Season 12

Not sure that I've seen it mentioned, but what is the "treasure" supposed to be? Gold, jewelry, Jimmy Hoffa, bearer bonds? :dontknow:
The treasure was a shipment of items from Spain, some thought (at the tiime) to be ancient relics.

It was an earlier 'lost treasure' legend that was already in existence. Parts of it are just repeated in the earlier versions of the Oak Island story before they got changed to remove it and it became "No one knows nothing about waht went on'.

Dan Blankenship was even telling you the treasure was of Spanish origin, but everyone just went off on silly 'theories' instead of just reading what was occurring back then.

If you want confirmation contact Doug Crowell for verification. He admitted to me that they that they suspected the whole thing was to do with some earlier story that everyone was following, they just the couldn't identify what the story was.

They know now.
 

I'll mention this also, if you want to get an idea of what the missing Spanish shipment searched for on Oak Island comprised of, just look to the lists/inventories of it that are given in the other locations where the same treasure was being searched for.

What, they didn't tell you on The Curse of Oak Island there were other islands being searched at the same time?

Nah, they wouldn't do that........
 

Yes,, Darcy Occonor was informed about the existence of a 'treasure map' and copies of it being used on Oak Island. Here is a typical exceprt from correspondence to him (this from John Goodman).

Again, as this was not revealed by O'connor, the question to answer is 'why'.

You quoted me, but you are answering a question I did not ask. That's your question, not mine. Meanwhile you conveniently avoided answering any of the questions I did ask. But be sure and double down on your extra-helpful collusion theories ... that's a much better use of your time. <sound effect: derisive tuba>

As I keep saying, I don't care about a map motivation or why it was omitted. I could speculate as to numerous legit reasons why any given datum might not make it into a volume about the subject, but ultimately, about this particular thing, I DON'T CARE. I have a feeling many folk who have a fascination with the Oak Island mystery are equally unconcerned about this. It's just not that interesting of a point.

You took a step in the right direction by informing us who the pull-quote came from. Even better would be a name of the source file, volume, chapter number, and/or a link.

--GT
 

YES, my first thought would be someone dug up something of value or why do it.

If I found a dug hole in the woods I'd assume someone was digging to establish a well. When they didn't hit water, they moved on to another spot and abandoned the idea of living on that plot of land. Never in a million years would I think that someone must have dug up buried treasure! I think you've been watching too many treasure hunting movies!
 

If I found a dug hole in the woods I'd assume someone was digging to establish a well. When they didn't hit water, they moved on to another spot and abandoned the idea of living on that plot of land. Never in a million years would I think that someone must have dug up buried treasure! I think you've been watching too many treasure hunting movies!
Agree.... We'd have absolutely no reason to believe that any more than the Easter Bunny. How anyone could jump to "something of value" must have been dug up is beyond my understanding I guess.
 

Heck, you could find a hole with a sign next to it that reads "I found 2 million pounds buried forty feet below" and it wouldn't tell you anything useful.
 

but what if you found an depression in the ground and for whatever reason decided to dig a ways just to see if you find anything and you come across some logs covering it. Do you stop there and walk away always thinking back why would someone have done that, or dig them up and keep digging..
 

but what if you found an depression in the ground and for whatever reason decided to dig a ways just to see if you find anything and you come across some logs covering it. Do you stop there and walk away always thinking back why would someone have done that, or dig them up and keep digging..
That sounds like a story told about Oak Island long ago. It didn't make sense then and/or now. But some people believed it and continued to dig. And some STILL believe it 200+ yrs later and lots of big holes dug in it and all around it.

The difference with YOUR statement above is if I / ME found it and the logs. And if I was curious I sure wouldn't invite the world in to watch or look or help dig up.... what...? Stories have a way to warp a human brain into things there not.
 

The treasure was a shipment of items from Spain, some thought (at the tiime) to be ancient relics.

It was an earlier 'lost treasure' legend that was already in existence. Parts of it are just repeated in the earlier versions of the Oak Island story before they got changed to remove it and it became "No one knows nothing about waht went on'.

Dan Blankenship was even telling you the treasure was of Spanish origin, but everyone just went off on silly 'theories' instead of just reading what was occurring back then.

If you want confirmation contact Doug Crowell for verification. He admitted to me that they that they suspected the whole thing was to do with some earlier story that everyone was following, they just the couldn't identify what the story was.

They know now.
The Del Mar map isn't even authentic (Everyone by now accepts this as fact) , and not that old. It is one in a series of fakes that have served the wild imaginations of those who could easily, and difficultly (!), see through them to serve their deepest desires.

