New treasure theory?

[ECS]

It is highly noticeable that when one's suspect facts are questioned and disputed by actual facts, they attack the messenger when unable to disprove the message.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[franklin]

It is highly noticeable that when one's suspect facts are questioned and disputed by actual facts, they attack the messenger when unable to disprove the message.

ECS you are the one always attacking everyone like you are an Internet Troll that has to have people see everything your way and no other way. If we were all like you nothing in this world would ever get done. We would all sit around and like Gulliver's Travel be saying, "We're doomed Marticia we doomed.

 

[NHBandit]

Yes, I am a Master Mason, a Royal Arch Mason, a Cryptic Mason and a Knight Templar.

LOL.. but that other dude is a 27th degree Googler so you must be wrong... I love reading the comments of the "experts" who haven't got a clue...

 

[ECS]

When has the correction of misinformation be it from poor research or speculation that was posted as fact by presenting actual documented facts been considered as "attacking", Franklin?
By "attacking" the messenger (Re Post #142), instead of providing a factual counterpoint, only supports the validity of the information presented.
Next time, if you don't like or agree with the facts presented in a post, instead of this "Internet Troll" name calling the messenger, address the message with factual information that proves it wrong.

 

[lokiblossom]

Selling pieces of the True Cross and other "Holy relic" items, as well as body parts of the Saints was big business in the Middle Ages, but that does not provide any evidence that Grail was found or that it was carried to Nova Scotia.

Lets look at another clue that Sauniere himself may have left in his little church named for Mary Magdalene (he actually did leave several clues). In his depictions of the Stations of the Cross (in most all Catholic Church's)at Station VIII there is a child swathed in Scottish plaid. The New Year is most always portrayed by an infant, could Sauniere, who by then knew about Poussin and Tenniers been with the child pointing to New Scotland?

Thats why I used the term "a different animal", the point was that for the first decade of their existence that was their mission, to find religious items for a relic hungry church, not protecting traveling Christians. and btw, the Grail was not an item to be found like a cup or platter, and HBHG didn't have it quite correctly either.

You had asked earlier if I could document the fact that the Templars were known as keepers of the Grail. Its simply an "understanding", as most of the Grail Romances of the period specifically identify the Templars as such.

Cheers, Loki

 

[Dave Rishar]

ECS you are the one always attacking everyone like you are an Internet Troll that has to have people see everything your way and no other way. If we were all like you nothing in this world would ever get done. We would all sit around and like Gulliver's Travel be saying, "We're doomed Marticia we doomed.

I see ECS attacking theories, not people. A number of us do that here. When we see a piece of evidence that doesn’t make sense or is incorrect, we mention it and point out why we have a problem with it. One can choose to interpret this as a personal attack, but a better way to go would be to consider it a form of scholarly peer review.

When I’ve presented my theory to the world (by putting it on the internet, I’ve essentially done this), I’ve invited the world to review it by default. If people evaluate my theory and the evidence supporting it and point out problems with it, that doesn’t make any of us bad people. All it does is show that my theory may not be correct. I have a few options at this point, depending on how I’m approaching things.

One way forward is to submit to my cognitive bias, ignore all evidence against my theory, and double down in order to satisfy my ego. This is what people naturally are inclined to do, as our brains are wired for cognitive bias. It feels right because of this, but it almost never results in a correct answer. However, my brain usually doesn’t care whether or not I’m correct - more on that below. Peer review exists specifically to try to prevent this.

Or, I can objectively re-evaluate the evidence - all of the evidence, not just the evidence that supports my theory. (In fact, I should throw that theory out at this point and start over. The fact that I had a theory before I had all the facts guarantees confirmation bias and means that my theory will be incorrect, except by accident.). Then I can say, "Hmmm. This doesn’t prove what I thought. What does it prove?" This feels wrong and it’s not easy to do. My instincts are screaming at me that the people that tore up my theory are enemies (there’s that cognitive dissonance at work)...but then I remember that my brain is a sometimes clever but very quirky lump of meat that was engineered to keep a naked caveman alive long enough to reproduce in a prehistoric environment, and that outside of very specific scenarios, those instincts are feeding me unproductive suggestions today. However, this is exactly the course of action that I need to take if I want to arrive at the correct answer, rather than an answer that feels good.

If someone shoots down a piece of your evidence, it doesn’t make them a bad person. It means that you had a bad piece of evidence. If this happens with a significant amount of your evidence, again, that doesn’t mean that they’re a bad person. It means that you had a lot of bad evidence, and probably have a bad theory as a result of it. Having a bad theory or an erroneous belief does not imply anything negative about you at all, other than that you’re stuck with a sometimes clever but very quirky lump of meat in your skull that’s performing all sorts of shenanigans in order to keep you alive in a prehistoric environment, but has absolutely no interest in your beliefs being correct outside of that specific parameter...

...just like the rest of us.

Apologies for the long post, but sometimes we need to be reminded of how our brains work and just how bad our brains are at being logical and objective - me as much as anyone.

 

[franklin]

When has the correction of misinformation be it from poor research or speculation that was posted as fact by presenting actual documented facts been considered as "attacking", Franklin?
By "attacking" the messenger (Re Post #142), instead of providing a factual counterpoint, only supports the validity of the information presented.
Next time, if you don't like or agree with the facts presented in a post, instead of this "Internet Troll" name calling the messenger, address the message with factual information that proves it wrong.

