Some Notes Re: Construction of the Money Pit

[Armchair detective]

Thanks, it's hard to swallow.

Now I am curious about your claim " it's been discussed before", presumably on tnet.
Very much interested in those alternate theories.
Can you direct to those discussions - some key words, how long ago, did you take part?

It's possible, however unlikely, that's you're just playing with me, which is OK, just let me know.

Thought you might ask the questions "Why pack a box and leave it behind?" or "Why build a storage area for such a box?" or even "Why bury such a box under 120 ft (at the time) of dirt?"

 

[Carl-NC]

I've been on TNet for 27 years, posted in numerous threads on OI and many other topics, so I can't offer any specific discussions to look at. The holes in the OI story are numerous and vast. Just focusing on this alleged box, there is zero evidence that any box existed. Truro claimed to have drilled through some wood but that isn't all that significant, wood seems to be plentiful in the OI digs. Besides, like most others they kept poor records and, like most others, conclusions were based on grand leaps of logic. For example, the claim they drilled through "loose metal." Highly unlikely they drilled through loose metal.

Oak Island has been dug and drilled all over the place and not even once has a scrap of evidence been produced that anyone has ever buried any treasure there. But the deeper they dig and find nothing, the wilder the theories get as to "what is down there." When all along, "nothing" appears to be the overwhelmingly most likely answer. I just can't fathom why anyone would still be entertaining a notion that anything is there.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

I've been on TNet for 27 years, posted in numerous threads on OI and many other topics, so I can't offer any specific discussions to look at. The holes in the OI story are numerous and vast. Just focusing on this alleged box, there is zero evidence that any box existed. Truro claimed to have drilled through some wood but that isn't all that significant, wood seems to be plentiful in the OI digs. Besides, like most others they kept poor records and, like most others, conclusions were based on grand leaps of logic. For example, the claim they drilled through "loose metal." Highly unlikely they drilled through loose metal.

Oak Island has been dug and drilled all over the place and not even once has a scrap of evidence been produced that anyone has ever buried any treasure there. But the deeper they dig and find nothing, the wilder the theories get as to "what is down there." When all along, "nothing" appears to be the overwhelmingly most likely answer. I just can't fathom why anyone would still be entertaining a notion that anything is there.

I've only been here 19 years. But, from evidence provided, Oak Island is as much a hoax as ancient aliens Giorgio A. Tsoukalos (sports announcer degree from Ithaca College) and Graham Hancock's ideas that there were "advanced" white civilizations 12,000 years ago. Bogus to the extreme. Let it go and move on.

 

[Armchair detective]

No help from you I guess.

" Just focusing on this alleged box, there is zero evidence that any box existed. "

False. There is a difference between zero evidence and thin evidence.
The letter quoted above has FIRST PERSON TESTIMONY on pages 2 & 3 which clearly states they hit SOMETHING().
I was interested if anyone gave thought to what the object could be based on the letter.

This thread was exploring the idea that there was a mine there. Regarding the idea there is/was a treasure, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

 

[Carl-NC]

You're the one postulating that there were 2 boxes, stacked vertically, and filled with gold. All based on "they hit something." This is how OI got to where it is today.

 

[Armchair detective]

I did start that way, the "two box theory", then days later I reviewed the McCully letter and refined the idea to one box, which fits the other presumed facts better.

However, I never said that the box was full of gold, I said it was built heavy duty to HOLD gold (or at least I thought I did). I used the assumption it was full of gold to try to figure out what's required to operate such a mine.
(Such as operating a windlass would need 3 people - If only one that weighed less than 500 lbs, he would spin like a pinwheel.)

Sorry for the confusion.

Still my best theory is the box was full of fool's gold.

 

[ARC]

What i think most that have delved into this have failed to see is the simplistic reality of un-necessity.

There is no ... nor has there ever been... the necessity to bury anything that would need to be at some point retrieved at this depth.
It would have been the work of pure madmen to do this.
No one in their right mind would think that doing so would be a necessity.

Meaning... treasure would not be buried at this depth for any reason beyond irrational crazy madman thought... especially considering the environmental conditions.

Any person or persons of any sane mind would know that burying at this depth and complexity would have a high probability of being lost or irretrievable... and would not make ANY sense to do so.

