What should the Laginas do next?

[bigscoop]

Look, this is the reality of the situation. “There's no treasure on Oak Island, never was.”

I beg to differ. It just took more imagination to figure out how to mine for, and extract, that existing treasure. “The tale was the treasure,” that treasure's eventual discovery arriving from the marketing of the treasure tale.

Even after the show has long concluded those re-runs will still continue to generate revenues, not to mention all of the aftermarket product, books, appearances, speaker fees, etc. Might even make more money after the show stops airing than they did when it was airing.

No treasure on Oak Island? The minute someone said there was treasure on Oak Island that treasure began to exist. It just took years for someone to figure out how to sell the notion to someone who knew how to mine it and sell it to the public. And now that treasure has long since been realized and recovered.

My hat goes off to them. “Well played!”..............

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[ticndig]

What should the Laginas do next​

Bake in an oven at 350 *F for one hour then served with a garden salad.

 

[Limitool]

A little research would identify the likely manner in which the narrative eventually got into print. It wasn't handed down from father to son. It's found written down in newspapers in the 1860s at much the time that the Oak Island Association was operating (1863-65).

You'll find that a certain Adams A. Tupper was involved at that time who had also been involved with previous investors, the Truro Company of 1848-50. That company had drawn on the experiences of two of the original discoverers, Anthony Vaughan and John Smith.

Tupper went on to invest in the Oak Island Treasure Company of 1893-99 and did actually set down the history of operations in that company's prospectus of 1894.

Thus, if the report of the discovery and of the platforms is a fabrication then Smith and Vaughan, who were also present during the operations of 1804-5, would be likely culprits.

So, the account wasn't 'handed down' it was communicated directly, as it were, straight from the horse's mouth.

"Thus, if the report of the discovery and of the platforms is a fabrication then Smith and Vaughan, who were also present during the operations of 1804-5, would be likely culprits.

So, the account wasn't 'handed down' it was communicated directly, as it were, straight from the horse's mouth."

Well if that's "right" and they were 15-20 years old or older in 1804 that means it went to print when these men were 75-80+ years old... is that what your calling straight from the horse's mouth? And if that's right..... when it went to print it now sounds like they were beating a dead horse right off the 1st printed story.

 

[Limitool]

It would be more accurate to say that assessments of the sources to date have produced no evidence of treasure, which is not to say the evidence is not there or that there never was any. It’s just that past assessments were performed inadequately and with no attempt at objectivity.

Current assessments are therefore being made based on incomplete and flawed work undertaken previously. The evidence is there, though it takes a while to find, but blind prejudice by past assessors is preventing people in the present from seeing it for what it is.

What’s worse is that once people have decided that there’s no evidence (when such may exist) they’ll inevitably reject it because it conflicts with what they’ve decided is the answer. That’s the problem of deciding that you know the answer before the investigation has been completed.

The solution is to do the job properly, and fully, and thereby discover what's been missed and incorrectly dismissed. As observed, the evidence is there. You're just not seeing it because of past inadequacies.

"The evidence is there, though it takes a while to find..."

What evidence is being seeked to find WHAT...? What leads anyone to believe there is evidence of a treasure or any treasure period. Whoever dug the 100 ft. wide X 140 ft. deep hole was just going upon a hope and prayer.... blind faith of a treasure myth. What is the single thing that leads anyone to believe a huge treasure in on Oak Island....?

 

[Limitool]

I have a tract of ground with an odd shaped rock on it, a few strange looking manmade markings in the surface of the rock. "So therefore, those markings must be related to a fantastic hidden treasure of some kind that's been hidden somewhere on the property." Sounds silly, don't it.

Now try it with just a manmade hole instead of a rock. Same logic.......

Wanny join my search for the stolen huge gold shipment in an iron clad box thrown off the bridge in Centerville TN.....? I have my own big ol' magnet so ya gotta bring your own and good rope. Bring your own cooler and beer also. I think I've done most of the research needed....

 

[Oregon Viking]

Wanny join my search for the stolen huge gold shipment in an iron clad box thrown off the bridge in Centerville TN.....? I have my own big ol' magnet so ya gotta bring your own and good rope. Bring your own cooler and beer also. I think I've done most of the research needed....

No Bradley... Use this for finding it. Magnet maybe to recover it.

 

[Limitool]

No Bradley... Use this for finding it. Magnet maybe to recover it.

View attachment 2156298

I KNOW.... I invited you to join the team and that is why.... (but ya gotta sign the NDA w/History Channel). Please bring drone with you. Now this river doesn't exactly flow clean blue waters. In fact you couldn't see your hand in front of your face if ya tried...... Hence needing a lot of magnet fishing folks...!!!!!! Come on buddy.... we'll get'er done...!