What Blankenship settled on evolved. He scoured the world looking for a story to fit his delusion. Some of the notable things he favored are the Concepcion salvage and the alleged Lord Anson (Spanish shipping of the ark) mystery folklore. How it ended for Dan was not with those theories. Dan was under the influence of his American friend Betty McKaig in the 1970s who had continued the 50+ year investigation of the Baconian scholar Leonell Strong into a star mapping theory based in the Northern Cross asterism's presence in the constellation of Cygnus. During these years his interest aligned with those of David Tobias who had DeVere, Bacon and Shakespeare in mind. Out of it came a loss of interest in the MP workings. We know he shifted to the hole he called 10-X. The name itself is evocative of ideas in the McKaig theories. Both 10 and X have the same value. This is a theme in the Shakespearean masque suggestion where we have two faces for one reality. The sum of 10 and X is 20 (anciently twenty from "twin t"). The twin T mystery is Strong's pet mystery. It refers to the Triple Tau and its explanatory value in understanding the mystery of life and death. The product of 10 by X is 100 which was understood by Strong to be the Tudor cipher value of Francis Bacon (add up the positional value of the letters in the 24 position alphabet, 67+33).

After Tobias left with his money Dan floundered. He basically hand dug 10-X until the Laginas showed up and reinvigorated the much older theories of countless brain dead scoundrels.

This is not to say any of Strong or McKaig's research has merit. There is nothing in it that implicates OI over any other place except that OI already had an aura of mystery which had shifted there from another local island (Hobson's Nose). The shifting of the story happened between 1830 and the first searcher efforts in the 1840s.

I implore you stop to inventing shit up based on things long ago discredited and spreading it confidently.
 

but what if you found an depression in the ground and for whatever reason decided to dig a ways just to see if you find anything and you come across some logs covering it. Do you stop there and walk away always thinking back why would someone have done that, or dig them up and keep digging..
You've only come across a story that says that. When walking in the woods and being given a story what part of the walk makes you accept the story? There are ways to condition you into accepting the story. The story may involve things you can see in your walk.
 

The Del Mar map isn't even authentic (Everyone by now accepts this as fact) , and not that old. It is one in a series of fakes that have served the wild imaginations of those who could easily, and difficultly (!), see through them to serve their deepest desires.

What Blankenship settled on evolved. He scoured the world looking for a story to fit his delusion. Some of the notable things he favored are the Concepcion salvage and the alleged Lord Anson (Spanish shipping of the ark) mystery folklore. How it ended for Dan was not with those theories. Dan was under the influence of his American friend Betty McKaig in the 1970s who had continued the 50+ year investigation of the Baconian scholar Leonell Strong into a star mapping theory based in the Northern Cross asterism's presence in the constellation of Cygnus. During these years his interest aligned with those of David Tobias who had DeVere, Bacon and Shakespeare in mind. Out of it came a loss of interest in the MP workings. We know he shifted to the hole he called 10-X. The name itself is evocative of ideas in the McKaig theories. Both 10 and X have the same value. This is a theme in the Shakespearean masque suggestion where we have two faces for one reality. The sum of 10 and X is 20 (anciently twenty from "twin t"). The twin T mystery is Strong's pet mystery. It refers to the Triple Tau and its explanatory value in understanding the mystery of life and death. The product of 10 by X is 100 which was understood by Strong to be the Tudor cipher value of Francis Bacon (add up the positional value of the letters in the 24 position alphabet, 67+33).

After Tobias left with his money Dan floundered. He basically hand dug 10-X until the Laginas showed up and reinvigorated the much older theories of countless brain dead scoundrels.

This is not to say any of Strong or McKaig's research has merit. There is nothing in it that implicates OI over any other place except that OI already had an aura of mystery which had shifted there from another local island (Hobson's Nose). The shifting of the story happened between 1830 and the first searcher efforts in the 1840s.

I implore you stop to inventing shit up based on things long ago discredited and spreading it confidently.
looks like you have. a handle on oak island. can't fool you tell us what treasure is on Oak Island ? ...Have you ever been underground ....back in the 14th 15th 16th century there were travel agents selling tickets to Oak Island for your vacation and you could dig tunnels and pick hundreds of tons of rock and build roads...FOR FUN back in the day you had to build your own ships and stock them and gather a crew....every time you left your port chances were good you would never be seen again but they went to oak I sland for vacation ..
 

looks like you have. a handle on oak island. can't fool you tell us what treasure is on Oak Island ? ...Have you ever been underground ....back in the 14th 15th 16th century there were travel agents selling tickets to Oak Island for your vacation and you could dig tunnels and pick hundreds of tons of rock and build roads...FOR FUN back in the day you had to build your own ships and stock them and gather a crew....every time you left your port chances were good you would never be seen again but they went to oak I sland for vacation ..
That's a loaded question. We absolutely do not know we are dealing with a "treasure", or even and older than searcher era "mystery" at OI. What we deal with are suggestions that are very much trying to get us to link OI to a reason for a story involving it.

