Suggesting a Location Other than the Money Pit

[gazzahk]

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Charlie P. (NY)]

I could dumb it down even more if you're suggesting that this would make things easier for you.

Yes, please. Try and make it like a feasable possibility . . . a blank page in this case.

Although we have less chance of finding any gold on Oak Island than impurities in Ivory Soap. 99-44/100% thumbs down.

I actually know something about nautical cartography and navagational reckoning - non electronic. And without a GPS and aerial view your rendition backed into from existing maps of the rocks Fred Nolan placed around the island would be too farsical to be of any use.

If you were talking sense instead of trash-talking members who are skeptics maybe you'd swing some opinion your way. We earned our skepticism through 162 years of bullshit. I'd go back even further to 1795, but those "events" were first mentioned in 1860. A LOT of folks here HAVE analyzed the data and drawn a solid conclusion. It's not just game-saying a negative. It's saying there is a big lack of affirmative.

 

[freeman]

 

[MikeN]

View attachment 2005010

He's wearing a tie of Templar colors!

 

[ARC]

I still after all these years cannot wrap my head around the Oak Island thing...

It made zero sense to begin with... and in the remote possibility that there was treasure buried there...
That it makes even less sense that anyone in their right mind after alll this time think there is a possibility of it still being there.

What warped fantastical imagination could possibly drive one into thinking that IF a said treasure existed to begin with... that it would still be there after eons of searching.

Like dogs chasing their own tails and quite sad actually... the desperation to prove something that has only been driven by imagination... Cant help but chuckle at the humility of it all.

The countless hours and money pissed away scratching around for evidence of something from nothing,

MOVE ON... to the next treasure legend, heh

 

[GoDeep]

Here's an example (crude example just for illustration) of why i always get a chuckle when someone lays lines over fixed points like boulders in an aerial shot as it can easily be off (and intentionally manipulated) by a factor of several degrees or more depending on how far apart they are and how you estimate the true center of a boulder (impossible to do visually). It can be off even more if you are trying to line up a 3rd boulder with 2, then you can vary it by a good 45 degrees depending on how far away the 3rd rock is.

It's so open to manipulation by the creator, one can come up with all kinds of say, 30 degree angles, and then claim "see it's impossible to have the coincidence", when in fact, if professionally surveyed, they actually measure 27.3, 34.8, 32.8, 26.2 etc. eliminating any claim of "coincidence".

Do you know how much even being off 1 degree is at 1000 feet away let alone 1000 miles away ends up!? Unless you hire a professional surveyor (and even then the true center of a large, asymmetrical bolder will cause errors for the surveyor as they will have to estimate the true center of the boulder) it just ends up giving meaning to the word "junk science":

 

[GoDeep]

Not to belabor the point (which is what i do...lol), but does anyone remember an episode on oak island (i think it was Oak Is. but it may have been another treasure show), and they drew an imaginary line through a couple of boulders on the island and said "look, if you draw a line through the boulders, it points directly to a town (i forget the town) in Europe and this town is where Templars originated(or some story like that), so its strong evidence these stones were laid by Templars!

As i was explaining above, if you take two rocks on oak island that are even remotely aligned toward Europe and draw a line through them, you literally only to need alter it less then 1 degree to hit ANY spot in Europe you want!

Junk Science at it's best! Not to scale, my demonstration doesn't even come close to showing how far off it gets 2000 miles away!

 

[gjb]

The development of the ground plan and the interpretation of the instructions would have implications on the date of origin and the nationality of the originator.

Given that the instructions appear to use Imperial units, in particular the fathom and the rod, there would likely be a British or Colonial influence. Furthermore, I feel that there is also the possibility that a smaller unit of measure, used specifically in surveying, may have been employed - this being the ‘link’ which was introduced into British land measurement as a decimal unit sometime in the 1620s. There are 100 links to a ‘chain’ of 22 yards which is one-tenth of a furlong. Thus, the link is 7.92 inches.

