Some Notes Re: Construction of the Money Pit

[chalkoutline]

I think there must have been something significant on OI for 3 teenager boys to dig a 30ft deep hole.
If they didn't find the 3 boxes of treasure than I agree they scammed the onslow company. If they did, then I would think their intentions were above board.

After that you're probably right

 

[chalkoutline]

I think there must have been something significant on OI for 3 teenager boys to dig a 30ft deep hole.
If they didn't find the 3 boxes of treasure than I agree they scammed the onslow company. If they did, then I would think their intentions were above board.

After that you're probably right

If the 90ft stone was a forgery than that's where the scam started because everyone since have been trying to go 40ft more.

 

[TruthbeTold]

I think there must have been something significant on OI for 3 teenager boys to dig a 30ft deep hole.
If they didn't find the 3 boxes of treasure than I agree they scammed the onslow company. If they did, then I would think their intentions were above board.

After that you're probably right

Did the brothers dig a 30 foot hole? After claiming to find evidence of a treasure hole they didn’t bother to go back until the mid 1800’s. Hoping folks forgot their original lies, one brother hoped to get the lie hyped up again to make money. That failed also.

The only money pit hole were the ones drilled by searchers hoping to dupe investors out of money.

Trying to find a reason that fits all of the fictional stories would be the same as finding a reason that my backyard holds some sort of fantastical treasure,

 

[releventchair]

Also....
Anyone with common sense would know...

Picking a place to dig 100 foot down with any success would not include an island in the choices.
#1 reason being...
The odds of flooding would be too great.

Hence....
Why IMO the hole was dug solely for water to begin with... OR.... was dug by a madman.

Mentions of flooring (platforms) ,but not of shoring.
Without which anyone digging over a few feet would be mad.
A six foot shored holes would up the odds of success more than a 20 foot unshored hole.
someone standing in a 20 foot unshored hole not something I heard mention of on the show I don't watch.
90 foot? Umm . Nothing is good without a good demonstration. (Ain't happinin!)

 

[n2mini]

Do we know what kind of deal the original 3 had or actually I think there was only one of them that was part of the Onslow group to come in and continue the dig. Most deals years later was just a percentage of what is found if anything. So no scam going on as they are not making any money off it... So it stands to reason they atleast "thought" there is or might be a treasure of some sort down there or why bother spending your time if you not getting paid to dig.. I also find it hard to believe that there were 3 guys digging and they found 3 chests. That story has probably gotten embellished over the years. If anything they found 1 chest and they all 3 got a little something from it... Yet some how maybe based on the dirt below believed there is more to be found.

 

[Carl-NC]

Try this idea for size.

Why? Why invent endless scenarios to explain something that probably never was? And burying weapons made largely of iron in a massively deep hole on a saltwater island makes sense how?

 

[ConceptualizedNetherlandr]

Why? Why invent endless scenarios to explain something that probably never was? And burying weapons made largely of iron in a massively deep hole on a saltwater island makes sense how?

Silly goose! They were peaceniks and wanted to gently return the iron to it's soluble form

 

[Carl-NC]

Although I've heard many arguments, im like armchair where no one theory seems to answer all of the questions.
There are contradicting accounts whether they encountered log platforms below 30ft. So im inclined to think there were none.

The one theory that fits the known evidence is that they found a natural sinkhole, but that's a theory with no pizazz so no one wants to believe it. Most of the early narrative is completely unreliable. The log platforms are a good example. Most likely they found a bunch of logs (blowdown) at 10 feet; this morphed into a log "platform" at 10 feet; and this morphed into a log platform "every" 10 feet. The fact that other sinkholes have occurred in the area, including one on the mainland having the same contents (stones & logs), strongly suggests this is all it is and all it ever was. This theory is also supported by the fact that absolutely nothing has ever been found.

 

[chalkoutline]

The one theory that fits the known evidence is that they found a natural sinkhole, but that's a theory with no pizazz so no one wants to believe it. Most of the early narrative is completely unreliable. The log platforms are a good example. Most likely they found a bunch of logs (blowdown) at 10 feet; this morphed into a log "platform" at 10 feet; and this morphed into a log platform "every" 10 feet. The fact that other sinkholes have occurred in the area, including one on the mainland having the same contents (stones & logs), strongly suggests this is all it is and all it ever was. This theory is also supported by the fact that absolutely nothing has ever been found.

