The TRUE story behind the Oak Island legend... (Finally revelaed)

[franklin]

Much of this is based on the "discovered codes by Bacon" in Shakespeare's works by Petter Amundsen, which is not acknowledged by any legitimate academic community as having actual verifiable substance.

I do not agree with #4 everything else is true.

Here is something that will prove that the King James Version of the Holy Bible has hidden messages that most laymen never see even though they look right at it. I hope this is all right with the forum as it does involve codes and not just religious.

First go to Saint John Chapter 21 verses 11-17 Here you will see where the Lord Jesus told Peter to cast his fishing net and Peter netted 153 fish a great number yet the net did not break. Just a story or is it saying something else?

This was the THIRD TIME that Jesus had appeared to the disciples so keep that in mind. Then in these same seven verses, Jesus asked Peter for the THIRD TIME if he loved him?

The Christian Fish is formed by the intersection of two circles through their centers and where they intersect is called the Christian Fish. Or you can use the Latin Name, vesica piscis or Mandorla. But anyway: This intersection is the square root of "3" and the smallest numbers that are divisible to come up with the square root of "3" is 265 divided by 153. you will come up with a difference of about 8/100,000ths. If Peter had caught 152 fish this number would have been off by about 3,952/100,000 and if Peter had caught 154 fish then it would have been off by over 3,892/100,000 Peter had to catch 153 fish and it is encoded into the KJV Holy Bible with different meanings but it still is the same thing. Also if you count the "letter characters" from where "One hundred fifty three fish" starts in Verse 11 and where "Third Time" is in verse 14 is a total of 265 characters counting the verse numbers. This verifies that this is the message and not just a fish story.

You should see the "template" I have made to decode the KJV Holy Bible.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[ECS]

Where do you go to get educators to change history? Send them to my house. I have the proof.

Saying you have the proof, and proving you have "the proof" are the same.
If you "have the proof" as you keep repeating on this forum, its time to PROVE IT.

 

[franklin]

Saying you have the proof, and proving you have "the proof" are the same.
If you "have the proof" as you keep repeating on this forum, its time to PROVE IT.

Are you the one they call "educator or academic"

 

[Raparee]

I do not agree with #4 everything else is true.

Here is something that will prove that the King James Version of the Holy Bible has hidden messages that most laymen never see even though they look right at it. I hope this is all right with the forum as it does involve codes and not just religious.

First go to Saint John Chapter 21 verses 11-17 Here you will see where the Lord Jesus told Peter to cast his fishing net and Peter netted 153 fish a great number yet the net did not break. Just a story or is it saying something else?

This was the THIRD TIME that Jesus had appeared to the disciples so keep that in mind. Then in these same seven verses, Jesus asked Peter for the THIRD TIME if he loved him?

The Christian Fish is formed by the intersection of two circles through their centers and where they intersect is called the Christian Fish. Or you can use the Latin Name. But anyway: This intersection is the square root of "3" and the smallest numbers that are divisible to come up with the square root of "3" is 265 divided by 153. you will come up with a difference of about 18/100,000ths. If Peter had caught 152 fish this number would have been off by about 2,805/100,000 and if Peter had caught 154 fish then it would have been off by over 4,160/100,000 Peter had to catch 153 fish and it is encoded into the KJV Holy Bible with different meanings but it still is the same thing. Also if you count the "letter characters" from where "One hundred fifty three fish" starts in Verse 11 and where "Third Time" is in verse 14 is a total of 265 characters counting the verse numbers. This verifies that this is the message and not just a fish story.

You should see the "template" I have made to decode the KJV Holy Bible.

I think that that is one of the most ridiculous things that I have ever heard. Hands down. It's right up there with Finder Keepers Templar stone henge in New Ross.

 

[franklin]

I think that that is one of the most ridiculous things that I have ever heard. Hands down. It's right up there with Finder Keepers Templar stone henge in New Ross.

You say that it is ridiculous? Must be because you are not an "educator or academic"

IS THERE ANY MATHEMATICIAN OUT THERE TO VERIFY WHAT I POSTED?