 

[dinx]

Keep going!

NOVA SCOTIA, CANADA: The premiere of 'The Curse of Oak Island' Season 11 is just around the corner, and according to Distractify, the cast members of the show are paid around $100,000 per episode. Every season of the show has more than 20 episodes which means that the brothers, Rick and Marty Lagina, must have earned around $2 million each season.

Sounds like they acquired a treasure chest of money afterall....hope they didn't sink too much of that pay into drilling and earth moving oak island- still- im happy for them. Seems like a fair ending. They recieved something not everyone has the opportunity to aquire .

 

[Armchair detective]

It seems as though nothing new will come from all the information that been reviewed so far, and that a new data source is needed to make any progress. Regardless of your feelings regarding the OI show, you can't deny that this is NEW information.
So as we move into OI: THE NEXT GENERATION, the debate of course will be the ACCURACY and VALUE of the dvd records, just like any peer review of a historical site. For this you would need recordings of all the shows, for they would become your source material.

 

[gjb]

"The evidence is there, though it takes a while to find..."

What evidence is being seeked to find WHAT...? What leads anyone to believe there is evidence of a treasure or any treasure period. Whoever dug the 100 ft. wide X 140 ft. deep hole was just going upon a hope and prayer.... blind faith of a treasure myth. What is the single thing that leads anyone to believe a huge treasure in on Oak Island....?

So may people assume that if there were a treasure on Oak Island then it would have to be in the Money Pit. That's not so. They're basing their thoughts on faulty and inadequate assessments previously conducted. The research to date hasn't been done properly or anywhere near fully enough.

People undertake historical research because they want to know the answers to questions and one very significant question is whether there might be evidence of treasure on Oak Island.

Based on the totally inadequate investigation performed to date, the answer would be no, but do the job properly, and thoroughly, and the answer would potentially be yes.

It stands to reason that if you don't look for evidence you're highly unlikely to find it, and you should also note that people don't do historical research necessarily expecting success. The answer isn't known which is why it's being looked for, even knowing full well that it may not be found.

You and others are deciding that you know the answer without doing any investigation and certainly without knowing if the task is completed or if it's even anywhere near adequate enough upon which to base an assessment.

What the Laginas should be doing is do the job properly and investigate the evidence that researchers have found. However, they're too busy making money from peddling the nonsense that Prometheus and History dictate we have to suffer in order for them to keep the dollars flowing.

 

[gjb]

It seems as though nothing new will come from all the information that been reviewed so far, and that a new data source is needed to make any progress. Regardless of your feelings regarding the OI show, you can't deny that this is NEW information.
So as we move into OI: THE NEXT GENERATION, the debate of course will be the ACCURACY and VALUE of the dvd records, just like any peer review of a historical site. For this you would need recordings of all the shows, for they would become your source material.

I feel that the huge amount of source material that existed before the Laginas began operations is fundamental to any assessment of Oak Island. The Curse of Oak Island footage is supplemental, and Heaven forbid that anyone should assess Oak Island based solely on CoOI!

The Laginas appear not to be looking closely enough at the existing material and seem not to be looking for new sources other than those that might be interpreted to support the History channel's chosen narrative. They seriously need to get out of that particular rut.

 

[Limitool]

So may people assume that if there were a treasure on Oak Island then it would have to be in the Money Pit. That's not so. They're basing their thoughts on faulty and inadequate assessments previously conducted. The research to date hasn't been done properly or anywhere near fully enough.

People undertake historical research because they want to know the answers to questions and one very significant question is whether there might be evidence of treasure on Oak Island.

Based on the totally inadequate investigation performed to date, the answer would be no, but do the job properly, and thoroughly, and the answer would potentially be yes.

It stands to reason that if you don't look for evidence you're highly unlikely to find it, and you should also note that people don't do historical research necessarily expecting success. The answer isn't known which is why it's being looked for, even knowing full well that it may not be found.

You and others are deciding that you know the answer without doing any investigation and certainly without knowing if the task is completed or if it's even anywhere near adequate enough upon which to base an assessment.

What the Laginas should be doing is do the job properly and investigate the evidence that researchers have found. However, they're too busy making money from peddling the nonsense that Prometheus and History dictate we have to suffer in order for them to keep the dollars flowing.

"What the Laginas should be doing is do the job properly and investigate the evidence that researchers have found."

That's the whole point of my comments and some others: What evidence have researchers found to point to any treasure even being there or ever was...? Whoever said or presented evidence that a treasure was there anymore then a spot in my large wooded front yard?

I agree if there WAS A TREASURE know to have been buried there then look for the evidence for such a happening and where. But whoever said there was such a happening? We seem to have gotten the cart ahead of the horse.