When i was 8, a sink hole opened up behind my yard, a tree went in with it. Had a decade past along and rhe tree decaded it might have been described as you stated but im pretty sure it would still look like a sink and pretty sure I wouldn't mistake for a pirate treasure location.

My sink hole explanation would be...a sinkhole opened up causing a pit 30 feet deep. Those involved with activity on the island found it dangerous so they filled it using dirt and log platforms every 10 ft so if it sank more the platforms would carry the surface weight.

If it did sink more an indentation on the surface as the logs started carrying the weight. The fill below the logs would look disturbed.

Of course in this scenario, there areno platforms below 30ft and no 90ft stone.
And no three chests of treasure.

 

[chalkoutline]

When i was 8, a sink hole opened up behind my yard, a tree went in with it. Had a decade past along and rhe tree decaded it might have been described as you stated but im pretty sure it would still look like a sink and pretty sure I wouldn't mistake for a pirate treasure location.

My sink hole explanation would be...a sinkhole opened up causing a pit 30 feet deep. Those involved with activity on the island found it dangerous so they filled it using dirt and log platforms every 10 ft so if it sank more the platforms would carry the surface weight.

If it did sink more an indentation on the surface as the logs started carrying the weight.

I believe there is a human component that started the story that can't be brushed off as a lie or scam.

 

[chalkoutline]

When i was 8, a sink hole opened up behind my yard, a tree went in with it. Had a decade past along and rhe tree decaded it might have been described as you stated but im pretty sure it would still look like a sink and pretty sure I wouldn't mistake for a pirate treasure location.

My sink hole explanation would be...a sinkhole opened up causing a pit 30 feet deep. Those involved with activity on the island found it dangerous so they filled it using dirt and log platforms every 10 ft so if it sank more the platforms would carry the surface weight.

If it did sink more an indentation on the surface as the logs started carrying the weight. The fill below the logs would look disturbed.

Of course in this scenario, there areno platforms below 30ft and no 90ft stone.
And no three chests of treasure.

You could build a similar around a filled well but since there's no fear of future sinking, they wouldn't need log platforms.

 

[Carl-NC]

Of course in this scenario, there are no platforms below 30ft and no 90ft stone.

The platforms are likely later embellishments, I consider that to be highly unreliable and highly unlikely. Finding a large stone in glacial till is not only likely, but entirely expected.

I grew up in Florida, the Sinkhole State. Sinkholes there will swallow cars and houses. If, 300 years from now, archaeologists dig up a car 100 feet deep, will they wonder how it got there or will they assume it was a sinkhole?

 

[chalkoutline]

The platforms are likely later embellishments, I consider that to be highly unreliable and highly unlikely. Finding a large stone in glacial till is not only likely, but entirely expected.

I grew up in Florida, the Sinkhole State. Sinkholes there will swallow cars and houses. If, 300 years from now, archaeologists dig up a car 100 feet deep, will they wonder how it got there or will they assume it was a sinkhole?

According to Google AI, the diameter of the original 1795 shaft was 13f. The log platforms were found every 10 feet.

If the platforms were used as support for digging down, the logs would have been limited to the depth they dug so if they dug 10ft the logs could only be 10ft to allow maneuvering once they dug down. By digging to 12 to 13ft, they could use longer logs but place at 10 below the previous platform. The only issue is when placing them at 10ft, there is a good chance you will disturb the earth the logs will be resting on compromising the platform's support.
In addition, all the diagrams of the shaft shows logs all the way across so there is no longer traverse up and down
The logs going allthe way across and limitation on length would seem to support the idea that the platforms WERE NOT used for digging down..certainly impractical an unsafe for a 90ft shaft.


However, if the log platforms were added when filling a sinkhole or possibly a well or mine shaft, the logs could have been cut as long as necessary to support the fill being placed on top.