 

[ECS]

Nothing in your posts# 259 & 261 prove that the Ark of the Covenant or any other "Holy Relic" was brought to Oak Island or the New World by the Templars or that the Mayflower "Adventurers" recovered it in 1620 or that the Founding Fathers recovered and hid it, placing the location encoded in the Declaration of Independence, but a put down of educators and academics with your claim of superior knowledge.

 

[franklin]

I will not give that proof to you. Send those educators and academics over to see me. But if everyone in the World has no Common Sense, just forget it. Superior knowledge has nothing to do with it and I have not made that claim. Accidents alone have made more discoveries in science than superior knowledge. But anyway do you really thing someone is just going to give you the proof you seek, WHY?

 

[ECS]

If not to me, will you give the proof to Reparee, Dave Rishar, Charlie P. (NY), or anyone else on these Oak Island threads?

 

[franklin]

Why did you not post on the last information I posted? Now you want more?

You can not even find the codes in the DOI? Do you know what the DOI message is all about?

 

[ECS]

More of the same unproven claims? NO.
But I am curious as to why you post all these fantastic claims of "hidden coded messages" that reveal what you deem as "real history" yet when questioned or ask for solid legitimate validation for your statements made as fact, you refuse.
If you are not going to offer any evidence for these claims, what purpose does all these posts serve?

 

[ECS]

... the Ark of the Covenant was brought over by the RC's and buried on Oak Island.
Petter Admundsen has verified all of this with his research and work on the Sir Francis Bacon Ciphers and the books of Shakespeare. Really amazing the work he has done.
The naysayers can post till the cows come home about Petter being wrong and no Historian has verified his work.
I know what he has done is correct...

I have carried Petter's work further into our Founding Fathers and I have located where the Ark of the Covenant of God is today...look at Independence Hall in Philadelphia and tell me what you see.
The Ark is not there but it could have been at one time.
There is a rose and cross in two diagonal lots just in front of Independence Hall. Run a line from the West towards the East, you will find that it is 53 degrees.
All work of the RC. Run this line across the Atlantic and it will run you into Paris, France.

It is true that NO legitimate has confirmed, verified or endorsed Amundsen's work, so how do you know it is correct?

...and if it is NOT CORRECT, carrying his work further proves nothing concerning the Founding Fathers and the Ark of the Covenant.

 

[franklin]

It is true that NO legitimate has confirmed, verified or endorsed Amundsen's work, so how do you know it is correct?

...and if it is NOT CORRECT, carrying his work further proves nothing concerning the Founding Fathers and the Ark of the Covenant.

Who is considered a "legitimate" I confirmed it! Who do we have to get Yale or Dartmouth Universities. Maybe you have to confirm it before any research is accepted by the "educators or academics" From a very early age I was taught right from wrong. And I can with what understanding I have know when something is RIGHT. I do not just except it, I research and I check it out for myself. If I have to ask and "educator or academic" about everything whether it is true or not is a total waste of time. I can make that judgement myself.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

The Christian Fish is formed by the intersection of two circles through their centers and where they intersect is called the Christian Fish. Or you can use the Latin Name, vesica piscis or Mandorla. But anyway: This intersection is the square root of "3" and the smallest numbers that are divisible to come up with the square root of "3" is 265 divided by 153. you will come up with a difference of about 8/100,000ths. If Peter had caught 152 fish this number would have been off by about 3,952/100,000 and if Peter had caught 154 fish then it would have been off by over 3,892/100,000 Peter had to catch 153 fish and it is encoded into the KJV Holy Bible with different meanings but it still is the same thing. Also if you count the "letter characters" from where "One hundred fifty three fish" starts in Verse 11 and where "Third Time" is in verse 14 is a total of 265 characters counting the verse numbers. This verifies that this is the message and not just a fish story.

You should see the "template" I have made to decode the KJV Holy Bible.

The "Christian Fish" symbol wasn't adopted until the second century AD - after the Romans started to forbid Christian meetings. Peter would have known nothing about it.

The jibberish about the "intersection of circles"? It would all depend on the radius of the circle and the length of arc (or even how long you decide to make the "tail" of the fish. It would work with arc lengths of 15 to 45 degrees - you would just get fatter fish with a larger arc.

