Treat Oak Island as an Armchair Treasure Hunt and it has a Solution

[gjb]

The main difference between an armchair treasure hunt and a real-life historical treasure hunt is that with the former you never challenge what you’re provided with. That would be pointless. You don’t question the back story, you don’t declare that there’s no treasure to be found, you don’t state that the whole thing is a hoax, you don’t decide that the clues are meaningless and you certainly don’t declare that there’s no solution. You assume that what you’ve been given is genuine, that the clues work together in a logical and reasoned manner leading to an answer, and you get on with it (unless that’s just not you’re thing).

However, armchair treasure hunts definitely do not start out by telling you exactly where the treasure is located! You have to work that out. This, in a nutshell, is the real problem with the Oak Island mystery. Nobody wants or chooses to look at it as a treasure hunt having clues and few have bothered to do so ever since the Money Pit was discovered.

Even those who consider that the mystery is very much a treasure hunt refuse outright to treat it in the manner in which treasure hunts are typically and very sensibly approached, that is, by following clues. The Beale Codes is an example of a treasure hunt that’s effectively an armchair treasure hunt in which the only way to find out if you’re right may well be to dig. Oak Island would seem to be the same.

However, in one sense Oak Island is not really a treasure hunt. It’s a pathetically unsuccessful attempt at treasure retrieval in which the putative location was not actually worked out from clues, but was assumed, most definitely guessed at, before any truly pertinent pointers to the real location were discovered. And why does this have to be anywhere near the Money Pit?

In any event, it took some 220 years for the clues needed to provide a reasoned solution to surface. However, this would require people to recognise the potential existence of a real puzzle, to take the trouble to identify the clues, work out what they mean and come up with an answer. The trouble is, even were this to be done, the owners haven't been, and still aren’t, prepared to listen - any more than is anybody else, even here, on treasure hunting forums of all places!!

That’s one real curse of Oak Island. Simply treat Oak Island as a genuine puzzle, sift through the potential clues, work out which are likely to be pertinent and then solve them. In essence, treat it as you would an armchair treasure hunt.

Ultimately, perhaps, the real mystery of Oak Island is why it's possible to do this. Why were the clues actually left?

 

[Carl-NC]

The main difference between an armchair treasure hunt and a real-life historical treasure hunt is that with the former you never challenge what you’re provided with. That would be pointless. You don’t question the back story, you don’t declare that there’s no treasure to be found, you don’t state that the whole thing is a hoax, you don’t decide that the clues are meaningless and you certainly don’t declare that there’s no solution. You assume that what you’ve been given is genuine, that the clues work together in a logical and reasoned manner leading to an answer, and you get on with it (unless that’s just not you’re thing).

So by your argument, an armchair treasure hunter is required to be a gullibilly?

Because the vast majority of treasure lore is fiction -- much of it made up during the Great Depression or the heyday of adventure/treasure magazines -- any treasure hunter, armchair or otherwise, should approach every treasure story with a healthy dose of skepticism. In fact, I would suggest starting out with the assumption that any particular lore is false, and only after proving with reasonable absolution that particular evidences are true would you begin to consider that the overall story might (might) be true. In other words, guilty until proven innocent. Otherwise, you risk fabricating solutions to fit a presumptive conclusion. Which I see a lot of around here.

To me, Oak Island is pretty much a non-starter. The various treasure maps floating around are, with almost dead certainty, fakes or hoaxes. No clues there. Besides that, all we have is a story with considerable variation in detail and little to no certainty in accuracy. Some of the clues can be considered wholly unreliable and likely embellishments (the block & tackle, or the log platforms every 10 feet); some of the clues are almost certainly faked (the 90-foot stone, Nolan's cross); and some of the clues are very likely natural (the initial depression, the flood passages). When you remove all of the clues that have near-zero reliability, you are left with almost nothing suggesting that a treasure was ever buried there. About the same as any other island in Mahone Bay.

And then there is 231 years of nothing found. The most reliable clue so far.

 

[Randawg72]

The story of the Oak Island money pit originated from the year 1795. At that time there were 3 teenage boys aged 16 years named Daniel McInnis along with his two friends John Smith and Anthony Vaughn. The three of them agreed to go on an adventure to Oak Island. They saw a depression under an oak tree and suspecting something could be buried there they started digging.
That's it. That's the whole mystery in one paragraph.
No pirate maps. No cryptic ciphers. Not even a secret confession from the gallows.
From that we have dozens of books, documentaries, and a popular reality show. And for what?
Just a "hunch" from 3 teenagers about 232 years ago.
Sorry, there is no treasure buried there and there never was.

 

[CTwoods]

..... people forget that as a teen or preteen, we sometimes or should I say, most of us, made up stories for whatever reasons.

 

[chalkoutline]

Just a "hunch" from 3 teenagers about 232 years ago.

I agree; however, why did the three teenagers go back in 1804 (onslow company) to continue digging.

Daniel McGinnis' father died on oak island in 1838. If the story is made up, wouldn't the father have stopped his son from defrauding the investors?

