Season 4

[Montclaire]

She has a website, anyone want to ask her?

Contact | Dr. Lori Ph.D. Antiques Appraiser

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Raparee]

...however you are applying a double standard to evidence as presented on this forum...

I didn't present any evidence to the forum, only the suggestion that the identification of the spike might be in dispute.

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.

You're right. Which is why I have been after him for any additional information that he can offer right now, and when, if ever, the actual report will be made public.

 

[alec]

I didn't present any evidence to the forum, only the suggestion that the identification of the spike might be in dispute.



You're right. Which is why I have been after him for any additional information that he can offer right now, and when, if ever, the actual report will be made public.

You'd make a really good politician!

 

[Raparee]

You'd make a really good politician!

YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!

 

[alec]

 

[Eldo]

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

Both Librarians

 

[MikeN]

They came up with a heavy 5" x 5"(each side) x 1/2" thick L angle bracket from a barn frame and their expert on coins, crosses, buttons and spikes identified it as a "part of a treasure chest". Also some 20th century hex nuts of about the right size for the bracket at about the same depth. Those were ignored.

View attachment 1417801

I thought that was strange also. She also used the words decorative, when clearly the effort to construct an object of such thickness would have been for a structural purpose. Also, she used the word "hinge" when there was no such function in that object. Thirdly, a quick view of treasure chests from that period shows that the decorative iron straps as typically seen were not even similar to that L Bracket, much less also having the bolt and nut of the type found.

There are rumors of nuts and bolts/screws going back to the 15th century - has anyone seen details of an old Spanish Galleon to know if they had such an L bracket and nuts / bolts?

 

[vpnavy]

You "experts" do realize that you are totally destroying one of my favorite shows! STOP IT!

 

[burlbark]

Are you talking of the internet experts watching a TV show and examining everything thru a 50'' TV screen. Not sure I'd call that an expert evaluation on anything... Where is everybody on here that said the cross was made this century and the loop was added maybe last week? Sure just because it's old and does fall within the right time frame doesn't mean it was found on OI... No one on here this morning is talking about it since what they claimed apparently is not true.. I'm not sure who that lady expert is and what her experience is to make her qualified to make the time frame statement but she did...

Hahahaha there used to be nothing more aggravating to me than seeing a made for TV expert discrediting intellectual facts. Not anymore. I sit and ponder where are education system went wrong and why TV has suddenly captivated the masses while destroying critical thinking.

She works for the Discovery Channel... no conflict of interest there

Oh yes I forgot... And there where emeralds in every hole that fell out. Without facets of course and no sign of being able to secure them.

 

[Eldo]

You "experts" do realize that you are totally destroying one of my favorite shows! STOP IT!

When are you gonna come up to Vermont and let me show you the trail of carvings and the Vault that this all ties into?

 

[gazzahk]

An interesting show... But still disappointing for what they do not tell us.

The Cross

I am glad to see the sisters finally being proved to be telling the truth.. This cross must have been an awesome looking piece of jewelry when it was studded with jewels. Still unsure of how she knew they were emeralds. I guess she has seen similar pieces before. But it must have been made by Spanish who had access to lots of different jewels. I do not imagine Aztecs were making crosses.

I was disappointed that the brothers authenticate the cross as be pre-treasure searchers but then simply ignore it. They do not revisit the claim that three chests were found. They mention other stuff found by Fred in the swamp but not the three chests. They do not ask about the other artifacts that are alleged to still exist from the hoard including gold coins. I think this is because this story does not fit there narrative of treasure still being there. The idea that treasure hiders would hide loot at 140+ feet but put three chests of treasure at 20ft is pretty hard to buy. If the original finders did find that treasure in the pit then the chances of more treasure being there are pretty poor. I find the descendants story the most plausible treasure story given on the show and they have ‘treasure’ to support it.

 

[MikeN]

On the plus side, there's the wood they're bringing up. Apparently all being dated to that era, as well as the black coloring (have they tested it as pitch?). Being able to locate 'something' is promising and they should be able to continuously expand the search area. But even if they brought up a gold bar, how would they excavate the entire area around the bottom of the 'can'? Eventually the area will collapse if honeycombed with too many holes.

And Smith Cove and the swamp could yet yield something.

 

[gazzahk]

The Metal finds

These finds are consistent with J.Steeles theory (outlined here)

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/oak-island/528709-alternative-theory-naval-stores-j-steele.html

It was interesting when Marty said the wood appeared to be coated in pine tar. Also they once gain found Charcoal. Marty on a previous episode (earlier season) had dismissed J.Steeles theory as lacking evidence. (Although Joys speculations as to why ‘chapels vault’ is so deep seem pretty far fetched). The British button also fits with her explanation of the Naval stores theory. It also seems that the expert collaborates that the British coins etc they found earlier where left by Sam Ball given that he worked for the British.