The smallest whole numbers to come up with the square root of 3? I don't see the point of it. Lovely you worked it out . . . but so what? Who would possibly have cared? Then or now?

I guess I'm thrilled for you that it returns an earthly reward for all this work, but I couldn't be bothered. I am not a numerologist. I am a statistician by trade. And I look at The Bible for the hope of different knowledge. It wouldn't be the relics.

 

[ECS]

Who is considered a "legitimate" I confirmed it! Who do we have to get ...

The Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship, or Dr Robert Crumpton, the Shakespearean Scholar that Petter Amundsen failed to convince.

"Petter Amundsen believes he has discovered secret codes in an an early complete folio of Shakespeare plays that puts us squarely in the swamp of Oak Island. Like the Bible Code, this hints of a complex system that ties to pagination counts and letter counting and geometric designs on the pages of a 400 year old folio...so complex and twisted that we wonder why anyone would go to the trouble to hide anything in this manner. It is an enigma within a cryptographer's nonsense"
Dr William Russo, PHD -November 2, 2017

 

[ECS]

... From a very early age I was taught right from wrong. And I can with what understanding I have know when something is RIGHT...

A musical interlude: Edie Brickell & the New Bohemians

 

[Dave Rishar]

Where do you go to get educators to change history? Send them to my house. I have the proof.

I have seen mathematics books that were incorrect when I went to high school. In Algebra II our teacher said a girl and I had the wrong answer to a complex problem. The girl was a straight "A" student. So we questions the teacher as we knew we had the correct answer. The teacher placed the problem on the blackboard with each and every step to solve it as we had done. It took the front of a sheet of paper and the back of the sheet of paper to complete the problem to get the answer. When the teacher finished she found out our answer was CORRECT and the teacher's book with the answers was WRONG. So not everything you have in school is always correct there are exceptions. To keep believing the same is like religious teachers teaching the same over and over even if it is wrong. Sometimes you have to step back and question history and I have and I have found history is very dull the way it is taught and it is very inaccurate or I should say WRONG>

That is actually an excellent example of cognitive bias tripping someone up. Your teacher assumed that the book was correct without apparently verifying it. It's an easy mistake to make.

This is also why certain individuals on this forum are asking you to show your work. We don't believe that the answer in the book is correct. We'd like you to show how you arrived at it. In response, you're saying, "I will not give that proof to you," just like your algebra teacher did.

First go to Saint John Chapter 21 verses 11-17 Here you will see where the Lord Jesus told Peter to cast his fishing net and Peter netted 153 fish a great number yet the net did not break. Just a story or is it saying something else?

Given that it's a collection of texts which were derived from a collection of oral histories, selected for inclusion into an eventual omnibus in an arguably haphazard or at best arbitrary manner, which (after several translations) gave us the King James version...well, yes, it's likely just a story, and probably not an accurate one by this point.

This was the THIRD TIME that Jesus had appeared to the disciples so keep that in mind. Then in these same seven verses, Jesus asked Peter for the THIRD TIME if he loved him?

I'm not sure that's relevant.

The Christian Fish is formed by the intersection of two circles through their centers and where they intersect is called the Christian Fish. Or you can use the Latin Name, vesica piscis or Mandorla. But anyway: This intersection is the square root of "3" and the smallest numbers that are divisible to come up with the square root of "3" is 265 divided by 153. you will come up with a difference of about 8/100,000ths. If Peter had caught 152 fish this number would have been off by about 3,952/100,000 and if Peter had caught 154 fish then it would have been off by over 3,892/100,000 Peter had to catch 153 fish and it is encoded into the KJV Holy Bible with different meanings but it still is the same thing. Also if you count the "letter characters" from where "One hundred fifty three fish" starts in Verse 11 and where "Third Time" is in verse 14 is a total of 265 characters counting the verse numbers. This verifies that this is the message and not just a fish story.

How does that intersection equate to the square root of three? What is the significance of 265, beyond the fact that if you divide it by 153, it's close to the square root of 3? If this is some sort of code, why use an imprecise number like the square root of three? Why not use something more precise, and not as open to interpretation, like the square of three?

You should see the "template" I have made to decode the KJV Holy Bible.

How does it jive with other "templates" that have been made to decode the KJV Bible that show other encoded messages?