 

[gjb]

"What the Laginas should be doing is do the job properly and investigate the evidence that researchers have found."

That's the whole point of my comments and some others: What evidence have researchers found to point to any treasure even being there or ever was...? Whoever said or presented evidence that a treasure was there anymore then a spot in my large wooded front yard?

I agree if there WAS A TREASURE know to have been buried there then look for the evidence for such a happening and where. But whoever said there was such a happening? We seem to have gotten the cart ahead of the horse.

Well, I certainly have! I’ve written a book presenting the results of my research and I know of other researchers who are trying to get their work considered. It’s just that the Laginas and History don’t cover anything that contradicts the story they’re peddling.

I can’t see that looking for evidence is putting the cart before the horse. For you and others to declare that there’s no evidence, and some are saying that there never was, you must have looked to determine whether there is any. I’ve done the same and believe I’ve potentially found some.

I don’t see how anyone could appreciate that there is or was potentially a treasure without looking for evidence and finding it. I’m not saying that I ‘know’ that there was definitely a treasure but I do believe that there’s evidence that there was an intent to deposit - though not in the Money Pit.

You and others will obviously not agree that what I’ve presented is evidence, as you’ve already declared that there isn’t any, but it’s having found some that’s suggesting to me that the Laginas should be taking a serious look at the sources to see if there’s anything else that’s been missed.

I just don’t feel that the work that’s been done is anywhere near adequate. I’ve spotted something I believe is potentially significant that’s been overlooked and other aspects simply dismissed due to people prejudging the situation, and other researchers have said much the same thing.

So, maybe the Laginas could start listening.

 

[bigscoop]

There is, and never was, any actual evidences of any treasure ever being on Oak Island. Wild theories, wild speculation, man's own ability to connect the dots that never even have any actual connection. This is, and has been, the existing flaw throughout the entire OI mystery because it's a mystery that's simply been created by the fascinations of men.

 

[BennyV]

Well, I certainly have! I’ve written a book presenting the results of my research and I know of other researchers who are trying to get their work considered. It’s just that the Laginas and History don’t cover anything that contradicts the story they’re peddling.

I can’t see that looking for evidence is putting the cart before the horse. For you and others to declare that there’s no evidence, and some are saying that there never was, you must have looked to determine whether there is any. I’ve done the same and believe I’ve potentially found some.

I don’t see how anyone could appreciate that there is or was potentially a treasure without looking for evidence and finding it. I’m not saying that I ‘know’ that there was definitely a treasure but I do believe that there’s evidence that there was an intent to deposit - though not in the Money Pit.

You and others will obviously not agree that what I’ve presented is evidence, as you’ve already declared that there isn’t any, but it’s having found some that’s suggesting to me that the Laginas should be taking a serious look at the sources to see if there’s anything else that’s been missed.

I just don’t feel that the work that’s been done is anywhere near adequate. I’ve spotted something I believe is potentially significant that’s been overlooked and other aspects simply dismissed due to people prejudging the situation, and other researchers have said much the same thing.

So, maybe the Laginas could start listening.

What’s your theory?

 

[Limitool]

Well, I certainly have! I’ve written a book presenting the results of my research and I know of other researchers who are trying to get their work considered. It’s just that the Laginas and History don’t cover anything that contradicts the story they’re peddling.

I can’t see that looking for evidence is putting the cart before the horse. For you and others to declare that there’s no evidence, and some are saying that there never was, you must have looked to determine whether there is any. I’ve done the same and believe I’ve potentially found some.

I don’t see how anyone could appreciate that there is or was potentially a treasure without looking for evidence and finding it. I’m not saying that I ‘know’ that there was definitely a treasure but I do believe that there’s evidence that there was an intent to deposit - though not in the Money Pit.

You and others will obviously not agree that what I’ve presented is evidence, as you’ve already declared that there isn’t any, but it’s having found some that’s suggesting to me that the Laginas should be taking a serious look at the sources to see if there’s anything else that’s been missed.

I just don’t feel that the work that’s been done is anywhere near adequate. I’ve spotted something I believe is potentially significant that’s been overlooked and other aspects simply dismissed due to people prejudging the situation, and other researchers have said much the same thing.

So, maybe the Laginas could start listening.

"Well, I certainly have! I’ve written a book presenting the results of my research and I know of other researchers who are trying to get their work considered".

Well cool... What research have you've done to share with us toward a treasure actually being on Oak Island or others?

"I can’t see that looking for evidence is putting the cart before the horse." Again.... evidence of what? And if you say treasure...!!!!! Why do you BELIEVE it is there or there ever was a treasure to even look for such evidence.

"I do believe that there’s evidence that there was an intent to deposit - though not in the Money Pit".

