... I’d postulated that maybe there’s a Geometrical Swamp which perhaps has a tunnel from its centre leading towards the slightly higher ground northeast of the Money Pit. I also suspected that this might be what’s referenced by the La Formule (McGinnis) Cipher.
The response above was predictable. I fully expected somebody to laugh this out of court without having bothered to investigate or to question why - simply because this does seem to be the way of the forum.
The McGinnis cipher was published in 2016 and makes reference to a tunnel of 1065 feet with an intermediate distance of 522 feet + 40 feet = 562 feet. However, my book on the Oak Island mystery was published in 2013 and, among possibilities, postulates a tunnel of 1065 feet also having an intermediate distance of 562 feet. These are exactly the same lengths, but my book was published three years earlier than the cipher.
It did strike me that somebody may have read my book and created the cipher as a hoax. Of course, it could have been me who created the cipher, but it wasn’t. The matching lengths could, of course, be coincidence, but, as I don’t know either way, I felt that the matter might bear some thought.
I appreciate that it’s easier to decide that you know the answer without investigation and to scoff rather than ask questions, but that’s not my way.
I don’t place much faith in Zena Halpern’s maps because they don’t say anything that might help solve the mystery. Likewise, the cipher stone allegedly found in the Money Pit. In the same way, I didn’t expect the McGinnis cipher to provide any useful information either, so I didn’t look at it until very recently.
I’ve always been concerned that while it seems there could be distinct pointers to the spot I suggest might be the place of deposit there are no documentary indicators or ground markers that might support my being on the right track. Furthermore, I had three main options, and I didn’t know which one to favour. These were 1064 feet and 521 feet, 1065 feet and 522 feet, and 1073 feet (for 1081) and 578 feet.
While I accept that the cipher looks suspicious, I have to wonder how it comes to reflect one of my options particularly when I introduced a subterfuge into my book to avoid giving too much away. However, anyone who bothers to look for them can see that these lengths are present in my work three years before the cipher was published.
All I wish to do is to report that this happened, but it seems that others just want to laugh without having bothered to ask why I raised a topic that I know full well is treated with amusement if not contempt and is casually dismissed by many without a moment’s thought.
Is this really an acceptable response to serious questions, inquiries and research on the forum? You may decide that you know all the answers without doing any investigation, but why laugh at others who are actually looking for those answers?
It's what these documents say that might be significant not the pieces of paper they're written on nor who owned them at any time or who eventually came to be associated with them.
We should be careful that we don't dismiss original documents pertaining to the Oak Island enterprise simply because cranks and eccentrics got hold of them and used them to promote their particular views.
You may include me in this, and make me kook of the week and mock me and my work, but you should really think carefully about what you're doing and why you're doing it.