Alternative Theory - Naval Stores - J.Steele

[n2mini]

I NEVER gave Franklin crap about anything, I disagree with him on a few key issues, of which everyone here is aware.
none of those issues has anything to do with legitimate, plausible theories.

but they are possible and as you and singlestack have recently said not everything historical is written.. So no one has 100% proof and can't state either way as fact.. only that it is possible. Maybe not likely but possible..

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Al D]

but they are possible and as you and singlestack have recently said not everything historical is written.. So no one has 100% proof and can't state either way as fact.. only that it is possible. Maybe not likely but possible..

What the F$&@ is your point?

 

[ECS]

I am not suggesting it.....I simply stated that of all of the theories out there, that one was plausible.

So many theories with so little facts.
'Nuff Said

 

[n2mini]

that everything you say and the other nay sayers keep speaking as if everything you say is a fact and it's not. That is what I'm saying. I have posted all day debunking what ya'll have said and then you and others then some what changed how you worded what you trying to say once I called you out on it. Lets just speak in facts which there are very few of or say I "think" this or that and not try to make it sound like you have inside info when you don't... We all know that not everything that has happened in the world is written down some where as has been mentioned today and that applies to both sides of this story of OI..

 

[Phil]

So many theories with so little facts.
'Nuff Said

FACT............Carbon dating proves there was activity on the island long before the "Money Pit" was discovered.
FACT............Carbon dating of artifacts removed from deep underground proves they dug extensive tunnels underground.
FACT............Carbon dating proves they built a significant amount of infrastructure around the island.

There is a tremendous of scientific evidence.........all of which are "facts". The only question is using that evidence to determine who they were, and why they were there.

For all we know, the entire island was nothing more than a place to repair ships and store gunpowder underground while the repairs were being done.

 

[Al D]

This may of interest to some.

 

[Phil]

This may of interest to some. View attachment 1897653

The age of the slipway was determined via dendrochronology, which is 100% accurate.

 

[Al D]

The age of the slipway was determined via dendrochronology, which is 100% accurate.

Yes...it was.

 

[mts]

FACT............Carbon dating proves there was activity on the island long before the "Money Pit" was discovered.
FACT............Carbon dating of artifacts removed from deep underground proves they dug extensive tunnels underground.
FACT............Carbon dating proves they built a significant amount of infrastructure around the island.

There is a tremendous of scientific evidence.........all of which are "facts". The only question is using that evidence to determine who they were, and why they were there.

For all we know, the entire island was nothing more than a place to repair ships and store gunpowder underground while the repairs were being done.

FACT........ Carbon dating only proves the age of an item. It does NOT prove HOW it got there, WHO put it there, or WHEN it got put there.

Very deep pits were dug by treasure hunters way after the money pit was first discovered. These holes and pits were then filled back in with debris that was lying around on the surface. They used excavators and very easily could have taken a big scoop of surface dirt that contained very old artifacts and debris that were never even in the pit itself. These were then poured down into the pit making it look like it was put there long ago. There has been so much activity there that it is impossible to say what was original and what was put there simply as part of the refill process.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

To be clear, no money pit has ever been discovered.....

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

"Pit" maybe. Which is a shallow depression in the surrounding soil. Money - no.

So the first recorded story (from 1860) was that kids/young adults dug in a general area in 1795 because the spot was a). clear of vegitation or b). was a depression or c). there were grooves in the bark of a branch above the spot that may have been from a block and tackle, and d). were drawn to the spot by lights on the island.

And the kids found nothing. Which has been the case in the 27 other attempts. Pretty conclusive that people have wasted a LOT of time and effort chasing imaginary gains.

 

[Phil]

To be clear, no money pit has ever been discovered.....

Guys have been dumping a lot of money into that pit for 200 years............Thus why it is called the "Money Pit".

 

[ECS]

FACT............Carbon dating proves there was activity on the island long before the "Money Pit" was discovered.
FACT............Carbon dating of artifacts removed from deep underground proves they dug extensive tunnels underground.
FACT............Carbon dating proves they built a significant amount of infrastructure around the island...

What was Carbon dated besides the coconut coir that proves activity, dug underground tunnels, and significant infrastructure?

 

[Phil]

FACT........ Carbon dating only proves the age of an item. It does NOT prove HOW it got there, WHO put it there, or WHEN it got put there.

Very deep pits were dug by treasure hunters way after the money pit was first discovered. These holes and pits were then filled back in with debris that was lying around on the surface. They used excavators and very easily could have taken a big scoop of surface dirt that contained very old artifacts and debris that were never even in the pit itself. These were then poured down into the pit making it look like it was put there long ago. There has been so much activity there that it is impossible to say what was original and what was put there simply as part of the refill process.

It is one thing to dismiss the possibility of a treasure on Oak Island. In fact, I would argue an island where you are repairing ships is a very bad location for burying a priceless treasure.......Unless it was only temporary.

Conversely, trying to dismiss the entire thing as an elaborate hoax is no different than claiming the Templars were in Nova Scotia...............The evidence does not support either theory.

 

[Al D]

It is one thing to dismiss the possibility of a treasure on Oak Island. In fact, I would argue an island where you are repairing ships is a very bad location for burying a priceless treasure.......Unless it was only temporary.

Conversely, trying to dismiss the entire thing as an elaborate hoax is no different than claiming the Templars were in Nova Scotia...............The evidence does not support either theory.

