Hard to believe

[Mike Mercury]

FOR...

Treasure was there... BUT...

Long ago found and removed.

that's what I'm starting to think. Whatever was stashed there...is now long gone. All this talk recently of "they found something"; well maybe... a piece or two that were accidentally left behind.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Rum Tide]

Our planets history is filled with failing empires. And most of them were before digital banking.

 

[Dave Rishar]

just as they kept it a secret for awhile that they were digging the hole at all...Once it got to the point that they needed help only then did they let others in on it...

So they did not keep it quiet. And they did not find anything after recruiting additional help. And nobody else has since.

In your opinion, is that evidence that they'd found treasure?

 

[ConceptualizedNetherlandr]

Our planets history is filled with failing empires. And most of them were before digital banking.

Empires come in all sorts of sizes controlling wealth of various sizes. It would have to be a pretty stupid empire that didn't spend it's treasure on self preservation attempts at all costs. In that unlikely event it would be another layer of rarity that the conquerors didn't absorb what was left.

 

[n2mini]

So they did not keep it quiet. And they did not find anything after recruiting additional help. And nobody else has since.

In your opinion, is that evidence that they'd found treasure?

No, but I'll I'm saying is that IF they did find something there would have been good reasons to keep it quite, and as I've said before. At this point there is no way to prove there was or wasn't ever treasure on the island unless it is found in the future. I admit that. Just as I admit I have no idea who all or when they did let other people in on them digging a hole on the island. NO ONE KNOWS... What kills me is that most skeptics on here won't admit that they can't prove it hasn't already been found.. We don't know what those 3 guys did find or did not find or when or what they told others. Are you willing to admit that, that it is "possible" they did find some sort of treasure or that someone maybe Samuel Ball did...is it possible

 

[Dave Rishar]

No...

Then why did you even mention it as evidence that there might be treasure? It suggests the opposite if anything, supporting comments from individuals that can't think critically notwithstanding.

At this point there is no way to prove there was or wasn't ever treasure on the island unless it is found in the future.

Unless it is found, yes, there is no way to prove that there is treasure is there. There is absolutely no way to prove that treasure is not there. The best that we skeptics can do is call out questionable logic and evidence, which we do, again and again and again.

Just as I admit I have no idea who all or when they did let other people in on them digging a hole on the island.

Would you agree that it was probably not to keep it a secret?

What kills me is that most skeptics on here won't admit that they can't prove it hasn't already been found.

I'll admit that right now: I can't admit that there wasn't a treasure that somebody already found. It's impossible to prove a negative in this case. All I can say is that the legend is shaky and has numerous plot holes, some parts don't logically make sense, and there's no solid evidence that there was a treasure in the first place, let alone someone having found it.

But as I said, I can't prove the negative, so you'll have to prove the positive. I'd simply ask the believers not to get angry at me for pointing out the problems. I didn't create those problems. I merely pointed them out. Someone had to.

We don't know what those 3 guys did find or did not find or when or what they told others.

I agree with that statement, but I'm not sure that you do. I know for sure that plenty of others don't here. If they did, we wouldn't be discussing what the Templars, pirates, Vikings, aliens, or Freemasons buried up there. We'd be discussing whether or not something was ever there...which is pretty much where the skeptics still are.

Are you willing to admit that, that it is "possible" they did find some sort of treasure or that someone maybe Samuel Ball did...is it possible

Sure. More to the point, I'll admit that I can't disprove the possibility. Even if I proved that Samuel Ball had never existed, I would not be able to disprove the possibility of a treasure. I can merely demonstrate the improbability.

 

[Dave Rishar]

There you go using common sense and logic again!

All I will say is this, you can't teach the blindfolded to see without them removing the blindfold. I gave up providing documented evidence to counter their speculations as they don't care to look at it.

Keep up the good fight!

I'm merely quoting this to preserve it for posterity. People need reminders sometimes.

 

[b3y0nd3r]

When the pit was first discovered, the three boys(men) dug to about 30 feet and left the hole open for years. They didn't fill it back in. So I feel that whatever is buried there, was there when they began to dig. Regardless of their age, the hanging tackle block or lack of, there are sworn testimonies that the events occurred.

They may have found three chests(seems too convenient 3 ppl 3 chests). Then felt there was more. To say that it was all just a hoax or misinterpretation, is foolhardy. The original three revolved their whole lives around the island. They had to feel there was more to it than just a sink hole.

Smith's cove. You don't build coffer dams to block imaginary flood tunnels. There had to be evidence of such.

The design of the beach. There were descriptions of the beach design which are too accurate, too structured to be just all coincidence. Coconut fiber to act as a filter to keep the drains from clogging, who would make that up?