Consider that the diameter of the Money Pit has been reported to be just over 13 feet. This could have been 20 links (13.2 feet) and the sides of the triangles, reported to be 10 feet, could have been 15 links (9.9 feet). The unit is also implied here in the interpretation of the instructions on Map F.

Given that the occupying power of Nova Scotia would be significant, one might rule out the English conquest of Canada in 1629 - Quebec being held until 1632. Official estimates of the dates of magnetic variation in Nova Scotia, extrapolated from published charts of the region from shortly after 1600 on which this is recorded, seem to suggest a possible date for 13 degrees NW of about 1650 or between 1740 and 1760.

The former date would seem only to be possible should there have been English or Scottish intervention in the Acadian civil war with Huguenot or English support for La Tour. However, the latter period encompasses two wars pitting Britain and the American Colonies against France: the War of Austrian Succession (1740-48) and the Seven Years’ War (1756-63).

Rupert Furneaux suggested that the Oak Island operation may have been intended to secure the military chest when New York was threatened during the American War of Independence (1775-83). However, a similar thought may have occurred to the British government during the earlier conflicts.

This might be considered more likely during the War of Austrian Succession than the Seven Years War. During the former, the military chest might have been secured in Annapolis Royal. though this may have been considered too weakly defended particularly considering the proximity of the fortress at Louisbourg (which was actually taken due to the initiative of militia out of Massachusetts.)

It was after this conflict that Halifax was firmly established, and this may have been considered a far more secure location for military funds during the Seven Years’ War. Nevertheless, with hindsight, one might look to the fall of Yorktown in the following conflict when Britain’s sea power was stretched too far by the intervention of too many foes. Halifax might not have been considered safe from simultaneous attack from Canada by land and from France by sea.

In either war, it is surely likely that any treasure deposited in such circumstances would have been recovered. In any case, preparations for such an eventuality may have been made, but perhaps the deposit was never found necessary. Thus, while I acknowledge that there may never have been a treasure on Oak Island I certainly wouldn’t declare that I know this for a fact.

The War of Austrian Succession may also have an attraction in the legend of Lord Anson’s treasure. This suggests that Anson may have cached some of the treasure he captured on the island of Juan Fernandez (Robinson Crusoe Island), and this has resulted in suggestions that Anson launched an expedition during the Seven Years’ War to recover the deposit (recounted in Anthony Westcott’s El Tesoro de Lord Anson, in Spanish). It may be this legend that resulted in the instructions being written onto copies of 17th and 18th century charts of Juan Fernandez (by Ringrose / Sharp and Bellin).

Anson’s exploits in the Pacific may have had a knock-on effect in that his arrival back in England could have liberated funds to pursue the war in the Americas. However, I fear that simply mentioning Anson may dredge up a possible link between Shugborough and Rennes-le-Château and thence to the Templars...

The development of the hypothesis outlined here owes much to Rupert Furneaux’s thoughts on the Oak Island mystery, and his book on the subject is recommended as background reading.

Furneaux notes the discovery of the Mallon Triangle in 1972 the existence of which was confirmed to me by the late Paul Wroclawski (personal communication) who reported that it was in a seriously poor state. Mallon’s daughter, Tina, has reported that her father found a third triangle the location of which he didn’t disclose. His papers disappeared after his death in 1986.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

The development of the ground plan and the interpretation of the instructions would have implications on the date of origin and the nationality of the originator.

Given that the instructions appear to use Imperial units, in particular the fathom and the rod, there would likely be a British or Colonial influence. Furthermore, I feel that there is also the possibility that a smaller unit of measure, used specifically in surveying, may have been employed - this being the ‘link’ which was introduced into British land measurement as a decimal unit sometime in the 1620s. There are 100 links to a ‘chain’ of 22 yards which is one-tenth of a furlong. Thus, the link is 7.92 inches.

Consider that the diameter of the Money Pit has been reported to be just over 13 feet. This could have been 20 links (13.2 feet) and the sides of the triangles, reported to be 10 feet, could have been 15 links (9.9 feet). The unit is also implied here in the interpretation of the instructions on Map F.

