Oak Island the Strange, the Bizarre, and Maybe the "Truth!

[Raparee]

After this post I don't know how anyone can believe anything you type.. You are apparently the only person on here to believe this which does not make it a fact...

Yeah. Make that three that believe this. No credible material evidence has been put forward that proves the OI origin story.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Singlestack Wonder]

The Indians in the early 19th Century said, "We did not build those earthworks. White men built them."

They were referring to forts built before the civil war...

 

[ECS]

They were referring to forts built before the civil war...

...or were they referring to the earthworks 40 miles east of Cincinnati on the Little Miami River called FORT ANCIENT.
This massive mound- building earthwork, now a NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK was constructed by the Adena Native American culture (AD 1000-1500).
When early White settlers inquired as to who built these fort like earthworks, the contemporary indigenous tribes reloed "the ancient ones", NOT white men.

 

[ECS]

No sir you are wrong and dead wrong.
As for you alan m. I have put up several really good post but I deleted them because of all of your all stupid responses.
You think you know everything but I am sorry to say, you are lost.

Please elaborate on all these "stupid responses" that you claim I have made.
You have constantly said I am "wrong", but have never provided the evidence to prove your claim that I am actually wrong.
Real documented evidence always disproves false fabricated information as exhibited by tour many many misinformation that has been corrected by me and others.

 

[n2mini]

Perhaps this is an appropriate time to introduce the concept of overwhelming evidence, for those not familiar.
since no one alive can legitimately claim first hand knowledge, historians must rely on second hand information to derive at what is considered the most probable truth. Overwhelming evidence plays an important role in this determination. This means that even if a document if discovered and found to be authentic, it would not change history if the information in that document was logically questionable. An analysis of UFO claims by ancients is an example.
there may have been UFO’s, or saucers in Biblical times, but it also could be that the writers of historic accounts then could just as easily have been making it up, or wrong, on drugs, whatever. It takes much more than one tiny piece of obscure evidence to change the course of historic opinion, thats just the way it is.

This same logic is why the 3 people on here that don't believe the original 3 ever dug a hole are wrong. Look up Oak Island on any computer, old newpaper etc. and every story will tell about the original 3 digging a hole. Doesn't have to have anything in it but dirt..

 

[Al D]

This same logic is why the 3 people on here that don't believe the original 3 ever dug a hole are wrong. Look up Oak Island on any computer, old newpaper etc. and every story will tell about the original 3 digging a hole. Doesn't have to have anything in it but dirt..

And, to add to your point, every story is identically worded.
just because a majority of people say or believe it, does not make it fact

 

[ECS]

... I do believe another chapter of history will be added to the beginning of America.
Maybe a completely different chapter than what we all were taught growing up.

Now where have we all read something similar and by whom?

 

[DaveVanP]

The Indians in the early 19th Century said, "We did not build those earthworks. White men built them."

My own people claim the Choctaw emerged from the earth from a cave in a hill in Mississippi (Nanih Waya)..I suppose that "fact" shoots Darwin down, as well as dozens of religions...

 

[DaveVanP]

...I read the same Reader's Digest story at the age of 14, sitting at a table in the kitchen,...

For me, it was an episode of Bill Burrud's "Treasure" TV show, about the same time frame as the RD story (1965?)

 

[n2mini]

And, to add to your point, every story is identically worded.
just because a majority of people say or believe it, does not make it fact

but it is up to whom doesn't believe said story to be able beyond a doubt disproove it... I as a believer in that they did dig a hole don't have to prove it as I have history on my side as you said before...

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

...or were they referring to the earthworks 40 miles east of Cincinnati on the Little Miami River called FORT ANCIENT.
This massive mound- building earthwork, now a NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK was constructed by the Adena Native American culture (AD 1000-1500).
When early White settlers inquired as to who built these fort like earthworks, the contemporary indigenous tribes reloed "the ancient ones", NOT white men.

Just a few miles from my home....definitely built by native Americans....

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

but it is up to whom doesn't believe said story to be able beyond a doubt disproove it... I as a believer in that they did dig a hole don't have to prove it as I have history on my side as you said before...

So because countless people have told the story of Santa Clause for hundreds of years, he does in fact exist.....Guess I’ve been on his naughty list forever.....

 

[Al D]

but it is up to whom doesn't believe said story to be able beyond a doubt disproove it... I as a believer in that they did dig a hole don't have to prove it as I have history on my side as you said before...

Sorry but within the intellectual community, it does not work that way, claims which are not in agreement with professional belief or opinion carry the burden of proof

 

[n2mini]

see this is what I have been saying on here for years. People like you have different sets of rules for burden of proof and you weld it however it fits your narrative...one minute you say history sets the standard now suddenly it doesn't as it goes against you.. Have a good Holiday weekend.. and to singlestack there was a time when there was a santa clause just not in the way we think of him now.. Monk named St. Nicholas look him up... yeah got you covered too Mr. Wonder..

 

[Al D]

I am always amazed how some people get upset when others do not agree with them, lol

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

see this is what I have been saying on here for years. People like you have different sets of rules for burden of proof and you weld it however it fits your narrative...one minute you say history sets the standard now suddenly it doesn't as it goes against you.. Have a good Holiday weekend.. and to singlestack there was a time when there was a santa clause just not in the way we think of him now.. Monk named St. Nicholas look him up... yeah got you covered too Mr. Wonder..

Yes....there was a Saint Nicholas in historical fact.....But there never was a Santa Clause whose sled flew thru the sky pulled by reindeer, one with a shiny red nose.

You seem to be doing the same misdirection the laginas do when a hole that they have verified to have a treasure chest, dead body, pillar, and side entrance comes up empty and is found to be just a naturally occurring underground water passage on an island.....they write it out of the script and don’t allow anyone on the show to speak of it again...

 

[ECS]

...
You can also read the 15 Volumes of : Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institute.
These reports claim the inscriptions found in the Tombs or Mounds were Cherokee or Ogam but they are Coelbren/Welsh.

Coelbren is a totally fake made up Welsh alphabet by Edward Williams using his "druid" pen name, Lolo Morganwg in 1791.
The Smithsonian reports are correct while those who promote a Welsh settlement in on Ohio is just junk history.
Fake alphabet= Fake history.

 

[ECS]

Allrighty then, one down, two to go, lol

They always come back!

 

[franklin]

Coelbren is a totally fake made up Welsh alphabet by Edward Williams using his "druid" pen name, Lolo Morganwg in 1791.
The Smithsonian reports are correct while those who promote a Welsh settlement in on Ohio is just junk history.
Fake alphabet= Fake history.

Odd when the Coelbren has been around for over 4,000 years?

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

but it is up to whom doesn't believe said story to be able beyond a doubt disproove it... I as a believer in that they did dig a hole don't have to prove it as I have history on my side as you said before...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof (Carl Sagan). It is not up to the folks who are unconvinced any treasure has or does exist under Oak Island to prove the existance of nothing. Because the normal state of places in general is that treasure is not all present in them. Treasure is exraordinary (literally - "above the ordinary"). Those who claim something unusual exists are obligated to prove something exists. If I ask you to prove a live ostrich is NOT standing behind me right now there is no way you could. You could drive here but I'd simply say "it just left for a burger." That is why if I make the etraordinary claim it is up to me to prove it.

You can show something and prove it exists.

How do you prove the non-exiatance of something.

On the other hand - in my recycling bin is an empty cardboard box. Contains only air. So that proves there is nothing of value buried under Oak Island because they contain the same nothing. See how that doesn't work?