 

[chalkoutline]

If the investors were defrauded, why didn't they prosecute the boys?

 

[chalkoutline]

Why did john smith (one of the three boys) by the land at the MP location in june of 1795?

 

[TruthbeTold]

The scam of oak Islamd continues to suck people in.

 

[n2mini]

Might not have ever been treasure there but the original 3 thought there might be, and atleast one of them was able to get others to believe it as well. Onslow Company. As mentioned above, one of them eventually bought the lot. NO ONE was getting rich from investors money. They weren't off partying with the money. Even up to the Restalls in the early 60's they lived a hard life on the island year round mind you with no electricity or road to the mainland. So they weren't living it up from investor money. Sure they all embellished their findings and thinkings of "we're almost there" to try to get more money to continue the dig. In the early years of the current TV Show, even the Lagina's thought there might be treasure there, but now I think even they look at it as more of a history lesson of who all was there. If there was treasure there it has long been gone..

 

[BennyV]

These threads are comical. Same 3 trolls come out to play every time OI is mentioned. Give it a rest.

 

[chalkoutline]

According to Google AI...

Timeline of the Discovery and Purchase

• • The Discovery (June 1795): Teenager Daniel McGinnis found a circular depression on Oak Island and returned with friends John Smith and Anthony Vaughn to start digging. [1, 2]
  • The Land Purchase (June 26, 1795): Just as their initial digging uncovered flagstones and log layers, John Smith bought the property (Lot 18) from a local merchant named Caspar Wollenhaupt for five pounds. [1, 2]

This would suggest it took 3 to 4 weeks to dig 30ft.

 

[TruthbeTold]

Here we go again.

After all claims have been debunked including nolans cross, log platforms, fictional flood tunnels, fake 90 foot stone, etc., some wish to start yet another thread of what if’s and could it be’s about the longest running hoax in history.

Logic would dictate that after thousands of posts here with ZERO evidence about a treasure, that folks would get a clue.

 

[chalkoutline]

Since this was a new factfor me, I posted the timing of the initial find to the land purchase.

A hoax is a false story or trick meant to fool people, such as a fake news report, a practical joke,

If the story was a hoax, they wouldn't have bought the land. As n2mini mensioned...the 3 boys thought there was as treasure there.

So for me, the land purchase validates the boys did indeed find man-made workings which prompted them to purchase the land. Why else would they do that?

 

[Carl-NC]

I don't think for a minute the story originated as a hoax. Someone saw a depression, drew an incorrect inference as to what caused the depression, and then doubled down on bad reasoning when they found rocks and logs in the hole. Not considering for even a moment the possibility of a sinkhole. After that, gullibillies lined up to take their turns at holding the shovel.

I do consider it a distinct possibility that the current holders of the shovels might be perpetuating a hoax for the sake of milking a TV show. Not the first time that would happen, and a better way to make money than real treasure hunting.

 

[pepperj]

I asked and even AI gave this percentage.

 

[TruthbeTold]

Even AI says, “myth and hoax”.

That’s yet another clue.

 

[FreeBirdTim]

These threads are comical. Same 3 trolls come out to play every time OI is mentioned. Give it a rest.

So anyone who realizes this story is baloney is a troll? Got it. By the way, calling a poster a troll is against TNet terms. Great way to get a vacation.

 

[chalkoutline]

I asked Google AI...
if a man tells everyone that he HONESTLY believes he found treasure is it a hoax?

A belief does not make a treasure hunt a hoax if the person is truly honest, but the find itself can still be false or mistaken.

Why Belief Is Not a Hoax

• • True Faith: A man can think he is right even if he is wrong.
  • No Trick: A hoax means someone tries to cheat you on purpose. If he is not trying to trick you, it is a mistake, not a lie. [1]

Based on this definition, by purchasing the land immediately after digging the 30ft hole indicates to me at least, that they honestly BELIEVED that they had found a treasure site; therefore, i conclude...although no treasure has found yet, their story was not an attempt to mislead or deceive anyone.

Note; i used the term "a man" instead of "3 boys" because Google AI automatically deemed the oak island story a hoax without presenting evidence that their intent was indeed to deceive/trick.

I asked Google AI...
is there evidence that the 3 boys on oak island intentionally deceived the public?

There is no direct evidence that the original finders intentionally deceived the public, though historical research shows the classic "three teenage boys" legend is factually inaccurate

This reply is of course just semantics. Most of us know that after so many years and attempts that the boys story and possible treasure were wrong irregardless of their intent.

 

[BennyV]

So anyone who realizes this story is baloney is a troll? Got it. By the way, calling a poster a troll is against TNet terms. Great way to get a vacation.

Rehashing the same mumbo jumbo about your non-belief on every post related to Oak Island should be considered an offense.

 

[Army of 1]

I always thought it totally unbelievable that someone whether it be Pirates , Templars or others would dig a 130 foot plus shaft bury a Treasure that would be almost impossible to retrieve , leave clues then sail off into the Sunset never to return !