Given that the occupying power of Nova Scotia would be significant, one might rule out the English conquest of Canada in 1629 - Quebec being held until 1632. Official estimates of the dates of magnetic variation in Nova Scotia, extrapolated from published charts of the region from shortly after 1600 on which this is recorded, seem to suggest a possible date for 13 degrees NW of about 1650 or between 1740 and 1760.

The former date would seem only to be possible should there have been English or Scottish intervention in the Acadian civil war with Huguenot or English support for La Tour. However, the latter period encompasses two wars pitting Britain and the American Colonies against France: the War of Austrian Succession (1740-48) and the Seven Years’ War (1756-63).

Rupert Furneaux suggested that the Oak Island operation may have been intended to secure the military chest when New York was threatened during the American War of Independence (1775-83). However, a similar thought may have occurred to the British government during the earlier conflicts.

This might be considered more likely during the War of Austrian Succession than the Seven Years War. During the former, the military chest might have been secured in Annapolis Royal. though this may have been considered too weakly defended particularly considering the proximity of the fortress at Louisbourg (which was actually taken due to the initiative of militia out of Massachusetts.)

It was after this conflict that Halifax was firmly established, and this may have been considered a far more secure location for military funds during the Seven Years’ War. Nevertheless, with hindsight, one might look to the fall of Yorktown in the following conflict when Britain’s sea power was stretched too far by the intervention of too many foes. Halifax might not have been considered safe from simultaneous attack from Canada by land and from France by sea.

In either war, it is surely likely that any treasure deposited in such circumstances would have been recovered. In any case, preparations for such an eventuality may have been made, but perhaps the deposit was never found necessary. Thus, while I acknowledge that there may never have been a treasure on Oak Island I certainly wouldn’t declare that I know this for a fact.

The War of Austrian Succession may also have an attraction in the legend of Lord Anson’s treasure. This suggests that Anson may have cached some of the treasure he captured on the island of Juan Fernandez (Robinson Crusoe Island), and this has resulted in suggestions that Anson launched an expedition during the Seven Years’ War to recover the deposit (recounted in Anthony Westcott’s El Tesoro de Lord Anson, in Spanish). It may be this legend that resulted in the instructions being written onto copies of 17th and 18th century charts of Juan Fernandez (by Ringrose / Sharp and Bellin).

Anson’s exploits in the Pacific may have had a knock-on effect in that his arrival back in England could have liberated funds to pursue the war in the Americas. However, I fear that simply mentioning Anson may dredge up a possible link between Shugborough and Rennes-le-Château and thence to the Templars...

The development of the hypothesis outlined here owes much to Rupert Furneaux’s thoughts on the Oak Island mystery, and his book on the subject is recommended as background reading.

Furneaux notes the discovery of the Mallon Triangle in 1972 the existence of which was confirmed to me by the late Paul Wroclawski (personal communication) who reported that it was in a seriously poor state. Mallon’s daughter, Tina, has reported that her father found a third triangle the location of which he didn’t disclose. His papers disappeared after his death in 1986.

Please provide your evidence that a “money pit” ever existed.

 

[ARC]

Please provide your evidence that a “money pit” ever existed.

Well the pit DID exist... but you are aware that many of the old photos of the excavations of it have been purchased ... rumored to be purchased by the brothers... only to be kept out of public use via internet etc,

Years ago i saw the actual photos of several deferent excavations / attempts in the pit...

Even photos of a prez visiting it.

 

[ARC]

 

[GoDeep]

Well the pit DID exist... but you are aware that many of the old photos of the excavations of it have been purchased ... rumored to be purchased by the brothers... only to be kept out of public use via internet etc,

Years ago i saw the actual photos of several deferent excavations / attempts in the pit...

Even photos of a prez visiting it.

I can't speak for him, but i think what he meant was "show me evidence there was treasure in the pit" Obviously the money pit exists, the question is, was there any treasure in it or anywhere on the Island for that matter.

