Season 4

[alec]

I'm sure it will come out once the non disclosure agreements are no longer binding.

But until then we're supposed to take your word for it? It seems like you aren't playing by your own rules of needing undeniable proof for everyone to see.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Montclaire]

We have no idea what testing was performed by Dr. Verderame to reach her conclusion, or what she would say in response to a conflicting mass spec report. The answer would be more testing by an independent lab.

 

[Bud Aurum]

I'm sure it will come out once the non disclosure agreements are no longer binding.

Hey Raparee,
Apparently "now" the disclosure statements are no longer binding since you have been disclosed... or we have a blabby historian....
Your Bud Aurum

 

[Raparee]

But until then we're supposed to take your word for it? It seems like you aren't playing by your own rules of needing undeniable proof for everyone to see.

Not really. I'm not making any statements. I'm not making any declarations or trying to convince you of anything. I'm simply repeating what someone involved (in some way) with the show has been saying.

 

[alec]

Not really. I'm not making any statements. I'm not making any declarations or trying to convince you of anything. I'm simply repeating what someone involved (in some way) with the show has been saying.

Isn't that the exact thing you've been railing against all along? Somebody puts it on the internet and it can't be real because there is no real proof of where it came from or someone from the show said it but you can't believe them because they are affiliated with the show?

What happened to the proof you require for everyone else?

 

[Raparee]

Hey Raparee,
Apparently "now" the disclosure statements are no longer binding since you have been disclosed... or we have a blabby historian....
Your Bud Aurum

Hi Bud.

According to the "blabby historian":

" I'd comment on the testing results but I can't because of someone else's NDA. I'm very very disappointed in the discrepancy between what I was told about the object last month - ie. testing high for manganese, making it modern steel- and what I'm hearing they said last night. Very disappointed."

So he himself isn't bound by a non-disclosure agreement, but respecting someone else's.

 

[Dbuck]

Not necessarily wrong. Just very biased.

If the button was British Military it would be known to collectors. Someone here could identify it in the "What Is It" forum in a day.

Did she show an example a bracket similar to the one found in use in a chest of known age? I could not find any similar image on the Interweb looking at old chests and storage lockers.

Did we get unbiased second opinions?

The Cross perhaps she is qualified to authenticate. The cross was brought TO Oak Island a few years ago by someone who has a family connection to the island. Perhaps it was found there.

And that looked an awful lot like a railroad spike to me. I've seen dozens. There are a dozen in my barn right now that look identical.

The button was stated as saying Plated and would normally say gilt if it was legible. Let's have some button 'experts' way in here then.

The bracket was said to be more likely from a ship. It may have been bent and actually not a bracket but used flat.

Why say she is perhaps qualified to authenticate the cross? Her expertise seems to be most prevalent with art and jewelry as you said.

The expert gave a very detailed explanation of how she determined what type of spike it specifically was. She said it was similar to what they have found from Spanish galleons on the Treasure coast.

The latest finds will be further analyzed. I hope they have more information on them in next weeks show.

 

[Dbuck]

Hi Bud.

According to the "blabby historian":

" I'd comment on the testing results but I can't because of someone else's NDA. I'm very very disappointed in the discrepancy between what I was told about the object last month - ie. testing high for manganese, making it modern steel- and what I'm hearing they said last night. Very disappointed."
So he himself isn't bound by a non-disclosure agreement, but respecting someone else's.

Repartee, this seems to be a very important discrepancy. Would you please comment further when you are able to watch last nights episode?

Thanks in advance

 

[Keith Jackson]

Due to my involvement in a car group - I got to know one of the people on a reality show (it's one of those family business type series). At least with their show ... the next seasons contract was never inked right at he end of the filming of a seasons episodes. The production company and network wanted to analyze the initial ratings of the first few aired episodes before committing to a next season.

Would that happen to be the car show involving some rather "big boys" from Eastern Ohio?

 

[alec]

Hi Bud.

According to the "blabby historian":

" I'd comment on the testing results but I can't because of someone else's NDA. I'm very very disappointed in the discrepancy between what I was told about the object last month - ie. testing high for manganese, making it modern steel- and what I'm hearing they said last night. Very disappointed."

