Season Two - Nov. 4, 2014 9:00 pm

[Au_Dreamers]

I'm actually rooting that they find something of value - monetary or historical - for Marty L.'s sake. He looks and acts just like my brother's best friend and seems level headed and guardedly semi-optimistic. I think I caught that he's bankrolling most of this. Nothing gets to rankling between family members more than money.

But it won't be the grail, the arc of the covenant, anything of Solomon's or the treasure of the Rosy Cross. And if the freemasons put something there they would have probably got it back ASAP after the Revolution and certainly after 1812/14.

All the really courageous people in history were pessimists. They had to act figuring the outcome would be bad or the chances of success slim. The optimists were just going with the flow. And when hard times come it is the pessimists who have stored up grain, brought a first aid kit, left 1,000psi for the ascent because a buddy might have miscalculated, or planned an escape route. Nobody appreciates us until then.

But it is the optimists who climb down out of the trees, try the red berries or bring the fire into the lodge.

The world needs both.

I beg to differ that ALL the really courageous people in history were pessimists. Mostly I believe you're using pessimist wrongly here. A skeptical person doesn't have to be a pessimist.

"an inclination to emphasize adverse aspects, conditions, and possibilities or to expect the worst possible outcome
a feeling or belief that bad things will happen in the future : a feeling or belief that what you hope for will not happen"

History would have practically stood still if that were true. All the pessimists would be standing around arrested or killed while they argued over the best plan of action and/or lamenting over all the bad stuff that "could" happen.

Losers find a problem with every solution, winners find a solution to every problem.

I think you're using the wrong label and personality traits. I know many optimists that are prepared and I know many pessimists that aren't and vice versa.

By definition they put their focus on on the negative. Just because an optimist isn't vocalizing the negative every 5 minutes doesn't mean they haven't considered the adverse aspects, conditions, and possibilities or the worst possible outcome. They just aren't harping on them all day long killing the joy of the adventure.

Being an optimist doesn't make one ill prepared or a lemming.

I never appreciate a pessimist. I do appreciate preparedness but I can't stand negative people. I don't believe in negative reinforcement and most of my experience with pessimists are that they are also bullies.

But remember I don't view skepticism one in the same as pessimism.

Skeptics who aren't demeaning or mean spirited albeit it's a grey area for many, do have value.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Au_Dreamers]

so was it Aliens who drew the stone map from so far above ?

or satellite Photography to get such an exact view

Ok I will use my Internet disclaimer here...some sarcasm might not read well on the Internet!!

Geez Jeff
The leading mystic of the Templars would find and define their sacred geometry locations by astral projection. Being above the area he would then survey the land and determine if the sacred geometry was present or not and then commit it to his memory to later create it on land.

EVERYBODY knows this, come on, keep up!!

 

[Au_Dreamers]

The Romans even had a form of Underwater Concrete...believe it or not, they were all master builders back then and the Phoenicians were definitely in the area years ago in the Mediterranean so its easy to say they had it or knew about it.

The idea of the wooden chest and the concrete and clay shell surrounding it, is all great news BUT......

does anyone feel a little bit worried about the nature of what may be down there, and the fact they want to swiss cheese the area to take 'samples' ?

This machine is a huge fricking drill and will literally tear right through any of the treasures that may be there....am I wrong??

View attachment 1084902

I've always thought about that.

IF they drilled the vault years ago and got a piece of parchment and then it flooded, I guess we will never get to read those lost Shakespeare writings!!

Maybe the vault isn't a vault but the ARK itself?!!? Now if that wood tests as shittah wood!!!

THAT'S A GAME CHANGER!!!! - thrown in just for Jeff

 

[Au_Dreamers]

Dave- well that's just the scenario they are dealing with. They can't just go dig the original money pit because nobody knows for certain where it is at!

I do agree with the Lagina brothers and the rest of them. 1 answer, 2 new questions.

Here's where both sides of the fence can decipher things out.

Back to the McGinnis foundation...

The family of one of the discovers moved to the island. What does that mean to you. What does that indicate to you?

I haven't decided. Does it mean that the boy and his family were so convinced that they would find treasure that they moved there to put their best efforts into it? Does it mean that they just took advantage of investors (if there were any) to get a decent house to live in on an island?

At what point in time did an entity that was digging source outside money?