 

[ARC]

I see... well they key word here would... IF ANYTHING,,, would be... "WAS" in the pit. heh

If there was anything in that hole those old timers beat feet with it Looooongg ago.

They didn't screw around in the old days... no red tape... and no sea water rise problems.

They would have somewhat easily on the first few tries hit and run long ago... IMO

 

[ARC]

The depth of that pit was always a "red flag" to me.

I thought the depth and description of "traps" was excessive.... perhaps just part of the "fish story" that grew over time etc... but... none the less excessive.

To bury something that deep was asinine at best. IMO

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

What I meant was that no evidence has ever been presented that an original money pit ever existed.

The only holes (pits) known to exist are those dug by searchers looking for something based on fictional, unproven stories supposedly created by the McGinnis brothers and then rehashed/re-invented on a 10-30 year cycle.

 

[BennyV]

I still after all these years cannot wrap my head around the Oak Island thing...

It made zero sense to begin with... and in the remote possibility that there was treasure buried there...
That it makes even less sense that anyone in their right mind after alll this time think there is a possibility of it still being there.

What warped fantastical imagination could possibly drive one into thinking that IF a said treasure existed to begin with... that it would still be there after eons of searching.

Like dogs chasing their own tails and quite sad actually... the desperation to prove something that has only been driven by imagination... Cant help but chuckle at the humility of it all.

The countless hours and money pissed away scratching around for evidence of something from nothing,

MOVE ON... to the next treasure legend, heh

That’s a little harsh. I see more people wasting much more time on less plausible theories than this one.

 

[ARC]

That’s a little harsh. I see more people wasting much more time on less plausible theories than this one.

Agreed.

 

[gjb]

According to some accounts, a significant feature of the cracking of the Enigma Cipher was the realisation that the messages might contain ‘probable words’ (see The Imitation Game). However, ‘probable words’ has been part of the cryptanalyst’s arsenal for some 500 years, and some early ‘unbreakable’ Vigenère ciphers were very easily cracked in this way. It was this potential weakness when combined with the fact that a letter could not represent itself that provided an opportunity for ‘cribs’ when deciphering Enigma messages.

The point is that if a cipher presents clues as to how it is formulated and the nature of its key then it can be cracked. However, whether this can be done in a timely fashion is another matter. If the objective has been achieved before the cipher is solved then breaking it hardly matters unless there are continuing messages employing exactly the same form.

In the case of Oak Island, one of the keys to breaking the ‘cipher’ is the ground plan underlying the placing of the ground markers (Pit, Rocks, Triangles and Tunnels). The weakness is that these had to be left in situ and thus provide clues as to identifying one of the keys.

There are other potential weaknesses and one such is providing the key, or a clue to it, in the message itself. One of the Oak Island maps is a case in point. The working of the instructions on Map F is actually illustrated on the map and an instruction in plaintext provides the key to breaking the instructions on other ‘ciphers’ (actually cryptic messages). At the heart of these instructions is the direction, “from centre of triangle between [or betwixt] Rocks 20 feet E,” and this is accompanied by a plan of the Drilled Rocks including a third point.

This completely opens up the instructions on all of the maps, this being, “Identify three points using the ground markers, find the centre of the triangle thus formed and take the specified offset from there.” This enables the map holder to fill in the gaps in the cryptic instructions provided that they know of the existence of the ground markers and can plot them on paper.

Should they hold all of the maps then they will soon appreciate the regular pattern of points that they form in combination. Were it this straightforward then this might suggest that the instructions are simply a short-term contingency measure.

Map point D, lying at top centre of this pattern might be a good place to start. The instructions are widely reported as:

515 SE and by 50 N
36 NE, 36 NE Rocks
3 Feet by 3 Feet by Four.

Harold T. Wilkins reports the first line as reading, ‘515 SE and by 50 N Tree’, which is as it is written on the original map.