So he himself isn't bound by a non-disclosure agreement, but respecting someone else's.

Well that makes all the difference in the world! You're quoting some unnamed "historian" who is repeating something somebody else told him about an object he apparently has never tested himself or maybe never even seen except on TV but he can't really comment because somebody else has an NDA.

 

[Raparee]

Isn't that the exact thing you've been railing against all along? Somebody puts it on the internet and it can't be real because there is no real proof of where it came from or someone from the show said it but you can't believe them because they are affiliated with the show?

What happened to the proof you require for everyone else?

I think you're reaching here, Alec, to score a touch. I stated that there was some frustration regarding the dating of the spike. Here is the proof to support that:

" I'd comment on the testing results but I can't because of someone else's NDA. I'm very very disappointed in the discrepancy between what I was told about the object last month - ie. testing high for manganese, making it modern steel- and what I'm hearing they said last night. Very disappointed.

...and...

"Ok. So she dated it [the spike] by eyeball yet the metallurgy says something totally different. They obviously chose to go with her eyeball and not the science."

...and...

"And mass spectrometry clearly showed that it was modern steel with high levels of maganese. That's obviously why the producers chose to go with the appraiser and not the scientist."

It seems like this person, who is close to the show, has some issues with the dating of the spike.

Whether this guys claim is correct is another matter.

 

[Keith Jackson]

If the button was British Military it would be known to collectors. Someone here could identify it in the "What Is It" forum in a day.

I don't have a screen shot of the button they found on the island, but if someone does, here is a good place to start looking. It is an online database of early British Military buttons. Although, with as long a history as England has, "Early" may be too early for what they found.

http://asahelena.wixsite.com/militarybuttons

 

[Raparee]

Repartee, this seems to be a very important discrepancy. Would you please comment further when you are able to watch last nights episode?

Thanks in advance

Hi DBuck,

I really don't have any info to offer, and am just repeating what I am hearing from local people. I'll certainly keep you updated.

 

[HenryWaltonJonesJr]

I'll take that old timer detectorist opinion of the spike, that he called right away, over most "experts" anyway.

I'm also curious about the button, seems to fall in line with the British coins found at detector depth. I'm not sure at what depth it was found (from the spoils) compared to the "metal" they were finding. To me its more likely they used some virgin ground when filling in one of the "big" holes and it ended up way underground. Seems more likely than a British officer ever being 140 down digging with his men looking for or hiding treasure.

 

[Raparee]

Well that makes all the difference in the world! You're quoting some unnamed "historian" who is repeating something somebody else told him about an object he apparently has never tested himself or maybe never even seen except on TV but he can't really comment because somebody else has an NDA.

This unnamed historian is one of the two partners in the Oak Island Compendium... Kel Hancock. The second partner is Doug Crowell.

 

[Stretch Da Truth]

Do you know who she works for? The History Channel.

Dr. Lori | Ph.D. Antiques Appraiser | History channel

She graduated from Penn State with a Ph.D in Art History.

Good find. That is kind of like being "tar & feathered"

Didn't the Doc say she used comparison to help date items? Like well this looks like that and that is from xxxx so that would make this item from xxxx.

 

[n2mini]

Those of you who's answer to everything found is "how do we know it really came from OI" Well if we all go by that kind of thinking we'll never have an answer. Even if they film it during the show some of ya'll would say it was planted. IF what the sisters say is true and their great great great grand father did find the cross in the money pit there is no way for anyone to prove it now.. No video being shot of course and even if it was there again ya'll would say it was planted. There is no way for me or anyone to prove to you that any of it is true at this point with the way ya'll are thinking..Maybe when the Brothers leave you could get a show on there to continue the search but if you even remotely wanted to do that, it would mean you think there is a chance that atleast some of it is true or why bother... You can't prove that a treasure was never there or already found. Can't be done!!!