ECS, It is like this, if we all had all of the facts or documentation there would be nothing to discuss. You rant about how poster's information or research is faulty and then you want us to put all the facts out there to prove a point or a story to be true. If we could do all of that or you could do all of that why talk about anything we could all just go get the damn treasure if we had all the facts. So don't keep asking people to lay facts on you. Hell if I had any facts I would not spread them on a forum for everyone to see. That is like getting on a rope bridge between two mountains and cut the rope hoping you will go to the mountain to your right. Either way you go you are going to die.

 

[ECS]

...
You had asked earlier if I could document the fact that the Templars were known as keepers of the Grail. Its simply an "understanding", as most of the Grail Romances of the period specifically identify the Templars as such.

The first documented "Grail Romance", Chretien de Troyes "Perceval Ou Le Conte Du Graal" has teenage Perceval meeting a group of knights and decides to join King Arthur's court.
There is no mention of Templars, only "Knights", as with all the other period King Arthur Round Table Grail stories.
In the section where Perceval sees the Grail along with a lance, it is described as a golden serving dish, and the word "holy" is never mentioned, that is later added by other Grail romance/King Arthur authors.
*NOTE* The first English prose version, Le Morte D'Arthur, by Sir Thomas Mallory ( written in1469-1470), DOES NOT make any reference to the Knights Templar.

 

[ECS]

Lets look at another clue that Sauniere himself may have left in his little church named for Mary Magdalene (he actually did leave several clues). In his depictions of the Stations of the Cross (in most all Catholic Church's)at Station VIII there is a child swathed in Scottish plaid. The New Year is most always portrayed by an infant, could Sauniere, who by then knew about Poussin and Tenniers been with the child pointing to New Scotland?...

Sauniere ordered the "Stations of the Cross" panels from a catalog of Giscard of Toulouse, as did many other churches throughout France, and are NOT UNIQUE to the Church of St Mary Magdalene in Rennes Le Chateau.
Could Giscard of Toulouse know about Poussin and Teniers and was a member of the "underground Stream" of secret societies ?

 

[lokiblossom]

Sauniere ordered the "Stations of the Cross" panels from a catalog of Giscard of Toulouse, as did many other churches throughout France, and are NOT UNIQUE to the Church of St Mary Magdalene in Rennes Le Chateau.
Could Giscard of Toulouse know about Poussin and Teniers and was a member of the "underground Stream" of secret societies ?

Sauniere did buy the Stations of the Cross, but who painted the scottish plaid on the child, or do you think that was a standard theme? And there are other anomalies, correct?


Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

The first documented "Grail Romance", Chretien de Troyes "Perceval Ou Le Conte Du Graal" has teenage Perceval meeting a group of knights and decides to join King Arthur's court.
There is no mention of Templars, only "Knights", as with all the other period King Arthur Round Table Grail stories.
In the section where Perceval sees the Grail along with a lance, it is described as a golden serving dish, and the word "holy" is never mentioned, that is later added by other Grail romance/King Arthur authors.
*NOTE* The first English prose version, Le Morte D'Arthur, by Sir Thomas Mallory ( written in1469-1470), DOES NOT make any reference to the Knights Templar.

I didn't say all of them I said most!

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

Will you name some of the "most" that mention the Templars?

 

[ECS]

Sauniere did buy the Stations of the Cross, but who painted the scottish plaid on the child, or do you think that was a standard theme? And there are other anomalies, correct?

Yes indeed, like that demon statue. Does he also point to Arcadia ? Or another Templar reference?
If it is a Scottish plaid on that child, what clan does it represent?

 

[lokiblossom]

Yes indeed, like that demon statue. Does he also point to Arcadia ? Or another Templar reference?
If it is a Scottish plaid on that child, what clan does it represent?

Don't know, and I doubt if the artist knew, the clan wasn't the point!

Cheers, Loki

 

[lokiblossom]

Will you name some of the "most" that mention the Templars?

Like I wrote, most of them, I'm sure you have read them all!

Cheers, Loki

 

[ECS]

Don't know, and I doubt if the artist knew, the clan wasn't the point!

Whomever authored that book from which this "fact" was claimed missed a golden opportunity of including the Sinclair family, Scottish Masonic groups, and Rosslyn Chapel by not identifying that alleged "Scottish plaid" tartan to a clan.

 

[ECS]

Like I wrote, most of them, I'm sure you have read them all!

Considering that none of the period "Grail Romance" sagas mentioned the Templars, by your reply, I'm sure you haven't read any.

 

[lokiblossom]

Whomever authored that book from which this "fact" was claimed missed a golden opportunity of including the Sinclair family, Scottish Masonic groups, and Rosslyn Chapel by not identifying that alleged "Scottish plaid" tartan to a clan.

In my own humble opinion the Sinclair's (St. Clair's), Scottish Mason's and Rosslyn Chapel have little to do with the Grail story.

Cheers, Loki

 

[franklin]

In my own humble opinion the Sinclair's (St. Clair's), Scottish Mason's and Rosslyn Chapel have little to do with the Grail story.

Cheers, Loki

Then you have not read the Cremona Document about Sir Ralph de Sudeley coming over to Arcadia in 1175? It proves the Knight's Templar was over here right after they discovered King Solomon's Treasure under the South Wall of Solomon's Temple.

 

[Al D]

Then you have not read the Cremona Document about Sir Ralph de Sudeley coming over to Arcadia in 1175? It proves the Knight's Templar was over here right after they discovered King Solomon's Treasure under the South Wall of Solomon's Temple.

The Cremona document is highly suspected to be fraudulent