I do not know why they think they just had to give up. Surely they could of sent down a diver, sent down a elctro magnet, sent down a smaller claw, sent down a drill, airlifted the hole etc etc etc The decision to just give up is totally done because they want to have enough to do for a series 5 rather than because they had exhausted possibilities to explore what they have found. It is very unlikely the found a treasure chest full of treasure and only pulled out wood and metal and none of the alleged treasure.

 

[gazzahk]

What next
Surely they cannot really believe that a Spanish galleon is buried in the swamp. Even accepting the spike is from a Spanish ship this was found on the surface. How does a large metal nail rise to the surface of the swamp (on its own). The desire to dig a massive hole in the swamp seems like filler for a new series rather than a serious attempt to find anything.

I would think if they do want to properly explore that hole they will need to freeze the ground around the area and dig. This may mean they will need to remove the metal pipe they have put there (I imagine the machine that put it there can put it in reverse and remove it).

As for Smith cove (pretty sick of the bald guy – ie he thinks the finger drains are the flood tunnels).; If they want to search for flood tunnels then search for them. Bring in some ground penetrating radar and see if a tunnel exists or drill holes every 5 foot apart on where Dunfeild found the sump/well. Finding the already found finger drains will show absolutely nothing..

So next week show will tell us there plans. Which given what we have seen in the past will be mostly ignored when we get to next season..

As said an interesting show but also disappointing.

My view is still that the most likely story for the existence of treasure was it was taken the day the pit was found by the descendants.. All there other finds just support man was active in the area and do not support that treasure is still there. Even if this was loot buried by the British military THEY WOULD OF COME BACK AND GOT IT. So all they will find is empty boxes….

 

[gazzahk]

Hahahaha there used to be nothing more aggravating to me than seeing a made for TV expert discrediting intellectual facts. Not anymore. I sit and ponder where are education system went wrong and why TV has suddenly captivated the masses while destroying critical thinking.

She works for the Discovery Channel... no conflict of interest there

Oh yes I forgot... And there where emeralds in every hole that fell out. Without facets of course and no sign of being able to secure them.

Look my friend there is a time to just admit you were wrong. She is an expert that has put her reputation on the line. Your are someone that has seen a low resolution image of the cross. Your view was it was gold wire welded together. Clearly you were wrong...

 

[burlbark]

Look my friend there is a time to just admit you were wrong. She is an expert that has put her reputation on the line. Your are someone that has seen a low resolution image of the cross. Your view was it was gold wire welded together. Clearly you were wrong...

Look at your past posts and please compile them in a paper back for comic relief....

 

[gazzahk]

Look at your past posts and please compile them in a paper back for comic relief....

Ha ha.. I am glad I can give you a laugh. I have never tried to write a book (other than training manuals) as my writing skills are pretty crap..

 

[Eldo]

Good Stewards? Of A Great Mystery?

For Now The Island's Secrets Remain Hidden.....


......and the truth about Oak Island and it's curse are finally revealed......

WHAT A WRAP UP.....

They pulled up the metal mounting bracket that held a piece of machinery to a wooden beam.......

Guess where it came from......



something like that would be metal and mounted to the wood....they would have easily just removed the tank and left the mount bracket on a piece of wood and threw it into their pit after finishing.....they have been hitting wood at random levels each time claiming they hit the vault to find it was an old tore up piece of the breakdown of a site scaffolding from previous digs.....

If I remember correctly a Water Boiler Tank exploded and killed one searcher......that ruptured piece of metal they pulled up is testament to that death IMO

Here's how easily they know whats under their sites locations....and they even had to dig four times knowing this all from photos and layouts there on maps.....why dig just to hit previous shafts? to pull up wood that's why...



These are the Chapel and Hedden Shafts as known when the Restalls arrived......they are very obvious on survey maps that they are not showing so as to act like they are blindly digging.

....and they know they are on top of previous digs and excavations.....each one reburying the site afterwards....they know that there's nothing there and they want to stage a massive operation to inflate the value of their enterprise so it becomes a permanent leech off the canadian govt for their next season......

 

[gazzahk]

They pulled up the metal mounting bracket that held a piece of machinery to a wooden beam.......

Guess where it came from......

View attachment 1418036

something like that would be metal and mounted to the wood....they would have easily just removed the tank and left the mount bracket on a piece of wood and threw it into their pit after finishing...........