Here's my thought. The greed of man. If you thought you were on the verge of finding a vast treasure and all you had to do was expend physical energy to dig it up would you dilute your share of the treasure by getting an investor?

Maybe once you realized the digging was beyond your means and you lacked the funds to continue you would dilute your share figuring you'd still be way ahead on the ROI.

How many of the operations were self funded?

Was there ever a cement cofferdam in or around where the Laginas just got their core sample?

Yeah this show isn't like Pawn Stars with no cash outlay to make the show happen. I tend to believe that the viewer base for Oak Island is a lot less than Pawn Stars. These guys aren't raking in the $$$ like Pawn Stars is.

While I don't want to be critical of any acting on the show you can clearly see what are natural reactions and honest interviews versus some of the "scripted" scenes. But that for me doesn't take away from the entertainment of the show.

 

[Dr. Meh]

The Laginas bought the island long before a TV show was conceived. Marty is a drilling engineer. I'm sure with or without the TV show the Laginas would have been doing some drilling on the island. If you believe the hype, the brothers have been interested in the island since a young age. It's not like History brought in a bunch of well known TV characters for this show. Not to mention everyone on the show is a terrible actor. Whenever a scene has been set up, such as when the nephew brings them the news of the impending legislation, it is blatantly obvious.

I really don't think them griping about money issues is an act. After all the money that has gone up in flames on the island, NO ONE, including a TV studio, is going to start throwing it around without giving it some thought. There would be no basis for a TV show if the Laginas weren't willing to fork over some of the costs. The TV studio is responsible for paying all of its crew, not to mention itself. Yes, they probably do cover some of the costs but if they were going to pay for everything why not bring in a crew of treasure hunting experts, or at least some decent TV personalities? The Laginas and their crew have got to be some of the most boring TV personalities ever. But they aren't there to be TV stars, they are there because they are the ones actively searching for the treasure.

I'm sure the brothers are interested and have been for a long time. But the TV studios are absolutely willing to throw money at it all day long as long as the show is getting good ratings.

The reason they didn't bring in actors or a big name is psychological. Nobody cares if Brad Pitt is struggling to find the treasure. But a couple of normal folks that they can relate to suddenly gives us some heroes to root for. Not to mention that the idea for the show was probably pitched by the brothers.

 

[New Gold]

This is once again an argument of optimist vs pessimist. Neither of us really knows the details of who's paying for what.

It's in the TV crew's best interest to draw out the search as long as they can, while still keeping the audience interested.

But think about the ratings if they actually find something valuable! Why not approach it from that angle? Throw a couple million at the search and watch the ratings skyrocket from all the progress being made!

Right now they are moving so slow they are losing interest. Which leads me to believe the Laginas are doing most of the financing.

 

[Dr. Meh]

This is once again an argument of optimist vs pessimist. Neither of us really knows the details of who's paying for what.

It's in the TV crew's best interest to draw out the search as long as they can, while still keeping the audience interested.

But think about the ratings if they actually find something valuable! Why not approach it from that angle? Throw a couple million at the search and watch the ratings skyrocket from all the progress being made!

Right now they are moving so slow they are losing interest. Which leads me to believe the Laginas are doing most of the financing.

It's not at all about optimist versus pessimist. It's about the reality of a situation versus a desired reality about something. I have an uncle who was a producer for Disney, screenwriter, and animator, another uncle who works as a key grip, and a sister in law who works as a producer for the History channel and Discovery channel. I can't say with 100% certainty that I know how this show is funded but I have a pretty good guess.

 

[New Gold]

Classic pessimist viewpoint: "I'm not a pessimist I'm a realist."

I have no doubt the show is funded by the studio. I do doubt however that the search expenses are being funded by the studio.

I recall FindersKeepers posting that he paid $400 an hour for a drill in New Ross, why didn't the TV studio help him with that?

I am optimistic in believing that the Laginas really are concerned about the costs they are incurring. You are pessimistic in believing they are fibbing for good TV.

 

[Dr. Meh]

Classic pessimist viewpoint: "I'm not a pessimist I'm a realist."

I have no doubt the show is funded by the studio. I do doubt however that the search expenses are being funded by the studio.

I recall FindersKeepers posting that he paid $400 an hour for a drill in New Ross, why didn't the TV studio help him with that?

I am optimistic in believing that the Laginas really are concerned about the costs they are incurring. You are pessimistic in believing they are fibbing for good TV.