Given the ground plan provided in a previous post, and further knowledge of the island, it would be possible to identify what this means. Given that Wilkins’ instructions are correct, there would be a point 50 units of measure south of the Money Pit, which can only be the Welling Triangle which is some 300 feet away, making the unit 6 feet or one fathom.

This would imply that the starting point is 515 fathoms to the northwest of this point, which could only be near the start of the Ancient Roadway which is described in early reports of the island.

Having thus reached the Money Pit (Tree) the instructions carry on (note well, instead of stopping here and suggesting digging) the format implying that the target is mid-way between the Money Pit and one of the Drilled Rocks. As the distance from the Money Pit to the East Rock is 432 feet or 72 fathoms then this would seem to be the Rock indicated.

Assuming that the instruction on Map F to locate the centre of the triangle thus formed also applies to this map, the point identified would have to lie due south of Map point D. The distance to this point can be calculated and proves to be 18 feet. This would then have to be spanned by the instruction ‘3 feet by 3 feet by Four’. The obvious deduction would be that this is ‘3 + 3 + 4 x 3 feet = 18 feet’.

Breaking this cryptic message then facilitates working out the meaning of the instructions on the other maps which identify regularly spaced points on the same design.

 

[gjb]

With the key to the cryptic messages potentially laid bear, it would be possible to work out how to interpret the instructions on the other four published maps. This activity might well start at the western-most point on the ‘W’ pattern which is here designated Map Point A. The instructions are reported by Wilkins as:

18 NE by 71 W on Rock
26 ENE by 18 SW Palm
7 feet by 7 feet by 8.

I assume that Wilkins has substituted Palm for Tree (since this designation appears on some of the other maps).

Assuming that these instructions are part of a common set, it should be clear that the starting points are at the end of the first two lines and that whatever 71 W means it is unlikely to be measured from the West Rock. It seems possible, therefore, that the first two lines have been reversed and the instructions might read:

Rock 71 W and 18 NE
Tree 18 SW by 26 ENE
7 feet by 7 feet by 8.

By assuming that the instructions identify one of the map points and operate in the same way as Map D and Map F this would then fairly quickly identify the meaning. As with cracking a cipher, one might take a guess at the equivalent of a ‘probable word’ this being that as the horizontal distance between the rocks is 418 feet, or about 70 fathoms, as on the first line, this unit might be tested first which proves promising.

This produces three points with a focus just east of the Money Pit and the West Rock. In accordance with the suggested key, it would be reasonable then to form a triangle and locate its centre, thereafter taking the specified offset.

The offset is ‘7 feet by 7 feet by 8’ which, if calculated as for Map Point D, would be 7 + 7 + 8 x 7 feet = 70 feet. This line terminates within two feet of Map Point A. However, by working backwards from the target point, the instructions would be more accurate if instead of 26 ENE the text had read 25 ENE. It could be that when copied the ‘5' was badly faded. The fading of two of the maps has been reported by the owners.

What seems to be added or confirmed by this interpretation is that the offset from the East Rock is specified first and the direction of the final offset is towards the Rock Centre Line or the Rock Mid-point if upon it. Confirmation of this will be found in the interpretations of the remaining map instructions.

A major implication of these instructions is that the Tree, or Money Pit, is not a location at which one is necessarily expected to dig. This isn’t an end point, it’s a starting point. However, its very nature suggests that it’s potentially a temporary point suggesting that not a great length of time was expected to pass between the deposit and recovery.

Consider also that this starting point, referenced as Tree, should be a distinct point on the ground for the instructions to work with a high degree of accuracy. This might suggest that the centre of the Money Pit was identifiable and that perhaps reports of a tackle block hanging over the pit could be authentic. So, the point identified by ‘Tree’ in the instructions could have been the point on the ground below the block.

Again, this would imply a short-term exercise. For the deposit still to be present it might be imagined that only the depositor knew specifically where the cache was located from a point above ground (the ‘X’ marking the spot).

He would thus prepare the maps or instructions to identify this spot, but then dying without having communicated the location or the meaning of the instructions he’d prepared as a contingency measure in the event of his death!

 

[gazzahk]