I believe the Hoax comment was intended to pertain to the show, Curse of Oak Island, although it would appear that many of the previous searchers pulled a fast one in order to gain funding for further digs.

 

[n2mini]

sounds like c14 carbon dating isn't very accurate if they keep changing the numbers needed to use it. regardless of which side of this your own... I'm guessing the Laginas are using a lab that is using whatever the latest version of c14 testing there is to get their dates...

Also again, there will not be enough evidence of a tree that has been laying around on the ground for 200-300 years to get backfilled into the MP hole and then be getting a false reading from that..

 

[mts]

It is one thing to dismiss the possibility of a treasure on Oak Island. In fact, I would argue an island where you are repairing ships is a very bad location for burying a priceless treasure.......Unless it was only temporary.

Conversely, trying to dismiss the entire thing as an elaborate hoax is no different than claiming the Templars were in Nova Scotia...............The evidence does not support either theory.

At no point did my comment attempt to "dismiss the entire thing". I was simply pointing out that there is a simple explanation for any carbon dating of items that were dug up. Which, since no treasure has ever been found, seems to be the most popular type of "evidence" put forward by those who believe that there was once a treasure buried there. I'm simply trying to help people understand why it would be possible for someone to dig up artifacts and old wood from deep underground and why doing so is not proof of anything other than that the ground has been worked so hard for so many years by so many people that it has been completely contaminated. Any old artifacts or wood taken from that area do not provide even a shred of evidence of the pre-existence of a pit or shaft or what could have been down there hundreds of years ago.

 

[mts]

sounds like c14 carbon dating isn't very accurate if they keep changing the numbers needed to use it. regardless of which side of this your own... I'm guessing the Laginas are using a lab that is using whatever the latest version of c14 testing there is to get their dates...

Also again, there will not be enough evidence of a tree that has been laying around on the ground for 200-300 years to get backfilled into the MP hole and then be getting a false reading from that..

There is no evidence of a tree being backfilled, but there is less evidence of a tree having been placed there by people 200-300 years ago when less than 100 years ago, treasure hunters basically dug the whole thing up already and backfilled it.

I can't prove that the red coated creature that people see running through my yard at night isn't a Chupacabra. But since the most likely explanation is that it is a fox, then it makes sense to point that out to people who continue to insist that it must be some sort of mystical creature. Who is more likely to be right?

Neither one of us has evidence. But logic tells us that what I'm saying is not only VERY likely, but is GUARANTEED to have occurred to a certain extent. When they backfilled that huge crater, it is almost 100% certain that objects were put into that hole that were not there in the first place. If you've ever looked at the pictures of that crater you would know what I mean. I don't know the exact dimensions but the thing was probably over 50 yards wide and a hundred feet deep. There is no way that surface contaminates didn't get into that hole. So anything they dig up and carbon date could simply have been sitting near the surface which easily explains away the strongest evidence most people have provided to date.

 

[DaveVanP]

I missed nothing. Post like yours is what is ruining History for everyone. The story of the Tucson Artifacts or the City of Calalus did not come out until after 1924. So there is not a big fat chance there could not have been a retraction in April of 1909. You always like to deal in FACTS. Well is 50 FACTS for you.Fifty "Facts" about the Tucson Artifacts - Calalus Calalus

I don't see a connection with the "Tucson Artifacts" or "Jewish City (Calalus) in Arizona" has to do with the supposed Egyptians in the Grand Canyon...unless you are now suggesting the Jews escaped the Grand Canyon Egyptians as part of an Exodus Was there also a North American version of Moses Did C.B. DeMille capture it all on camera?

The Story appeared in the April 5, 1909 edition of the Gazette, after being "set up" with a story printed on March 12. 1909 telling of the "progress" of an expedition of "renowned explorer G.E. Kincaid" - however, there no record of ANY "explorations" by a "G.E. Kincaid", in any other newspaper, magazine, or journal, no Natioanl Geographic story, nothing - other than two articles in the Gazette. Supposedly, Kincaid made a 6-month trip down the Colorado River from Green River, Wyoming - and oddly he is reported in March as saying "...the most interesting features of the trip was passing through the sluiceways at Laguna dam".

The April 5 story introduced the world to "Professor S.A. Jordan" archaeologist of the "Smithsonian Institute" - of which there is NO RECORD in the Smithsonian of ANYONE by that name ever having been employed, contracted, consulted, or received contributions from or by the Institution, nor are there any records of ANYONE by that name EVER having been a student or a professor of archaeology anywhere in the world in the latter half of the 1800s or early 1900s. (there was a young German art historian and archaeologist named "Julius A. Jordon"[b. 1877] who had never been in the US or had any association or correspondence with the Smithsonian). Jordan was reported to have headed a group of scientists, "funded by the Smithsonian" to explore and document the previously-"uninteresting" archaeological discovery of Mr. Kincaid - and of this expedition and it's funding, there is NO record - other than what the Gazette reported, of course... The newspaper went on to describe the "wonders" found in "Kincaid's Cave" - the phrasing and descriptions of which were found to be word-for-word from Theosophist writings of Mu and Lemuria from the 1880s and 90s, and the rantings of Helena Blavatsky and Aleister Crowley.

Yes, the long arm of the Templar Global New World Order has a long reach to implement such a conspiracy for such a cover-up.

 

[franklin]

What about the 50 facts? I guess they mean nothing to you? That is a completely different story than the Tucson Artifacts.. Fifty "Facts" about the Tucson Artifacts - Calalus Calalus