. a few million, perhaps, who believe there is.

 

[alec]

Proof is Proof. It's not saying there is proof. It's not hear-say, legends, stories or forum posts. Show me a survey map with the stones precisely lined up to within 1 percent, but also show me the other stones that are on the island that were disregarded. He must have mapped all the stones before he realized that some of them lined up to make a cross.

WoW! Nothing like wanting a perfect world scenario. What you're saying is that when you go to a treasure site and find rock markers then there can't be any other rocks/stones around because you have to ignore those in order to use the actual markers which means you're skewing the results because you not using things that aren't actual markers. Makes complete sense to me! I'm guessing you don't do much field work in treasure hunting.

I would agree that proof is proof and just hearing it on the internet or somewhere else isn't proof however, this discussion is about a place that none of us have personally been to nor have any of us actually worked the site so getting the definitive proof you are wanting is damn near impossible. Playing devils advocate is a good thing when treasure hunting just so that you aren't chasing imaginary clues however, again, we are discussing something that none of us have any personal, on site experience with so we are left to use what we can glean from a TV show, the internet and books to continue the discussion. The "proof" or evidence within those realms is overwhelming that the cross was laid out by man to be used for something specific.

Here's a drawing I took from the internet. No, it's not Nolan's original survey but that's not available.

 

[ILikeTreasureStories]

Proof is Proof. It's not saying there is proof. It's not hear-say, legends, stories or forum posts. Show me a survey map with the stones precisely lined up to within 1 percent, but also show me the other stones that are on the island that were disregarded. He must have mapped all the stones before he realized that some of them lined up to make a cross.

"The distances along the stem of the Cross of 294ft,429ft and 147ft are those proposed by Petter Amundsen, differing from the survey made by Fred Nolan of 293ft,429ft and 145ft respectively."

Those are the measurements of the two professional surveys done on Nolan's Cross. Not too much difference considering the terrain they had to measure across. I know, I have presented no proof. But I will assure you this is not like the Telephone Game. The point of the Telephone Game is that by the time the last person gets the message, it has changed so much from the original message that it is humorous. All of the clues in the Oak Island story have remained the same for 150+years. The distances in between the stones has not changed. I've seen 100 different sources that all say the same thing. 90 foot stone. Same story. Flood drains. Same story. Piece of parchment with "vi". Same story. What part of the story has changed? The theories? Theories are always evolving based on new evidence provided. I know that only a million pounds of gold is evidence enough for you, Jeff of PA and SW, but for some of us, hand cut wood carbon dated to the 17th century is a huge fu##ing clue!! Only to be cut down with the juvenile response that "It's impossible to dig under sea-level." Even though a 140 foot deep shaft was sunk on Oak Island in the 1860s. Completely dry to that depth. Mpoeng mine in South Africa is 2.5 miles deep underground and is scheduling to go twice as deep. Completely dry. I understand gullible. I don't believe in global warming. I think people that do are gullible. I just don't see what reason on earth you would have to question these guys' figures. What profit is to be made? Surely anyone considering buying his land would have their own private survey done to verify his measurements.

So next week, more PROOF of human activity before 1790 will be presented with an archaeologist representing the province of Nova Scotia on site.

"What's that? Proof? On Oak Island? Will Jeff of PA belittle everyone's intelligence by saying they planted the evidence? Does he understand something bigger than the diameter of the hole cannot be taken out of the hole? Therefore will always be room for someone to cry, hoax? Does he realize the only way he can be convinced is if he was on site? Will SW use more than the 8 words he usually uses to convince others it was staged? Will quisp demand an unrealistic amount of evidence in order to prove to him, even if the Oak Island community is in 99% agreement of the findings? Tune in Tuesday night, as undeniable proof gets denied, and doubters make even more unrealistic demands."

xxoo

 

[alec]

So far Singlestack has "hundreds of years" of statistics in his favor that nothing is there. "Everyone else" does not include the billions of people on Earth who don't believe there is any treasure there vs. a few million, perhaps, who believe there is.

You could also add to that the people that don't think buried treasure exists at all or that all treasure hunters are stupid dreamers that will never find anything. Try telling that to someone like Mel Fisher.

 

[Raparee]

All of the clues in the Oak Island story have remained the same for 150+years. The distances in between the stones has not changed. I've seen 100 different sources that all say the same thing. 90 foot stone. Same story. Flood drains. Same story. Piece of parchment with "vi". Same story.

Unfortunately a lot of the accepted facts of the OI 'mystery' aren't really based on anything. 90' stone? Let's see it, so we can verify the engravings on it. I mean, it was supposed to have been part of somebody's fireplace, was supposed to have been used at a book binder, and yet no one thought to get a rubbing of it? The entire story of the code on the stone is very sketchy to someone reading it with an open mind.