 

[chalkoutline]

According to Google AI, the diameter of the original 1795 shaft was 13f. The log platforms were found every 10 feet.

If the platforms were used as support/cribbing for digging down, the logs would have been limited to 10ft to allow maneuvering once they dug down another 10ft down.
That would seem to support the idea that the platforms were embellished.

However, if the log platforms were added when filling a sinkhole or possibly a well or mine shaft, the logs could have been cut as long as necessary to support the fill being placed on top.

If you agree log platforms could only be used for filling, than someone digging down 90ft would need to use cribbing methods for walls and platforms. Since only log platforms were reported, it doesn’t seem realistic that after burying the treasure they would then remove all the cribbing and replace with log support and fill....knowing they would have to repeat all that again to retrieve it.

 

[chalkoutline]

If you agree log platforms could only be used for filling, than someone digging down 90ft would need to use cribbing methods for walls and platforms. Since only log platforms were reported, it doesn’t seem realistic that after burying the treasure they would then remove all the cribbing and replace with log support and fill....knowing they would have to repeat all that again to retrieve it.

So I propose that Carl NC is correct about the sinkhole but also certain the three boys would have recognized a sinkhole from an indentation so for me a repaired sinkhole using log platforms and fill makes sense.

However, by accepting this explanation, you have to conclude the 90ft stone with symbols wasn't found at 90ft but chiseled by someone seeking additional financial support.

When you add in that rick and marty dropped 5 cassons in 2015 at the MP location and found nothing, im pretty sure there is nothing to find.

 

[n2mini]

The Laginas have probably hit in an around the original MP site by now plenty of times but the actual spot was lost years ago. With all the searching and surveys over the years no one made a good reference drawing of it's location.. Before Dan died they asked him in one of the early years where did he think the MP spot was..

So you think the story of them having actually dug down 90' and then found the stone was completely made up. Didn't even dig a hole to 90' ? I would imagine there were quite a few people there during the process of digging. Granted finding the stone could have been faked and supposedly found after most of the workers had left for the day so the few still there could keep the lie safe... but the workers would have known roughly how deep the hole was when they left..

 

[Armchair detective]

Not seeing the reason to repair a sinkhole.
For livestock protection, wouldn't you simply put a fence around it?

Maybe to restore farming acreage, but what a lot of work.

 

[chalkoutline]

Not seeing the reason to repair a sinkhole.
For livestock protection, wouldn't you simply put a fence around it?

Maybe to restore farming acreage, but what a lot of work.

Good point.
I got the idea from my neighbor's sinkhole which I mentioned earlier. It opened up in their backyard and rather than abandon and build another house, they filled the sinkhole.

 

[Carl-NC]

According to Google AI

Also highly unreliable.

but also certain the three boys would have recognized a sinkhole from an indentation

A very old sinkhole that has filled in over the decades/centuries can appear as a recess in the ground. My childhood home in Florida has a large recess in the front yard where, perhaps, pirates buried treasure. Or, where there was a large tree cut down 75 years ago, and the root system has rotted out and the ground sank.

So you think the story of them having actually dug down 90' and then found the stone was completely made up.

Not me, I'm certain that people have dug well over 100 feet. I'm also certain they have found all manner of rocks along the way. Maybe the "cipher stone" really came from 90 feet, maybe somewhere else along the way, but it was just an ordinary stone that was used as a prop for luring investors. One eyewitness said the stone had a bunch of scratches on it, but it didn't look like writing.

 

[chalkoutline]

Not me, I'm certain that people have dug well over 100 feet.

I recognize Google AI has problems but it is this response that made me rethink the mp shaft. If you are cribbing down 90ft, why would you remove and replace with logs knowing you have to do it again to retrieve...

It is not possible and extremely dangerous to dig a 100-foot deep well without cribbing or other shoring methods. The deep, narrow shaft would face a severe and immediate risk of collapse, which could result in a fatal accident for anyone inside. For this reason, wells this deep are drilled by professionals, not dug.

Do you agree cribbing is needed?
what about a well? Does the same apply?
Im honestly interested in knowing and you seem more knowledgeable than me.