Nobody in Europe would have any specific privileged destination in mind prior to there being detailed charted maps of this area, ca. 1751. You could fumble there and not know where you were, assuming you could do a trans-Atlantic voyage. Those voyages were not technologically feasible until the late 15th century. Part of the reason Vikings get trotted out is because coastal Northern island hopping in shallow boats had allowed early voyages to a least Northern Newfoundland. They like to keep that "possibility" spoken in order to obfuscate about trans-Atlantic voyage feasibility.

I like to think I have enough of a handle on the literary traditions that got borrowed in the earliest details we are given in the OI folklore to sniff out who the rats were who mixed in elements in their descriptions to draw a specific type of observer in. The treasure in the lore is the afterlife. The moral of the story is to not die in a shaft trying to decipher the meaning of symbols which you are certain will answer all your questions about your fate. It's a theme from the colonial era Freemasonry about staying on the straight and narrow path with faith. A lot of people sill believe in that treasure. Should they?
 

You've only come across a story that says that. When walking in the woods and being given a story what part of the walk makes you accept the story? There are ways to condition you into accepting the story. The story may involve things you can see in your walk.
but for the 3 guys who apparently started all this that is their story. Walking across an island found a depression in the ground for whatever reason decided to dig.. Found what they thought were hand placed logs. So if anyone found this would you just stop or would you keep digging. Someone said they'd just keep walking if they found a hole or a depression in the ground and chalk it up to sink hole. 3 guys on OI had probably never heard of or seen a sink hole...
 

but what if you found an depression in the ground and for whatever reason decided to dig a ways just to see if you find anything and you come across some logs covering it. Do you stop there and walk away always thinking back why would someone have done that, or dig them up and keep digging..
The finding of log platforms in the imaginary money pit was yet another made up story to generate interest to obtain investors.

The only wood found digging on oak island is wood left behind in the ground by previous grifters.
 

The Del Mar map isn't even authentic (Everyone by now accepts this as fact) , and not that old. It is one in a series of fakes that have served the wild imaginations of those who could easily, and difficultly (!), see through them to serve their deepest desires.

What Blankenship settled on evolved. He scoured the world looking for a story to fit his delusion. Some of the notable things he favored are the Concepcion salvage and the alleged Lord Anson (Spanish shipping of the ark) mystery folklore. How it ended for Dan was not with those theories. Dan was under the influence of his American friend Betty McKaig in the 1970s who had continued the 50+ year investigation of the Baconian scholar Leonell Strong into a star mapping theory based in the Northern Cross asterism's presence in the constellation of Cygnus. During these years his interest aligned with those of David Tobias who had DeVere, Bacon and Shakespeare in mind. Out of it came a loss of interest in the MP workings. We know he shifted to the hole he called 10-X. The name itself is evocative of ideas in the McKaig theories. Both 10 and X have the same value. This is a theme in the Shakespearean masque suggestion where we have two faces for one reality. The sum of 10 and X is 20 (anciently twenty from "twin t"). The twin T mystery is Strong's pet mystery. It refers to the Triple Tau and its explanatory value in understanding the mystery of life and death. The product of 10 by X is 100 which was understood by Strong to be the Tudor cipher value of Francis Bacon (add up the positional value of the letters in the 24 position alphabet, 67+33).

After Tobias left with his money Dan floundered. He basically hand dug 10-X until the Laginas showed up and reinvigorated the much older theories of countless brain dead scoundrels.

This is not to say any of Strong or McKaig's research has merit. There is nothing in it that implicates OI over any other place except that OI already had an aura of mystery which had shifted there from another local island (Hobson's Nose). The shifting of the story happened between 1830 and the first searcher efforts in the 1840s.

I implore you stop to inventing shit up based on things long ago discredited and spreading it confidently.
Excellent information as usual SSR!
 

but for the 3 guys who apparently started all this that is their story.
Not really, it was someone else's story about them. We have no idea how much of it is true, and a good idea that it is full of later embellishments.

Walking across an island found a depression in the ground for whatever reason decided to dig.. Found what they thought were hand placed logs. So if anyone found this would you just stop or would you keep digging.
The exact same scenario occurred on the mainland in 1949... a depression of soft soil that, when excavated, revealed buried logs and stones. They determined it was a sinkhole full of debris. I'm sure it would be easy for someone to mistake that for something man-made, and that's probably why things are where they are at.
 

Who's story was it that convinced the Onslow Company to come in and dig? The story was out long before what was first known written story about it. Should let you know there were probably other stories written about it just haven't been found.. The ole saying of everything known is not written and everything written is not known..
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom