Mystery of Oak Island Solved

[Raparee]

What we have is Circumstantial Evidence by way of Written and Verbal Declarations!

It is Acceptable in Court and the Prosecution has the burden of Disproving that Possibility!

In court written and oral accounts of a 90' stone or log platforms would be considered hearsay, not evidence (circumstantial or otherwise), and would not be admissible. Regardless, this isn't a court of law.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[gazzahk]

There are multiple different issues with the 90 foot stone.

1. There are documented reports of eyewitness accounts that a strange looking stone with scratches/marks that did not look like letters was found.
2. These reports were not first published for 50 years later.
3. There are no early reports of a readable code on that stone.
4. The first reports of the readable code are 100 years later in a prospectus to raise funds for treasure searchers. this document claimed the the knowledge of the code was well known.
5. the stone claimed in this document was 1 foot larger than earlier reports of the stone.
6. reports of the stone 10 years later (Now back to original size) have the code being worn away.

my view is they probably did find a weird stone but it never contained a readable code. the code story was a hoax to raise money

 

[Robot]

There are multiple different issues with the 90 foot stone.

1. there are documented reports of eyewitness a counts that a strange looking stone with scracthes/marks that did not look like letters was found.
2. These reports were not first published for 50 years later.
3. There are no early reports of a readable code on that stone.
4. The first reports of the readable code are 100 years later in a prospectus to raise funds for treasure searchers. this document claimed the the knowledge of the code was well known.
5. the stone claimed in this document was 1 foot larger than eaflier reports of the stone.
6. reports of the stone 10 years later (Now back to original size) have the code being worn away.

my view is they probably did find a weird stone but it never contained a readable code. the code story was a hoax to raise money

I would argue...Jumping to Conclusion!

 

[Red James Cash]

One thing that doesnt make sense,whhy have the tar made on the island if you have to bring the trees over from nova scotia.Why not make the tar near the trees and bring the tar to the island.Hauling trees is a lot of hard work.

 

[n2mini]

While the writers for the show tried to push the fake stone carved for the show as real, it was quickly removed from the script before further embarrassment and more folks turning off the show followed.

The fake carved stone shown by previous diggers only appeared once money was running out and they needed an infusion of cash. That fake carved stone disappeared as when folks at the time figured out it was a scam as well.

And no oak log platforms have ever been found.....their find and description was part of the original hoax story early on...

What would it take at this point in time to prove the logs every 10' ?

 

[Carl-NC]

What would it take at this point in time to prove the logs every 10' ?

A time machine, or a resurrection.

 

[gazzahk]

I would argue...Jumping to Conclusion!

Which part is jumping to conclusions?

https://www.oakislandcompendium.ca/...lost-90-foot-stone-part-2-in-a-special-series

If you read this article all the research supports the view that the "alleged decipherable code" was fake.

There is no evidence that it (a decipherable code) ever existed and this is why there is no copy of the "alleged" code. People who found the stone did not believe there was a code.... They simply used the stone as a building block....

 

[gazzahk]

No evidence... or log platforms has ever been presented.

The earliest documents have oak platforms found at 10, 20 and 30 foot. No lower then that. After that just marks..

The reports of every 10 foot to 90/100 feet do not appear until the 1870s.. My view is was just a miss reporting of this earlier documented evidence.

Smith and Vaughn, of the circumstance, and they commenced digging.
After going down ten feet they found a layer of oak timber, at twenty the same, and thirty the
same. By this time the work became too heavy for them to carry on alone, and they tried to get
the inhabitants to join them; but they refused from a kind of superstitious dread. About seven
years afterwards, Simeon Lynds, of Onslow, went down to Chester, and happening to stop with
Mr. Vaughn, he was informed of what had taken place. He then agreed to get up a company,
which he did, of about 25 or 30 men, and they commenced where the first left off, and sunk the
pit 93 feet, finding a mark every ten feet. Some of them were charcoal, some putty, and one at
80 feet was a stone cut square, two feet long and about a foot thick, with several characters cut
on it.

source: The Liverpool Transcript, October 16, 1862
https://www.oakislandcompendium.ca/...ak_island_docs_compiled_by_les_m_may_2014.pdf

 

[n2mini]

As with all the old stories, there is no way to prove or disprove any of it. As I have said before. Surely no one expected them to keep the logs that were found as they dug down for all these years... Granted they might have in the very beginning to show people and the group of folks the original 3 got to come help them but at this point in time they would be long gone and probably used along the way for bracing etc in the search...