Also.... there is NO evidence of ANY treasure in history that has been purposely secreted in this way... OR in any even remotely similar way... but yet people somehow with their crazy imaginations have come to believe that one was.

To many people are living in the imaginary Indiana Jones movie mind. heh

Just again... my 3 cents.

 

[Armchair detective]

Not a bad argument.

The counter- argument is pointing out that one must be filling the shaft in from the bottom to the top to have leave log levels, dirt, log levels, etc. No point in doing that if just a bust mine.
It is implied that something was being hidden, if not treasure, then what?

The auger McCully was using needs some research, a "ball and pin" type that would not "allow a gold coin to pass through". Is that true?
Also if it was fool's gold he hit, would THAT have passed through?

I'll be looking into the tunnels thing. There doesn't seem to be time to research everything, and THERE'S ALWAYS ONE MORE THING !!

Okay now let's hear all the reasons not to believe there is/was a treasure down there. Extra points if you don't use the words "no evidence", "madman", "crazy", "insane", "irrational".

 

[3cylbill]

What i think most that have delved into this have failed to see is the simplistic reality of un-necessity.

There is no ... nor has there ever been... the necessity to bury anything that would need to be at some point retrieved at this depth.
It would have been the work of pure madmen to do this.
No one in their right mind would think that doing so would be a necessity.

Meaning... treasure would not be buried at this depth for any reason beyond irrational crazy madman thought... especially considering the environmental conditions.

Any person or persons of any sane mind would know that burying at this depth and complexity would have a high probability of being lost or irretrievable... and would not make ANY sense to do so.

Also.... there is NO evidence of ANY treasure in history that has been purposely secreted in this way... OR in any even remotely similar way... but yet people somehow with their crazy imaginations have come to believe that one was.

To many people are living in the imaginary Indiana Jones movie mind. heh

Just again... my 3 cents.

have you ever been underground in a mine ..?

 

[ARC]

have you ever been underground in a mine ..?

With this question you bring up a very good point...

This question you ask is exactly why the pit does not even fit into logical thinking.

 

[3cylbill]

With this question you bring up a very good point...

This question you ask is exactly why the pit does not even fit into logical thinking.

so........no you have never been underground in a mine....

 

[ARC]

so........no you have never been underground in a mine....

Yes... As well as several natural caves from here to England.

 

[ARC]

No matter....
Digging straight down is and has never been the best option of digging anything other than a well for water only.
Furthermore... it has never been documented in history digging a "shaft" of any depth... as a method of hiding anything.
And even more so...
An extreme dig of the complexity that has been theorized on O.I would have not been a time conducive task.
Meaning...
In logical thinking... even using ones imaginations... one can reach a simplistic theory based on facts...

#1. If you are hiding something... time is of the essence.
#2. If you are hiding something of value... you would not risk it.
#3. If you are hiding something of extreme value... its location could e compromised at some point and need to be relocated.

Computing these very basic simplistic things...
A near 100 foot depth shaft in an island with a possible low water table... (with no other way to find out without digging it)... would not fit the criteria in looking for a location to secret something via a build of said "money pit".

Simple common sense is sometimes overlooked when the thought of gold dances in ones head. heh

 

[ARC]

In fact.......
I think the "money pit" is.... and has never been more than ORIGINALLY,,.
A........
Well.

For watering ships...
Later for watering livestock.

 

[3cylbill]

Yes... As well as several natural caves from here to England.

why do you think that nothing could be hidden in a mine ...?

 

[ARC]

why do you think that nothing could be hidden in a mine ...?

Who said that ?

I do not recall ever stating that I thought something could or would not be in a mine.

We are not taking about a mine.

 

[ARC]

We are talking about a relatively small straight down shaft... something along the lines that could have even been made by some old koots thinking oil might be there.

We are not talking about a mine like dig.

 

[3cylbill]

We are talking about a relatively small straight down shaft... something along the lines that could have even been made by some old koots thinking oil might be there.

We are not talking about a mine like dig

 

[3cylbill]

really..? so the main shaft is all there is and there are no other tunnels off the main shaft ?

 

[ARC]

Although after rethinking my last statement... this could have very well have been an "exploratory" dig... by someone trying to find something.

Perhaps even a mine like thing.
Cybil...
You must see the difference between... a hole dug to FIND something... and a supposed hole to HIDE something.