Theory and Question- Serpent Mounds & Oak Island

[n2mini]

I don't really care about the Templars or Sinclair. Just thought it was funny I could a quickie google search and find out the Diplomas aren't as all knowing as ya'll state them to be. We all know that books, stories, and tall tales from that time period is not 100% perfect. We just can't pick and choose which parts to claim as fact to fit our agenda.. I haven't looked into Franklin's information as my thinking on it is that he might be right, who knows.. Atleast in my mind I know that not everything that happened back then is recorded correctly, if so the Sinclair Diploma would atleast know when the man died...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[ECS]

Here is an excerpt from Henry Sinclair's wikapedia page...

Yes, Wikapedia, is the end all of all knowledge.
Maybe you should actually read the Sinclair Diploma and Bishop Thomas Diploma before rushing to rash judgements.
But that would require actual research in Scottish University archive libraries like a professional historian.

 

[n2mini]

wasn't a rash judgement, was just stating the info as I found it. and have no desire to go to the university to do research on it. As I said I don't really care about him or what he did or didn't do...

 

[ECS]

...it appears that you did have an interest with that intensive Wikipedia research you posted.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

While you are calling people out, why don't you call out Franklin and ask him how Sinclair and his band of Merry Templars could build a ship from materials in the wildness, felling trees, cut, dried, planed into shiplap boards, masts, decking, rudder, and not to mention rope for rigging and sails (there was NO Home Depot in 1398 Nova Scotia) and the source of this information.

Come on ECS! Franklin stated the templars made a trip to Mars. If they did that they certainly could build a ship.....

 

[ECS]

...with Swiss Army knives and one hand tied behind their back!

 

[n2mini]

...it appears that you did have an interest with that intensive Wikipedia research you posted.

I only had an interest in finding something to dispute what you were claiming and I think I did.. Not really goes against what your saying but you referenced material that apparently isn't 100% accurate... So can't just pick and choose which parts to believe. Just as ya'll do the "believers". You weren't counting on anyone looking into it.. In the end heck you might be right, what I'm also trying to get across is not every little tid bit of info out there is correct or even out there. I'm sure there were and are happenings all over the world past and present that either don't make it into books, memoirs, Diplomas, or maybe they did and it just hasn't been found yet by someone who is going to post about it..

 

[DaveVanP]

n2mini asked a question which has been ignored once again.. simply, why do you guys come here EVERY day just to whine?

you are like the down trodden neighbor that looks across the fence at his neighbors b-b-que and grumbles about how bad the food is, how the lawn furniture is lousy, the wrong brand of beer, hell, you even complain about the sun is too hot (or, it's too damn cloudy). using this logic, you remark at how big of fools your neighbors guests must be.


why not just go and have your own party. nobody is forcing you to stare over the fence. go find something you can enjoy.

None of the "naysayers" are "whining'. Using your analogy, the neighbor is cooking dog turds on his grill, and the guests are raving about how awesome it is...the "naysayers" are simply pointing out that is what they are doing. The Laginas are serving up sh*t sandwiches, and there are those giving them 3-Star Michelin Ratings...

In another way, the "naysayers" are saying, "The Emperor has no clothes."

 

[n2mini]

Either you've been drinking this morning or I need to in order to fully understand that post..

 

[DaveVanP]

Here again I call ya'll out with info I have to go get and you want to skip and change the subject and reference it as the same type thing Franklin is doing. So you admit the Sinclair Diploma isn't as all knowing as you claimed it to be. You just didn't count on anyone looking into it... SO as ya'll are fond of doing, if any of it is "suspect" we can't believe any of it. How does that feel being on the other side of that comment...

The Diploma is "reasonable reliable" for a few reasons: it is an actual, real physical document, that can be seen and read, even today. It has provenance - in that it is known where it came from, and can track its authenticity. It is corroborated by other, independent documents.