Yep... Pretty easy to believe that what they are finding is still remnants of previous searchers...

They will need to find some pretty convincing evidence that the metal they have found is from at least the 16th Centuary to support it was the remains of somebody that was not a treasure searcher...

Even then it could be the remains of a naval stores operation on the island rather then a treasure hoard...

 

[Skept]

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.

She has a Ph.D in Art History from Penn State. She is under hire of the History Channel. What's she going to say? "Nope, junk. Turn off the cameras and pack up, boys."

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

Hello, it's nice to meet you. I signed up after reading your posts accusing Dr. Lori of being coerced into a positive opinion--not this thread specifically, but currently the last post in "Another season. Is this a joke?" I have no association with her, I'm just surprised that someone would make such a specious argument while appearing to be a skeptic--and I mean skeptic in a good way. I'm interested in why you believe she is not credible and why she would risk a professional an academic reputation for what monetary reward the History channel would provide her to lie.

First of all I want to address Dr. Lori and her education with the resources in the link you provided.

Dr. Lori is a graduate of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor and Wesleyan University. She earned her Ph.D. in art history from The Pennsylvania State University. Dr. Lori has served on the faculty at Penn State University, State University of New York, Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Albertus Magnus College, Arcadia University, Southern Connecticut State University, and Muhlenberg College.

I can't speak for the quality of any of these schools. I'm not familiar with ivy league colleges, party schools, etc. but I know that she must have spent a small treasure herself to afford that much education. A Ph. D isn't something that a person would necessarily want to throw away backing something that wouldn't hold up to peer review. Sure it happens, I'm not saying that it doesn't, but the crux of the matter here is whether or not her employ by the History channel is worth more to her than her professional reputation.

Speaking of professional reputation, it's not as if the History channel is the only place she's worked for. Again on the same page you linked to, she lists experience in several museums.

Dr. Lori has held museum positions at the Yale University Art Gallery, the Allentown Art Museum, Muhlenberg College, and the Palmer Museum of Art at Penn State University.

As well it doesn't seem as if she would have trouble finding other work if she told History to go take a hike if they pressured her.

Dr. Lori is an award-winning TV personality. She has appeared on: - History channel's The Curse of Oak Island - Discovery channel's Auction Kings - FOX Business Network's Strange Inheritance - Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - NBC TV's The Tonight Show - Anderson LIVE, Anderson Cooper's talk show - Lifetime Television's The Balancing Act - ABC TV's Live Well Network - Fine Living Network - Host, TV talk show Comcast Tonight - FamilyNet's Everyday with Marcus and Lisa - Treasure HD's Treasure Seekers - Retirement Living TV - Daytime - The Comcast Network - BBC World Service - NPR

Then there is also some pretty commendable boasting of her work as an antiques appraiser, and a handy page to sum all of her qualifications up in one brief list.
Compare your art & antiques appraiser with Dr. Lori

So yes, it's a coincidence that she is hired by the show's own production network. Is that her only source of income? Clearly not. I also think it's a pretty grand assumption that simply because the History channel is signing a check that she would be coerced to lie for them. Meanwhile how many other historians, experts and the like are also hired by History? Should we dismiss them as shills as well? Should we dismiss all experts who consult for any television production?

It would be great if they got an unbiased second opinion, but I think the burden of proof is on you to prove that she is not credible. I couldn't find any evidence that she wasn't with a very brief Google search. Let's reveal a little more about her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Verderame

Let's try some google searches.

lori verderame investigated
https://www.google.com/webhp?source...v=2&ie=UTF-8#q=dr+lori+verderame+investigated

lori verderame debunked
https://www.google.com/webhp?source...&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=dr+lori+verderame+debunked

lori verderame lying
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=dr+lori+verderame+lying

Now of course a bunch of quick rudimentary Google searches does not prove that she is NOT a paid talking-head, and she has quite an extensive TV personality elsewhere as well. Of all her appearances, her work as an appraiser, I can't find one quick mention of her being a hack on Google? Meanwhile I seriously doubt that the production teams on all of those publications would fail to properly vet her. This isn't some "Ancient Aliens" expert who has been debunked a hundred times over.

Now aside from her work in the limelight, she boasts quite an extensive work as an auctioneer as well, even offering services on her website and supposedly showing records of her sales and the amount they sold for ( though I didn't actually confirm this ). With that in mind, even if there isn't any indication of someone catching her fibbing on TV and fact checking or something of that nature, there doesn't seem to be any kind of ill review of her work as an appraiser to be found either.

So what we're left with is the very thin thread that she's not credible because the History channel wouldn't pay her to say they weren't significant. I don't think she needs the money that bad.