 

[RustyGold]

this is my new and improved theory guys. about 500yrs ago, some rich dudes in europe heard that a vast and rich treasure was hidden on oak island by , of all people, the atlantians. sooo, they load up and sail on over, find what they think is the sweet spot and dig down, and down, then sideways. they find didley squat and fill the shafts back up to the top but not before some are killed in accidents and stuff falls outa their pockets along with other highly significant stuff and crap like that. then, some kids find the spot and think pirates must have buried their treasure at that spot. bam, the oak island mystery is born. well wadda ya think?

You forgot the coconuts!

 

[etex]

Put the lime in the coconut and drink it all up🥥

 

[Raparee]

The earliest documents have oak platforms found at 10, 20 and 30 foot. No lower then that. After that just marks..

The reports of every 10 foot to 90/100 feet do not appear until the 1870s.. My view is was just a miss reporting of this earlier documented evidence.



source: The Liverpool Transcript, October 16, 1862
https://www.oakislandcompendium.ca/...ak_island_docs_compiled_by_les_m_may_2014.pdf

That's right. Stories that cannot be verified cannot be accepted as fact.

 

[n2mini]

That's right. Stories that cannot be verified cannot be accepted as fact.

That is true but they also can't be ruled as fact to not have happened either.. As most skeptics on here seem to think and keeping saying...

 

[etex]

And you can't rule out as fact Bigfoot didn't dig the money pit way back then

 

[n2mini]

And you can't rule out as fact Bigfoot didn't dig the money pit way back then

Not sure why you bother to post on here, let along watch the show. Your last 15-20 posts (or possibly more, I only looked back so far) have all been negative/sarcastic to what others have posted.. You could add to the discussion while being a skeptic, without every post being a snide comment..

 

[Raparee]

That is true but they also can't be ruled as fact to not have happened either.. As most skeptics on here seem to think and keeping saying...

Making an argument like that could get you accused of making an appeal to ignorance.

 

[gazzahk]

That's right. Stories that cannot be verified cannot be accepted as fact.

You are correct.... It is all based on stories not evidence..

For decades researchers have been hunting for documentary evidence that the Onslow Company really existed and conducted their dig in 1803. Even the date of the Money Pit discovery is in doubt among serious investigators. Some accounts set the date at 1799. Some accounts say Sam Ball was one of the three discoverers, leaving out John Smith. Only one thing is certain among authors and researchers alike, and that is that nothing is certain about the early years.

The Onslow Company, it is said, was comprised of Simeon Lynds of Truro, Colonel Robert Archibald, Sheriff Thomas Harris of Pictou, Captain David Archibald and the three discoverers. No one has ever found, or brought forth publicly, any stock certificates, bills of sale, company ledgers, or letters to support that this company existed. We're not saying that it didn't exist. We're simply putting emphasis on how little can be proven at this point in time.

Source: https://www.oakislandcompendium.ca/...-the-evidence-they-left-or-didnt-leave-behind (Very interesting article)

It is almost beyond belief the amount of money and effort that have been put into looking for this "treasure" with NO EVIDENCE that even the pit itself existed...

 

[n2mini]

I'm pretty sure for the first 150 years or so people knew where the original 3 first started digging. Hence the Money Pit.. It was there. Doesn't mean there was treasure in it but the hole was there that at some point years later got named the Money Pit..

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

The “MONEY PIT” monicker was derived over the years as scammers kept getting foolish investors to give them money.....with the money lining scammer’s pockets and no treasure ever found, over time the scam became known as the “MONEY PIT”....folks eventually figured out that giving the scammers money was like throwing their dollars into a bottomless pit....

 

[lokiblossom]

The “MONEY PIT” monicker was derived over the years as scammers kept getting foolish investors to give them money.....with the money lining scammer’s pockets and no treasure ever found, over time the scam became known as the “MONEY PIT”....folks eventually figured out that giving the scammers money was like throwing their dollars into a bottomless pit....

You know that's not right don't you?

Cheers, Loki