 

[n2mini]

I'm not going to even try to multi quote all my answers. Just because you don't believe any of the story from the beginning with the 3 guys doesn't mean that none of it is true.. We all know I and no else can prove it either way... The believers like to come on here and talk about this that and the other, possible theories, what "evidence" they think they have found in a book, on rocks, in the sky etc... Most of us don't take it toooooo serious. Then the skeptics come on here and most talk as if everything they say is fact and anything we say is not because we can't PROVE IT. Sure there are parts of the story I believe or find possible and some I'd question more... The show to me at this point is more of a history lesson as to what all MIGHT have happened on the island before and after the original 3 digging..I do believe as I have said many a time that IF anyone did find a treasure on the island way back when there was good reason not to go running around telling everyone... People discuss the Templers and Freemasons and the such as there might be clues as to what they might have left and if so there could be clues as to what, where, and when somewhere in a note, book, etc... Sure some take those talks too far claiming so and so buried this that and the other and we all know that while it might be possible no one knows it for a fact...
I'm not on here trying to switch any of the skepics over to a believer, so not sure why the skeptics give a crap as to why the rest of us are on here....IF you don't like or believe the story/show go do whatever it is that you do like.
I don't like the show Survivor so I don't watch it. By no means I'm I going to watch it just so I can go on their forum to bash the show, the players, strategy etc..

 

[b3y0nd3r]

I'm not going to even try to multi quote all my answers. Just because you don't believe any of the story from the beginning with the 3 guys doesn't mean that none of it is true.. We all know I and no else can prove it either way... The believers like to come on here and talk about this that and the other, possible theories, what "evidence" they think they have found in a book, on rocks, in the sky etc... Most of us don't take it toooooo serious. Then the skeptics come on here and most talk as if everything they say is fact and anything we say is not because we can't PROVE IT. Sure there are parts of the story I believe or find possible and some I'd question more... The show to me at this point is more of a history lesson as to what all MIGHT have happened on the island before and after the original 3 digging..I do believe as I have said many a time that IF anyone did find a treasure on the island way back when there was good reason not to go running around telling everyone... People discuss the Templers and Freemasons and the such as there might be clues as to what they might have left and if so there could be clues as to what, where, and when somewhere in a note, book, etc... Sure some take those talks too far claiming so and so buried this that and the other and we all know that while it might be possible no one knows it for a fact...
I'm not on here trying to switch any of the skepics over to a believer, so not sure why the skeptics give a crap as to why the rest of us are on here....IF you don't like or believe the story/show go do whatever it is that you do like.
I don't like the show Survivor so I don't watch it. By no means I'm I going to watch it just so I can go on their forum to bash the show, the players, strategy etc..

I AGREE! I can't understand that people actually waste time hanging around a forum that they don't believe, only to try to convert(?) believers. There are plenty of things I don't believe, but I don't go about trying to convert them.

I see the question come up quite often:

Why bury a treasure so deep, that it would be hard to retrieve?

Perhaps it wasn't/isn't a treasure, but, something so dangerous to man that it had to be hid away forever.

 

[Al D]

I AGREE! I can't understand that people actually waste time hanging around a forum that they don't believe, only to try to convert(?) believers. There are plenty of things I don't believe, but I don't go about trying to convert them.

I see the question come up quite often:

Why bury a treasure so deep, that it would be hard to retrieve?

Perhaps it wasn't/isn't a treasure, but, something so dangerous to man that it had to be hid away forever.

Excellent points, I believe that munitions were buried there by the French, munitions and possibly some gold, to support Washington in preparation for the revolutionary war. This would have to be done in secret since France could not risk a war with England.
burying munitions in such a structure as the Oak Island money pit would have made it possible for a small number of persons, maybe only one, to trip the booby trap and flood the chamber, thus destroying the powder and making it all but impossible for the British to gather proof of France’s involvement.
this means that there must have been a back door to the chamber, most likely in the swamp.

 

[ECS]

...
Perhaps it wasn't/isn't a treasure, but, something so dangerous to man that it had to be hid away forever.

...and perhaps it is what it appears to be, an empty hole.

 

[n2mini]

...and perhaps it is what it appears to be, an empty hole.

SO you bother to frequent this forum why? your are obviously a non believer and are bored to death of every other tv show and forum known to man....Please explain why your on here. That would be interesting, maybe...

 

[ECS]

I have always found it curious that when one encounters an opposing view or questions information posted, someone always has to post "explain why your on here".
One would think the answer to that is obvious.

 

[Dave Rishar]

When the pit was first discovered, the three boys(men) dug to about 30 feet and left the hole open for years. They didn't fill it back in. So I feel that whatever is buried there, was there when they began to dig. Regardless of their age, the hanging tackle block or lack of, there are sworn testimonies that the events occurred.

Sworn testimonies have put innocent people on the electric chair before. Personal testimony is the least reliable form of evidence that there is.

They may have found three chests(seems too convenient 3 ppl 3 chests).

"May have." And I'm glad that you mentioned the 3/3 aspect.

Then felt there was more. To say that it was all just a hoax or misinterpretation, is foolhardy. The original three revolved their whole lives around the island. They had to feel there was more to it than just a sink hole.

