The Knights Templar connection to Oak Island Challenge

You finally realized there is a difference between an academic accredited historian and a books author who is credited with creating that work- the first must provide solid documentation in support of the claims presented, the latter can use actual facts to support pure speculation.
PS: Dan Brown is another "well respected author", but not a "credited" historian.
'nuff said.

As an author myself I knew there was a difference, I had simply misused a word.

The three authors I have mentioned are all well respected historians on the Templars, so answer my question. What is it that they have written that you disagree with?

Cheers, Loki
 

What was that remark you keep posting me-, Oh yeah, about not paying attention.
I answered that question on post # 454.
Now with all these authors named, and whether that are respected historians which is debatable, NO Templar connection to Oak Island has been proven beyond wishful speculation.
 

Last edited:
What was that remark you keep post to me-, Oh yeah, about not paying attention.
I answered that question on post # 454.
Now with all these authors named, and whether that are respected historians which is debatable, NO Templar connection to Oak Island has been proven beyond wishful speculation.

And none ever will be.

The is no Templar connection to anything anywhere... ON PURPOSE.

Sure as heck never gonna connect anything concerning that island to them via an internet forum.

Does one really think that someone here or anywhere alive today... historians included... could even remotely deduce in what building the Templars EVER slept in...
let alone where they might have hidden something.

That's why they were the Templars.

Their secrets will always remain... THEIRS.

HEH.
 

And none ever will be.

The is no Templar connection to anything anywhere... ON PURPOSE.

Sure as heck never gonna connect anything concerning that island to them via an internet forum.

Does one really think that someone here or anywhere alive today... historians included... could even remotely deduce in what building the Templars EVER slept in...
let alone where they might have hidden something.

That's why they were the Templars.

Their secrets will always remain... THEIRS.

HEH.
Heh, there are NO Knights Templar TODAY; there ARE families in Great Britain, who claim descent from the ORIGINAL KT... dunno. :dontknow:
 

Probably. Except for that inconvenient 400 year gap.
 

My first post here, interesting topic and I had to reply. Maybe that 400 year gap is being filled? I read about a new book coming with a long title called Jesse James and the lost Templar treasure supposed to come out this summer. Answers? Maybe.
 

...
The three authors I have mentioned are all well respected historians on the Templars...
Will Jesse James & the Lost Templar Treasure be a book by another "well respected Templar historian"?
There does seem to be an abundance of those these days.
 

I don't know but on Amazon the photo of the back of the book had a comment written by a Templar Grand Master who sounds like he approved.
 

I don't know but on Amazon the photo of the back of the book had a comment written by a Templar Grand Master who sounds like he approved.

That would be Timothy Hogan, his worth as a true historian is questioned by some, but he does love the conspiracy stuff
a lot of hype to sell books IMO.
he is also the author of “ Alchemical Keys to Masonic Ritual “
If you know anything about Masonic history, the brotherhood is radically different today than it was before Albert Pike, Pike created most of the esoteric links that most people associate with Freemasonry today, just to improve membership numbers, it was a lot of BS, Hogan is just another Masonic lackey promoting the same BS.
 

Last edited:
So, now that I'm back to 40 hour work weeks and have more free time than I know what to do with, I went ahead and reread the thread.

Suggest you go back and reread the thread...

I did.

...answered that...

No, you didn't.

I ask again, if you have no "Connection Theory of the Templar's to Oak Island" why are you on this thread?

To find out what history books you're talking about when you made this claim:

Robert the Bruce enlisted the help of 25,000 Templar's in regaining Scotland's Independence from England...that's in the history books.


You advised me to reread the thread. I did, and I found no explanation. At this point, I'm unsure of whether you were mistaken, you were thinking of another thread, or you're operating sock puppet accounts in this thread and got confused about which one that you were posting as. Please clarify in any event.
 

That would be Timothy Hogan, his worth as a true historian is questioned by some, but he does love the conspiracy stuff...
Just like that collection of authors that mix fiction with minimal fact who have been referred on this thread as highly respected Templar historians.
 

My first post here, interesting topic and I had to reply. Maybe that 400 year gap is being filled? I read about a new book coming with a long title called Jesse James and the lost Templar treasure supposed to come out this summer. Answers? Maybe.

Welcome. The British had a name for such publications: "Penny Dreadfuls".

Mass produced cheap works of fiction using "famous" characters like Spring Heel Jack or Dennis Moore. The "Twilight" series of books is a modern continuation.
 

Just like that collection of authors that mix fiction with minimal fact who have been referred on this thread as highly respected Templar historians.

Your insinuations are ridiculous, Haag, Read and Addison are highly respected Templar historians and none of them go into alternative/ speculative history except in one instance, to list in the back of the book some of those alleged legends adding, "with no basis in fact".

In Addison's case a later addition to his 1842 work, as an introduction by David Childress in 1997 also muddies up that book, most who read it know that up front. But why should an introduction added 155 years later cast doubt on an otherwise excellent history book?

All three of these authors are basically on your side, which makes it kind of hilarious how much you attack them!

Cheers, Loki
 

Last edited:
This Loki....

Directing the flock.jpg

...is why they be here :laughing7:

Cause it's what they do.
 

Last edited:
...
In Addison's case a later addition to his 1842 work, as an introduction by David Childress in 1997 also muddies up that book, most who read it know that up front. But why should an introduction added 155 years later cast doubt on an otherwise excellent history book?...
...and in Addison's excellent history book where is his Templar connection to Oak Island?
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top