Flood drains? None have been found in the more than 200 years of excavating, and yet their existence is taken as gospel. Parchment? Links of gold chain? Let's see them.

Even the origin story is false, despite 99% of the OI community agreeing with it. "Three boys row over to OI in response to seeing some lights". Fact: the three were grown men, and they already owned land on the island.

If we can't believe the origin of the legend of the 'treasure', how credible is the rest of it?

 

[alec]

"If we can't believe the origin of the legend of the 'treasure', how credible is the rest of it?"

Hmmmmm, you believe in the internet don't you? Al Gore invented it you know, or did he?

There are treasure legends everywhere, all over the world. Are all of the legends absolutely true? Nope! Is there any basis in fact to the legends? Probably, almost all legends have at least a grain of truth in them. Should it keep someone from trying to prove the legend is real? Definitely not!! There is ample evidence that something happened underground on oak island centuries ago. Is it treasure? Is it still there? Only time (and money) will tell. Treasure hunting is inherently a dreamers domain. Some dreams come true, others do not but that can't stop you from dreaming and wanting to figure out the mystery. Maybe the mystery on Oak Island has nothing to do with treasure at all but the evidence says there is a mystery there.

 

[n2mini]

Apparently even those that do not believe there is or was treasure on the island are either bored to death every Tuesday night orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr they have some doubt in their belief or they WOULD NOT BE WATCHING THE SHOW... I'm guessing that the brothers have seen Nolan's survey and believe it to be real, since so far they have never mentioned needing to re-survey those rocks to make sure they are where Nolan says they are... and with them redoing what others have done over the years I'd actually think they would have them surveyed just to see. Would be one of the cheapest things they've done on the island actually. Granted some of them have somewhat been moved over the years with people thinking maybe something is buried under them and depending on where each point on each rock it is measured to and from there will be some error there which most on here would use to say it's all a hoax.. There is no way I can prove any of it is true just like I know there is no way for anyone to prove it is not true other then so far no treasure has been found, that we know of, unless you believe the Mcginnis family..
I guess since there are no pictures of what the original 3 boys saw to make them start digging and as they dug down to find the different levels with the rounded logs every so often that didn't happen either? Again I can't prove that ever happened either... but all the searchers that have ever been there believe it to be true. Again that doesn't mean there was treasure there..

 

[ILikeTreasureStories]

[QUOTE=Raparee;5296225]Unfortunately a lot of the accepted facts of the OI 'mystery' aren't really based on anything. 90' stone? Let's see it, so we can verify the engravings on it. I mean, it was supposed to have been part of somebody's fireplace, was supposed to have been used at a book binder, and yet no one thought to get a rubbing of it? The entire story of the code on the stone is very sketchy to someone reading it with an open mind.

Flood drains? None have been found in the more than 200 years of excavating, and yet their existence is taken as gospel. Parchment? Links of gold chain? Let's see them.

Even the origin story is false, despite 99% of the OI community agreeing with it. "Three boys row over to OI in response to seeing some lights". Fact: the three were grown men, and they already owned land on the island.

If we can't believe the origin of the legend of the 'treasure', how credible is the rest of it?[/QUOTE]


Flood tunnels have been found. You choose not to believe the accounts, or have not read them. The 90' stone was etched by a college professor of Halifax(?). You choose not to believe him, or have not read the accounts. The three boys were boys when they discovered it and started digging. Thy were grown men by the time they had the funds to buy the properties, and recruit help. You choose not to believe or have not read the accounts. The parchment has been fully documented and analyzed as materials used in the 16th century. You choose not to believe or have not read the accounts. There are many, many, rumored findings on Oak Island that I never talk about because there is no documentation. I'm not here to present you with my findings. Everything I know is readily available on the internet or libraries. Go find it yourself. I'm not, however, just going to let you get away with these definitive statements that any horses ass can say. You don't believe, I get it. Just say that. Don't indirectly call me an idiot for choosing to believe the accounts. What about the wood carbon dated to the 17th century? Just some Dunfield diggings right? Dunfield documented his diggings and are readily available. All four shafts the Laginas dropped reached areas Dunfield never reached. That was the point, for anyone paying attention. You choose not to believe even the modern accounts, so how can I take you seriously?

Listen, archaeology was literally non-existent until the late 19th century. The clues that you find important now, meant nothing to the treasure hunters of old. In the early days of Egyptian archaeology, mummies were sold off in private auctions to private citizens to be unwrapped at social parties, because many ancient "trinkets" were in the wrappings. So much history lost, and scattered in that one example of early archaeology. I think Chappel, in particular, did a tremendous job of preserving data about Oak Island that he wasn't obliged to do. The notion that everyone before our modern time of computers was a buffoon, irritates me to no end. There is an indirect notion here that no one before generation snowflake was capable of telling the truth. Including Dan Blankenship! The poor guy has mountains of evidence of human activity under Oak Island from depths of 10'-240' and everyone indirectly calls him a liar. Yes, it would've been ideal if the money-pit was treated as a modern archaeological site. Hind-site 20/20 much?