 

[alec]

I think you're reaching here, Alec, to score a touch. I stated that there was some frustration regarding the dating of the spike. Here is the proof to support that:

" I'd comment on the testing results but I can't because of someone else's NDA. I'm very very disappointed in the discrepancy between what I was told about the object last month - ie. testing high for manganese, making it modern steel- and what I'm hearing they said last night. Very disappointed.

...and...

"Ok. So she dated it [the spike] by eyeball yet the metallurgy says something totally different. They obviously chose to go with her eyeball and not the science."

...and...

"And mass spectrometry clearly showed that it was modern steel with high levels of maganese. That's obviously why the producers chose to go with the appraiser and not the scientist."

It seems like this person, who is close to the show, has some issues with the dating of the spike.

Whether this guys claim is correct is another matter.

But that's the whole point. You could be completely correct about everything you say however you are applying a double standard to evidence as presented on this forum. Your historian said "between what I was told" and "what I'm hearing they said". So his information appears to be from a third party with no documentation to prove what he is saying, just that somebody is affiliated with the show. That would be like me saying I talked to a cameraman from the show and he saw the Laginas bring up 118 gold bars during a dig but an NDA keeps him from talking about it until they decide to put it on the show. THIS IS COMPLETELY UNTRUE however, it would be information from the same type of source you are using but you and others would DEMAND proof wouldn't you? You wouldn't take my word from a third party that heard the information from somebody else that it actually happened and is fact would you?

I just see a double standard at play here and think you are unwilling to admit that.

 

[Eldo]

Do you know who she works for? The History Channel.

Dr. Lori | Ph.D. Antiques Appraiser | History channel

She graduated from Penn State with a Ph.D in Art History.

They really made some mistakes showing things that were obvious as fakes already......all to promote the show while fronting their interests as legitimate explorations and

Especially the Hooked X on the piece of clay....that was another 'Zenith' to try to pursue the show further and the fakery they used to justify their excavation of the topsoil....you see the Archaeologist there on that one?

Anytime they are conducting their operation outside of the standards for the laws concerning troves of this nature, or environmental protection, we can tell they are planting evidence to allow them to continue under their special "Travel and Tourism" bargains with the Govt in Nova Scotia.....how they flip flop the show is calculated to produce a shroud over the "Mystery" so they can confuse everyone.

Nova Scotia is the culprit funding this menagerie......tying themselves to the operation in hopes they can find something to put on display.

Canada doesn't look at it the same. They aren't that desperate for attention of this kind. They have extensive records available of the foundation of New France.......which you have never seen a cent of....

Sinclair this Sinclair Templar that...... drunk on "Crown" acting like clowns......

How is there any interest in travel and tourism around this site? There's nothing to see, and the place is practically a demolition site after the "Tubing" runs.....

Do visitors ride the wire into the money pit like its a ride at the fair?

I was bouncing pits 3 times this deep when I was 16 in the hills of TN, AL, and GA.........and that's travel and tourism......Parks and Recreation sort of stuff.....outdoor education and wilderness survival training....and a focus on vertical rescue

You don't see any of that when you are bouncing off the walls from the "excitement" they try to create while lies are thrown out by this Cabal

.....you wont get anything of value from journeying there in the winter (a long one) and their window of "Tourism" is very limited, to be able to see a construction site run by a yahoo and his bro?

So what's the real perk of this Tourism Agreement?

Someone is being bribed or is getting a kickback, that's the perk

You want to help the effort and you do work in research, to discover they are a lie and that every part of their operation there is just that......

Even the elements of the Govt that are supposed to protect these sites are biased now because of what fantasies they have woven in their webs.

This is sabotage and a stall tactic portrayed until the remaining shareholders kick the bucket.....it's sickening.......Poor Dan Blankenship.

 

[Bud Aurum]

---

This unnamed historian is one of the two partners in the Oak Island Compendium... Kel Hancock. The second partner is Doug Crowell.

Raparee Bud,

If what you say is true... and they have an item identified by Dr. Lori as 14th century after lab tests already dated it much more modern accurately, then the History channel
is setting itself up for failure if proven.
Now we have "Fake TV" to go along with "Fake News".
Your Bud Aurum