Classic response from someone who's ignorant and backing themselves in a corner. You can call your naivety "optimism" but it doesn't make it so. You continually try to belittle people here by calling them pessimistic just because they don't agree with you. Then you get so clouded with your defensiveness that you fail to see that we all hope for the same things you do. You're acting like you're fighting a battle while everyone else is just laughing at how absurdly defensive you're getting.

As for finderskeepers "show", I have no idea what show he keeps claiming he made but I guarantee it wasn't on History and wasn't even remotely close to being popular. Truth be told, I don't think his show ever was on TV but maybe YouTube or something. Whoever the producers were, they didn't have the kind of funding this show does. Really not even comparable.

 

[jeff of pa]

calm down people.
looks like more then one of you are getting a bit carried away and defensive

 

[jeff of pa]

As for finderskeepers "show"

First off finderskeepers is a member here give him extra respect !

if you have questions for him I'm sure he will gladly answer.

As for his "show", I believe it is still in production

 

[New Gold]

Classic response from someone who's ignorant and backing themselves in a corner. You can call your naivety "optimism" but it doesn't make it so. You continually try to belittle people here by calling them pessimistic just because they don't agree with you. Then you get so clouded with your defensiveness that you fail to see that we all hope for the same things you do. You're acting like you're fighting a battle while everyone else is just laughing at how absurdly defensive you're getting.

As for finderskeepers "show", I have no idea what show he keeps claiming he made but I guarantee it wasn't on History and wasn't even remotely close to being popular. Truth be told, I don't think his show ever was on TV but maybe YouTube or something. Whoever the producers were, they didn't have the kind of funding this show does. Really not even comparable.

You just lost all credibility with this post. Major lulz.

Finders Keepers was featured on America Unearthed which is produced by... The History Channel.

I have not been "defensive" in any of my posts. Maybe offensive. Possibly aggressive. I do not belittle people, that would be personally attacking someone's character. Such as calling them naive or ignorant.

And playing the "everyone's laughing at you" card.

Instead of bashing me address the points I made. I don't get why you are so sour. A forum is meant for trading ideas.

 

[Dr. Meh]

You just lost all credibility with this post. Major lulz.

Finders Keepers was featured on America Unearthed which is produced by... The History Channel.

I have not been "defensive" in any of my posts. Maybe offensive. Possibly aggressive. I do not belittle people, that would be personally attacking someone's character. Such as calling them naive or ignorant.

And playing the "everyone's laughing at you" card.

Instead of bashing me address the points I made. I don't get why you are so sour. A forum is meant for trading ideas.

You didn't make any points to address. And you either have awfully thin skin or a less than firm grasp on the English language if you think ignorant and naive are personal attacks. Belittling someone's response with "classic ______ response" shows that you aren't listening and don't care what that person has to say. It's belittling their opinion and an indication of poor interpersonal communication skills.

For example, I can say I'm ignorant of finderskeepers "show", ignorant on basic construction methods, and ignorant on sewing techniques. Ignorant and naive are only personal attacks if you let them be.

Incidentally, finderskeepers being featured on a show is a far cry from having your own series and, again, the comparison is laughable. And again, your ignorance on the subject is showing.

For the record, I'm not bitter or upset in the least. I'm bored. And I'm sick of your only response being "you're just a pessimist." Why can't you acknowledge someone else's point of view? Why can't you acknowledge that they may have some valid points? Or that it's possible to be cautiously optimistic without being labeled a pessimist?

 

[FinderKeeper]

To Dr Meth,
1st question/Our TV show has aired 35 times on the History Channel and on H2, Its #13 on America Unearthed, The Hunt for the Holy Grail. Its a 1hr show with Scott Wolters. Check it out.
2nd question/ I had to pay for all cost at the site during filming, it was my permit and my hunt. I had full controll of what was to happen at the site , digging, drilling, reclaim the site. This is the law when doing a hunt like this.
3 rd question / it was not $400 a hr it was $350 a hr for the drill rig.
4th question / We plan to return to New Ross this spring to do more work. Did we find anything during the TV show, that info is for us only, but we did get all the mineral rights to dig at the site and thats all I will talk about for now.
5 th question/ Scott Wolters did pay us for doing the TV show and he paid for everything off site and it cost him a lot of money.
Right now we are under contract with ITV out of NY city and working with a film company from Canada to do more filming for the History Channel. We have posted this info on this site many times

 

[New Gold]

Thank you for the clarification Finders, not to be a kiss-ass but I really admire the work you are doing in my home province.