I will not give that proof to you. Send those educators and academics over to see me.

Your educators and academics have come to see you. They're here, right now. People are asking you to explain your position and you appear to be hesitant to do so. If you won't give your proof under these circumstances, what would make me think that you'd provide it under other circumstances?

 

[franklin]

The Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship, or Dr Robert Crumpton, the Shakespearean Scholar that Petter Amundsen failed to convince.

"Petter Amundsen believes he has discovered secret codes in an an early complete folio of Shakespeare plays that puts us squarely in the swamp of Oak Island. Like the Bible Code, this hints of a complex system that ties to pagination counts and letter counting and geometric designs on the pages of a 400 year old folio...so complex and twisted that we wonder why anyone would go to the trouble to hide anything in this manner. It is an enigma within a cryptographer's nonsense"
Dr William Russo, PHD -November 2, 2017

I will try to contact this Dr. Robert Crumpton and/or Dr. William Russo. Thank you. I sent a message to Professor Stanley Wells. I will let you know when I receive his reply.

 

[ECS]

... I sent a message to Professor Stanley Wells. I will let you know when I receive his reply.

"..the conspiracy theorist are vocal and getting a lot of publicity...it matters because history matters, because truth matters. It matters because it's wrong to propagate theories for which there is no basis in fact...It matters because young people shouldn't be subjected to conspiracy theories as if they were fact"
- Sir Stanley Wells CBE, Emeritus Professor of Shakespeare Studies of the University of Birmingham, England, Emeritus Governor of the Royal Shakespeare Company, member of the Council of Shakespeare Globe, and one of the United Kingdom's foremost Shakespearean Authority.

In your message to Sir Stanley Wells CBE, did you mention Petter Amundsen's Bacon codes theory in Shakespeare's works, and that you have stated many times that Shakespeare was illiterate and could not even sign his own name.
If he responds to your message, please let us know what he replies to these claims.
Enquiring minds want to know.

 

[ECS]

That is actually an excellent example of cognitive bias tripping someone up.
Your teacher assumed that the book was correct without apparently verifying it. It's an easy mistake to make.

This is also why certain individuals on this forum are asking you to show your work. We don't believe that the answer in the book is correct. We'd like you to show how you arrived at it.
In response, you're saying, "I will not give that proof to you," just like your algebra teacher did.

Given that it's a collection of texts which were derived from a collection of oral histories, selected for inclusion into an eventual omnibus in an arguably haphazard or at best arbitrary manner, which (after several translations) gave us the King James version...well, yes, it's likely just a story, and probably not an accurate one by this point...

Your educators and academics have come to see you. They're here, right now.
People are asking you to explain your position and you appear to be hesitant to do so.
If you won't give your proof under these circumstances, what would make me think that you'd provide it under other circumstances?

If Sir Stanley Wells CBE, Dr. Robert Crumpton, and Dr. William Russo, experts in their respective fields response is that there exist NO hidden Bacon gematria codes in Shakespeare's works, and that Petter Amundsen's theory is built on a false and non existent premise will you accept their word?
...or will you persist in your claims that teachers, scholars, academics and other professionals in their fields are inaccurate and wrong?

 

[franklin]

I will persist. Of the three you mentioned, I know Dr. Robert Crumpton was amazed by Petter Admundsen's work. As for the other two, the Sir Stanley Wells CBE, even though he is acclaimed as having a high IQ, I do not think the man is really that well classified by my take of him on film. He makes his living from being a scholar of Shakespeare so I do not see him leaving his thoughts by any great or small distance. As for Dr. William Russo, I know nothing of the man to make a claim either way. But as I said I am intelligent enough to research and to see what Petter Admundsen has accomplished in his work and research. I see no problem with it. As far as the academic world, by my own reasoning, they are always out of touch, out for repeating others work and not a single one of them will research a subject enough to come to any conclusion. So I do not expect them to change any time in the future. I stand by my claim until someone can prove without a doubt that Petter Admundsen's work is unfounded.

I know from what I have done with Petter's research that his claim of hidden messages in Shakespeare by Sir Henry Neville and Sir Francis Bacon are real. I know what I have researched and found is real and there is no doubt in my mind.