 

[Raparee]

There is ample evidence that something happened underground on oak island centuries ago. Is it treasure? Is it still there? Only time (and money) will tell.

We have stories suggesting that something happened underground on Oak Island centuries ago. We have no evidence of it. The only evidence of anything interesting ever happening on OI are the finger drains. Not because they are connected to some imagined treasure, but because they represent an aspect of some industry in Nova Scotia's history. Unfortunately, the treasure hunters, with their "dreaming and wanting to figure out the mystery", with their bulldozers and their dynamite, have made it difficult (if not impossible) to actually learn the truth.

 

[alec]

We have stories suggesting that something happened underground on Oak Island centuries ago. We have no evidence of it. The only evidence of anything interesting ever happening on OI are the finger drains. Not because they are connected to some imagined treasure, but because they represent an aspect of some industry in Nova Scotia's history. Unfortunately, the treasure hunters, with their "dreaming and wanting to figure out the mystery", with their bulldozers and their dynamite, have made it difficult (if not impossible) to actually learn the truth.

I would refer you to the post just before yours, there is plenty of evidence that something man made happened underground on Oak Island centuries ago. Was much of that destroyed? Sure, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there or there still isn't something else there. Are you just going to ignore the timbers found at depths below where any other excavation has happened or do you believe trees grow underground?

 

[Raparee]

I'm packing up to head out of town for the next few days, so I'll only address one of your misconceptions right now.

The three boys were boys when they discovered it and started digging. Thy were grown men by the time they had the funds to buy the properties, and recruit help. You choose not to believe or have not read the accounts.

Daniel McGinnis (1758-1827). In 1788 McGinnis moved to Oak Island and bought Lot 28. Thereafter he bought Lot 23 in 1790, Lot 27 in 1791, and Lot 1 in 1794. McGinnis was listed as a “farmer” in both the 1791 and 1794 poll tax listings for Lunenburg County’s “heads of households.”

John Smith (1775-1857). Listed on the 1794 Lunenburg County poll tax list as a farmer on Oak Island, therefore a “head of household.”

Anthony Vaughan (1750-1835). Bought Lot 14 in 1781, after which he bought Lots 15 and 16 in 1785.

According to the story, the "Money Pit" was located in 1795, making McGinnis 37 years old, Smith 20 years old, and Vaughan 45 years old. All this information is in public record.

The facts are out there if you choose to read the accounts.

 

[alec]

Stay safe on your trip! I hope you're not going treasure hunting, you'll probably come home empty handed!

 

[ILikeTreasureStories]

I'm packing up to head out of town for the next few days, so I'll only address one of your misconceptions right now.



Daniel McGinnis (1758-1827). In 1788 McGinnis moved to Oak Island and bought Lot 28. Thereafter he bought Lot 23 in 1790, Lot 27 in 1791, and Lot 1 in 1794. McGinnis was listed as a “farmer” in both the 1791 and 1794 poll tax listings for Lunenburg County’s “heads of households.”

John Smith (1775-1857). Listed on the 1794 Lunenburg County poll tax list as a farmer on Oak Island, therefore a “head of household.”

Anthony Vaughan (1750-1835). Bought Lot 14 in 1781, after which he bought Lots 15 and 16 in 1785.

According to the story, the "Money Pit" was located in 1795, making McGinnis 37 years old, Smith 20 years old, and Vaughan 45 years old. All this information is in public record.

The facts are out there if you choose to read the accounts.

Nice choice. The one that has nothing to do with any evidence in question. The one that I never brought up, but you did as an afterthought. Have a nice trip, horses ass.

 

[skybolt]

You could also add to that the people that don't think buried treasure exists at all or that all treasure hunters are stupid dreamers that will never find anything. Try telling that to someone like Mel Fisher.

Not to mention the 3 chests Nolan supposedly found in the swamp, but no one bothered asking to see them before he sadly passed away. In 50 years time this story will be accepted as truth, since it was mentioned enough times.

 

[etex]

Stay safe on your trip! I hope you're not going treasure hunting, you'll probably come home empty handed!

Maybe he will find a Roman sword, they are like pull tabs up there I hear

 

[Raparee]

The three boys were boys when they discovered it and started digging. Thy were grown men by the time they had the funds to buy the properties, and recruit help. You choose not to believe or have not read the accounts.

Post #1011. ...and you claim never to have brought it up?

 

[jeff of pa]

Nice choice. The one that has nothing to do with any evidence in question. The one that I never brought up, but you did as an afterthought. Have a nice trip, horses ass.

watch what you say and how you say it

 

[ILikeTreasureStories]

watch what you say and how you say it

Got it. I have to indirectly call people stupid like you do. PC. Got it.