 

[Dr. Meh]

To Dr Meth,
1st question/Our TV show has aired 35 times on the History Channel and on H2, Its #13 on America Unearthed, The Hunt for the Holy Grail. Its a 1hr show with Scott Wolters. Check it out.
2nd question/ I had to pay for all cost at the site during filming, it was my permit and my hunt. I had full controll of what was to happen at the site , digging, drilling, reclaim the site. This is the law when doing a hunt like this.
3 rd question / it was not $400 a hr it was $350 a hr for the drill rig.
4th question / We plan to return to New Ross this spring to do more work. Did we find anything during the TV show, that info is for us only, but we did get all the mineral rights to dig at the site and thats all I will talk about for now.
5 th question/ Scott Wolters did pay us for doing the TV show and he paid for everything off site and it cost him a lot of money.
Right now we are under contract with ITV out of NY city and working with a film company from Canada to do more filming for the History Channel. We have posted this info on this site many times

I didn't ask that many questions but I appreciate the information nonetheless.

Now, can you at least acknowledge that having a one episode show airing reruns several times doesn't have the same type of studio funding that a regular series in it's 2nd season does? Really, that's the only point I was trying to make to this guy. Certainly, you would agree that having a whole series based on your hunt would have been more lucrative.

 

[jeff of pa]

You didn't make any points to address. And you either have awfully thin skin or a less than firm grasp on the English language if you think ignorant and naive are personal attacks. Belittling someone's response with "classic ______ response" shows that you aren't listening and don't care what that person has to say. It's belittling their opinion and an indication of poor interpersonal communication skills.

For example, I can say I'm ignorant of finderskeepers "show", ignorant on basic construction methods, and ignorant on sewing techniques. Ignorant and naive are only personal attacks if you let them be.

Incidentally, finderskeepers being featured on a show is a far cry from having your own series and, again, the comparison is laughable. And again, your ignorance on the subject is showing.

For the record, I'm not bitter or upset in the least. I'm bored. And I'm sick of your only response being "you're just a pessimist." Why can't you acknowledge someone else's point of view? Why can't you acknowledge that they may have some valid points? Or that it's possible to be cautiously optimistic without being labeled a pessimist?

First off the word ignorant has more then one meaning,
and even though it is obvious which one you meant, in the future
I suggest you use something less abusive sounding.

this Is My opinion, and has been my opinion for years.

I do not sit back when I see someone use the word ignorant when speaking of a forum member.

secondly it is against forum rules to suggest someones educational level is below yours unless
They start a thread to claim their education is lacking and ask for your opinion.

Just an FYI for future posting here

 

[New Gold]

Here in Lunenburg County it's pronounced "ignint" and has only one meaning.

 

[FinderKeeper]

To Dr Meth
I am under contract and can not talk about the price or cost of a TV show, Each TV show has its own expence account . We are up for our own TV series and a first year show like Oak Island does not get enough to pay all the bills. Even a second year or third year show is the same , because the contract locks in the price for 3 years. If the show hits it big like some on TV and the contract ends. Then they can jack up the amount to keep it running. You should know this if your friends are in the TV business.

 

[Robot]

One has to ascertain how much past evidence, affidavits and historical stories are required or needed to convince and prove ones’ theories to others.

It would compare to the Billions of people today who believe in their found Faith through recorded stories, without providing the claimed ancient hard evidence (Ark of the Covenant, Holy Grail, Rod of Moses and Golden Tablets, etc.).

Like Heinrich Schliemann’s discovery of Troy from his theory that Homer's Iliad and Virgil's Aeneid was a true story, other searchers have also found laid up treasures from believing in recorded stories.

Yes it is important, but not necessary to locate and prove past evidence.

It is more important and necessary to proceed with investigating from these stories to try and locate "new" evidence that will help prove or disprove the existence of a treasure buried at Oak Island.

It is of the essence that we move ahead to try and solve this mystery before nature by the threat of global warming with rising ocean waters, destructive storms, lost existing markers, or encroaching land developments all hinder future possibilities.

I commend the Lagina brothers with their faith in these stories and with them committing their time, effort and resources to try to confirm it.

I trust the knowledgeable discussions on forums like this will help add to it and hope to add new evidence with my researched theory as to where I believe the Treasure Vault is located.