Again.... one more time, again! WHY IN THE HELL DO YOU OR ANYBODY BELIEVE THERE IS / WAS A TREASURE DEPOSIT UPON OAK ISLAND in the 1st place....? So now we're going with an "intent to deposit" but "they" didn't / couldn't do it.? Is that what you mean by intent...? And they sailed away with there treasure intact? Now watch the last of next season exploit this narrative. Stay tuned...!

If you don't already... you need to get a job with the History Channel promoting there show. And if you have a book out (published) please share the title with all of us so we can get...! Or better yet just post a link for us to review.... Thanks



"

 

[Blak bart]

Bagger 288: World's Largest Digging Machine

This is the largest digging machine (or trencher or rotating shovel) in the world. It was built by Krupp and is shown here crossing a road ...

machmachineine.blogspot.com

They could dissect the island with that sucker !! I'd watch !!

 

[Limitool]

These people who buy into a treasure being buried upon Oak Island I just wonder why...? I want there to be one too.

But are you / they actually looking for a KNOWN TREASURE or just evidence of a possible one...?

Shouldn't it be the other way around.... ? Like, looking for evidence of a known treasure....?

And if someone says.... you don't know of a treasure unless you look for the evidence can all start in my backyard. How stupid that concept seems.... it just makes no sense. Like the cart in front of the horse thingy again....? It's like looking for something that you have no idea of but looking for evidence OF IT...!

 

[bigscoop]

Look, I've been involved in the making of these type of "non-reality, reality" based shows, not once, but twice. And I can tell you that right from the very start producers "ARE IN CHARG OF EVERYTHING!" But what's this actually mean, you may ask?

Well, there is a process, from early proposals to non-disclosure agreements to sizzle reels, and much more to eventually shooting a pilot episode. And, all of this process is also strongly influenced by the interested network. In the end the original proposal is nothing like the end result as the actual reality is gradually turned into maximum dram, maximum mystery, a complete control of the narrative - (and for good reason), etc., etc. This is the underbelly of the business.

So, back to the original question that's been repeatedly asked since day one, "What evidences ever existed to even suggest that a treasure was either hidden on the island or that one was intended to ever be hidden on the island?"

"FACT!" There never was any evidences of such, just the suggestion. Today we have show outsiders claiming they have research of such treasures or such intentions, and yet, NO THEY DON'T.....what they have are a bunch of very loosely constructed circumstantial pieces of completely random evidences "that they are personally attached to."

Every tale of lost or hidden treasure has this same type of following, men consumed by the unknown, which in many if not in most cases, was just a fabricated and manufactured tale to begin with. And just like OI, when faced with overwhelming contrary evidences that are contrary to their own pet-theories, well, they quickly deny and reject all of those contrary evidences.

And that's just the reality to today's non-reality reality based TV shows and most every tale of lost or hidden treasure.

 

[gjb]

"I can’t see that looking for evidence is putting the cart before the horse." Again.... evidence of what? And if you say treasure...!!!!! Why do you BELIEVE it is there or there ever was a treasure to even look for such evidence.

Again.... one more time, again! WHY IN THE HELL DO YOU OR ANYBODY BELIEVE THERE IS / WAS A TREASURE DEPOSIT UPON OAK ISLAND in the 1st place....? So now we're going with an "intent to deposit" but "they" didn't / couldn't do it.? Is that what you mean by intent...? And they sailed away with there treasure intact?

You’re completely missing the point. I didn’t start off believing that there was a treasure. Other people were claiming that there was a treasure, but I felt that their thinking and arguments were weak.

This was in the mid-1970s, and the book I was reading (the first I’d ever read on the subject) was Rupert Furneaux’s work of 1972 in which he suggests that maybe the treasure wasn’t in the Money Pit. That set me thinking - might there be evidence to support this? Furneaux had presented a few novel ideas that appealed to me, but I felt that he hadn’t followed them up adequately. So, I chose to do so.

You seem not to understand. Have you never had to undertake an academic dissertation or thesis? Have you ever done any academic research? This was effectively an academic exercise. I identified a research question and set about addressing it.

I didn’t need to believe that there was a treasure in order to wonder if there might be evidence of such. Why on earth can’t you see that? This was a search for knowledge as much as it was a search for answers, and I was fully prepared for the undertaking to be unproductive. It wasn’t a matter of believing, it was a matter of wanting to know.

As to intent, my research suggests that a specific spot on the island was set apart for some reason, perhaps being the location of a deposit. Naturally, I don’t know whether or not there was a deposit, but it appears that this was intended even if it didn’t take place.

That’s to say, maybe there was ultimately no need to make the planned deposit. They didn’t sail away with the treasure, it would simply not have been shipped to the island.

The significant point is that a spot was identified.