"Evidence" that supports the "Templar Voyage to America" myth is not "documented" in any way other than what has been MADE UP, or imaginatively-interpreted relics. The 90'-foot stone" that is talked about, but cannot be verified to exist; we have ONLY Muir's assertion that there was ever a translation of "Sinclair's Journals" - which she claims to have destroyed (conveniently) - but there no mention that such a journal ever existed by anyone other than her. A cross cast in lead evidently mined in France is "definitely Templar"; fiber identified as "coconut coir" could ONLY be left there by Templars; a metal pin with a hole in one end could ONLY be used as a plumb bob to check a vertical shaft; a broken pick-ax could ONLY be used for tunneling (anyone consider it could have been discarded because it was BROKEN?); since there is an authentic European Templar artifact that with the image Abraxas (a man's body with the head of a rooster, and serpents for legs), any serpent-shaped mound of rock and soil MUST have been erected by Templars - ignoring the FACT that Natives in America built dozens (hundreds?) of such mounds, and Templars are not known to have ever built ONE, anywhere.

 

[n2mini]

I fully understand how everything that is written is not 100% accurate. ( Ya'll NOW readily admit the Diploma is only "reasonable reliable" ) What I'm trying to get across is that goes for the nay sayers and the believers equally...

 

[DaveVanP]

I fully understand how everything that is written is not 100% accurate. ( Ya'll NOW readily admit the Diploma is only "reasonable reliable" ) What I'm trying to get across is that goes for the nay sayers and the believers equally...

As "reasonable reliable" as a birth certificate, or affidavit - acceptable a "legal document". Yes - it is true that either can, and have been , falsified - but that can usually be proven. And it IS an actual document, has not been disproven, and not simply a claim of "something I read and transcribed myself - and then destroyed."

 

[n2mini]

The Sinclair Diploma doesn't even know when the man died!! nuff said!!! how can we know how accurate the rest of it is? If his grandson wrote it, at what point in time did he write it. years before the man died, years afterwards? was he not around when the man died?? With those kinds of questions you would be tearing a "believer" to shreds.. Would you not

 

[ECS]

Considering that your entire knowledge of the SINCLAIR and BISHOP THOMAS DIPLOMAS are from my posts and the few WIKIPEDIA paragraphs you read in a Don Quixote moment of attempting to dispute me has really exposed your ignorance on those and other real historical documents and how they establish provenance of verification of events.

 

[n2mini]

I think what really happened is that I showed you and everyone else how anyone can pick "certain" historical documents (as you call them ) apart.. There is no all knowing history book out there. That is what I'm trying to get across. The Sinclair Diploma might be full of facts as far as I know as I don't care.. Once I saw that they didn't know when the man died I had to point that out to prove my point.. That's it. I have no idea if the man ever came to the OI area and never said he did or didn't.. Is it possible heck yeah...

 

[ECS]

I don't really care about the Templars or Sinclair. Just thought it was funny I could a quickie google search...

A "google quickie search" doesn't really qualify you as an adept erudite on Henry Sinclair.
It is highly noticeable that you, my friend n2mini, ignore the Bishop Thomas Diploma that conforms that Henry Sinclair never departed from Scottish soil.
As for when he died, news traveled very slow in the 1400's especially from battlefields, remember they had no telegraphs, telephones, or computers for quickie google searches.
Maybe you need to do more logical "thinking on" the little information garnered from a " google quickie search" and actual make an attempt at real research to understand the why variance of death dates when Sinclair "was slain there cruelle by his enemies".

 

[Al D]

Either you've been drinking this morning or I need to in order to fully understand that post..

No surprise in that statement

 

[n2mini]

So once I find a flaw in one Diploma you jump to another one. You don't seem to grasp the idea that I don't care about Sinclair in what he did or did not do.

alan m, of all people I thought you'd get a kick out of that post with what you have in your signature...

 

[Al D]

alan m, of all people I thought you'd get a kick out of that post with what you have in your signature...

I take my drinking very seriously, lol

 

[ECS]

So once I find a flaw in one Diploma you jump to another one.
You don't seem to grasp the idea that I don't care about Sinclair in what he did or did not do...

n2mini,my friend, you did NOT find a "flaw" in the SINCLAIR DIPLOMA since you have never read the actual document.
Your BIG discovery was a comment on Wikipedia from your "quickie search" which by your standards, does indicate that you "cared" about Sinclair. enough to do that search and humorously report your findings.