They probably did feel that there was more to it than just a sinkhole. That doesn't mean that it was ever there.

Smith's cove. You don't build coffer dams to block imaginary flood tunnels. There had to be evidence of such.

Are we sure about coffer dams and flood tunnels then? I don't watch the show.

Coconut fiber to act as a filter to keep the drains from clogging, who would make that up?

What keeps the filters from clogging?

I'm not going to even try to multi quote all my answers. Just because you don't believe any of the story from the beginning with the 3 guys doesn't mean that none of it is true..

It doesn't mean that it's not all false, either.

We all know I and no else can prove it either way...

Yes you can. If somebody finds it, that's proof that it exists.

Then the skeptics come on here and most talk as if everything they say is fact and anything we say is not because we can't PROVE IT.

Skeptics also come on here and point out that a lot of the "facts" behind this story are anything but, and that a lot of the story doesn't actually make any sense. The response is initially anger triggered by cognitive dissonance, followed by avoidance also triggered by cognitive dissonance.

Sure there are parts of the story I believe or find possible and some I'd question more... The show to me at this point is more of a history lesson as to what all MIGHT have happened on the island before and after the original 3 digging..I do believe as I have said many a time that IF anyone did find a treasure on the island way back when there was good reason not to go running around telling everyone... People discuss the Templers and Freemasons and the such as there might be clues as to what they might have left and if so there could be clues as to what, where, and when somewhere in a note, book, etc... Sure some take those talks too far claiming so and so buried this that and the other and we all know that while it might be possible no one knows it for a fact...

Another "tell" for someone experiencing cognitive dissonance is that they'll revert to what's called "word salad," which involves wording that's...well, not nonsensical, but it doesn't exactly make sense at that point in the conversation. It's kind of just talking to talk. The subject is generally contextually correct, but the whole thing just seems out of place and doesn't really add to the discussion.

You were angry at me when you wrote this. (Anger is another tell, BTW.) When you've calmed down, re-read what I just wrote. Then read what I quoted you on. Then - if you're interested - Google "cognitive dissonance" and settle in for some heavy reading, and find out why this discussion played out the way it did.

I'm not on here trying to switch any of the skepics over to a believer, so not sure why the skeptics give a crap as to why the rest of us are on here....IF you don't like or believe the story/show go do whatever it is that you do like.

I like to put out facts and logic for people that haven't made up their minds yet. I fully understand that I will never be able to change someone's mind on this if they believe in it like they do in religion, politics, or any other faith-based belief system. I'm not here for them. I'm here for the newcomers.

I AGREE! I can't understand that people actually waste time hanging around a forum that they don't believe, only to try to convert(?) believers. There are plenty of things I don't believe, but I don't go about trying to convert them.

See above. I'm not wasting my time.

I see the question come up quite often:

Why bury a treasure so deep, that it would be hard to retrieve?

Perhaps it wasn't/isn't a treasure, but, something so dangerous to man that it had to be hid away forever.

Like at the bottom of the ocean, which was conveniently nearby?

If this was meant to be hid, why are people looking for it two centuries later?

Don't try to apply logic to the Oak Island legend. It's not a good fit.

 

[n2mini]

I have always found it curious that when one encounters an opposing view or questions information posted, someone always has to post "explain why your on here".
One would think the answer to that is obvious.

I don't mind an opposing view. I'm all for a good debate but only when it is a discussion and not someone just throwing out pot shot one liners.. The post above yours were having a discussion and then you post your pot shot...why. If you don't have anything of value in discussion form why bother posting is all I'm saying. Go look at your past posts. Most are 1 liners. The Random Chat Thread is a good place for those.

 

[n2mini]

Dave Rishar, our discussion all started because I made the comment that the original kept quite about their digging and would have had reason to keep it quite if they did find some kind of treasure. You apparently don't believe that and started questioning me about it and I kept having to explain it to you. Granted it's just my belief can't prove it and said as such... Your the one experiencing cognitive dissonance as you keep questioning everything over and over again.. I don't see where in my posts that I'm angry or anything I said that would lead you to believe that. I do get frustrated with having to keep explaining myself to the skeptics on here from time to time.. End of this discussion and will not post about it anymore.

Back to our original discussion. How hard is it to believe that if 3 guys were digging a hole and for whatever reason believed there was some sort of treasure in it, that they would probably not go running around town telling everyone?

 

[ECS]

... Go look at your past posts. Most are 1 liners...

Sometimes a one liner is more direct, right on, and all that needs to stated.

 

[somehiker]

I have always found it curious that when one encounters an opposing view or questions information posted, someone always has to post "explain why your on here".
One would think the answer to that is obvious.

A Psychologist would know the answer, and be able to name the compulsion as well, I suspect.

 

[gazzahk]

How hard is it to believe that if 3 guys were digging a hole and for whatever reason believed there was some sort of treasure in it, that they would probably not go running around town telling everyone?

Yep... I agree I would not be telling anyone..