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

[FreeBirdTim]

The only people who buy this story of a 130 foot deep shaft dug to bury treasure are people who have never dug a hole in their life! It's hard work to even dig a small hole 2 or 3 feet in the ground with a shovel. Digging a 130 foot hole would take a tremendous amount of effort and way too much time if you're trying to be secretive. Not to mention the chance of a cave-in, which would mean certain death.

 

[3cylbill]

Tell me why thousands of tons of stonework were done , stone roads stone foundations stone barriers with no machinery no accessibility just ships could reach the island..and where did all the stone come from.this alone took many years by handwork..why would they do this kind of work on a 100 acre island.. without even considering a treasure...?

 

[TruthbeTold]

Yep...oak island contains the remnants and trash of common human habitation.

In over 200 years+ of the fictional treasure tale, not ONE single piece of evidence or documentation has EVER been produced that shows a treasure was buried there.

The long running scam continues....

 

[3cylbill]

Yep...oak island contains the remnants and trash of common human habitation.

In over 200 years+ of the fictional treasure tale, not ONE single piece of evidence or documentation has EVER been produced that shows a treasure was

Yep...oak island contains the remnants and trash of common human habitation.

In over 200 years+ of the fictional treasure tale, not ONE single piece of evidence or documentation has EVER been produced that shows a treasure was buried there.

The long running scam continues....

Apparently you didn't understand my question ..you should read it again before you jump on your high horse.....

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Let's please post by our rules and keep it cordial..

 

[chalkoutline]

I asked Google AI...
why would someone build stone roads on a 100 an island in 18th century?

Building stone roads on a small 100-acre island in the 18th century was usually done to manage heavy transport, soggy terrain, or specialized industrial work. Without paved infrastructure, small island dirt tracks quickly turned into deep, impassable mud under the weight of heavy carts or frequent wet weather.

Practical and Industrial
1. ReasonsMoving Heavy Cargo: Transporting quarried stone, timber, cannon, or bulk supplies from a shoreline landing or wharf to an inland work site required a reinforced surface that wouldn't buckle under heavy wagons.
2. Conquering Bogs and Swamps: If an island had low-lying, marshy, or swampy areas, laying down a dense stone causeway was essential to keep transit routes from sinking into the muck.
3. Agricultural and Livestock Use: Farmers clearing rocky island fields often used the abundant surface stones to build boundary walls or stable farm lanes for carts and livestock.
4. Military or Naval Outposts: Strategic coastal islands used by military engineers required solid roads to move artillery pieces and garrison supplies in all weather conditions.

I would contend, if the stone road was un covered first, no one would connect it to treasure

 

[chalkoutline]

Just for fun i asked Google AI...
Why would someone dig a 100ft vertical shaft in the 1800s on a 100 acre island?

If someone actually dug a 100-foot vertical shaft on a small island during the mid-to-late 18th century, historical and speculative theories generally point to a few specific motivations:
1. Concealing Treasure legend suggests hiding loot from figures like Captain Kidd, stashing gold, or burying religious artifacts safely away from mainland authorities.
2. Military or Strategic Operations/Secret Munitions Storage: A covert depot to hide gunpowder, bullion, or military provisions away from British or American naval patrols during the height of the Revolutionary War era.
3. Naval Logistics / Tidal Infrastructure: Alternative engineering hypotheses (such as the French naval or hydraulic theories) suggest large-scale works related to clandestine ship maintenance or regional operations rather than simple plunder.
4. Natural Geological Confusion Sinkholes: Many local geologists and skeptics argue that a 100-foot deep vertical drop is not man-made at all, but rather a natural limestone sinkhole or an anhydrite karst collapse accelerated by the island's unique water table.

 

[Carl-NC]

Tell me why thousands of tons of stonework were done , stone roads stone foundations stone barriers with no machinery no accessibility just ships could reach the island..and where did all the stone come from.this alone took many years by handwork..why would they do this kind of work on a 100 acre island.. without even considering a treasure...?

Would you say the stone works:

1. absolutely proves that there is a buried treasure
2. are most likely explained as part of a buried treasure
3. are possibly part of a buried treasure
4. are most likely explained as unrelated to a buried treasure

To answer the question -- where did all the stone come from? -- keep in mind that OI is glacial till. It was also farmed for a long time so plowed-up stones would be plentiful. Here is a photo of stone walls in Ireland, all built with plowed-up glacial stones:

That's a lot of stones. And the stone structures found on OI are also common on the Nova Scotia mainland. Does that mean there are there buried treasures all over Nova Scotia?

 

[chalkoutline]

Google AI says...
Yes, there are more than enough natural stones on Oak Island and its surrounding beaches to build the stone pathway or "road" uncovered near the swamp. The island's shorelines and glacial till deposits naturally feature abundant loose rocks, cobbles, and boulders.

 

[FreeBirdTim]

Tell me why thousands of tons of stonework were done , stone roads stone foundations stone barriers with no machinery no accessibility just ships could reach the island..and where did all the stone come from.this alone took many years by handwork..why would they do this kind of work on a 100 acre island.. without even considering a treasure

There are many areas around New England that cannot be farmed, due to the overwhelming amount of rocks and stones in the ground. The Ice Age was responsible for that problem. We have hundreds of miles of stone walls around here from farmers who were trying to make their land usable and to keep livestock under control. And of course, the stone foundations were once homesites. Bottom line, stone walls, stone foundations and stone roads really have nothing to do with buried treasure.

 

[n2mini]

I guess all the rocks on the island have already been picked up, dug up and moved to form the roads and shore line, foundations, etc.... Mid 60's some where probably used by Dunfield to help build the causeway. For the most part the Laginas have not found lots of random rocks/boulders in their digging ( atleast that they tell us about ) that weren't already placed as a road, berm, or foundation of some sort...

 

[TruthbeTold]

Any rock the laginas find they attribute to the templars.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Post deleted for rule violation......3cylbil, please post by our rules, no insults directed at members.

 

[Armchair detective]

Missed the episode - apparently there was a focus on the stone pier extending into the swamp area (formerly open water in an island's lee).

Missing some context here - how often are such structures built on the surrounding islands?

Was anything said about its elevation versus sea level? Or about how far it extends inland?

Can't help noticing the permanence of such a structure (versus say a corduroy road).

I love being able to have an opinion without knowing what I'm talking about.

 

[gjb]

Now that I’ve got the responses I was expecting (and was actually hoping for), I’ll go back and reconstruct. If we accept that what’s written about the Oak Island mystery makes little or no sense then we can safely strip off all the supposed clues together with the back story and hold them in limbo.

Obviously, we could then place them wherever we want, even in the trash can.

However, we might devise an armchair treasure hunt, which I’ll call ‘The Holm Oak Island Armchair Treasure Hunt’ and incorporate within it the back story and all of the clues thus extracted from Oak Island. Bear in mind that in an armchair treasure hunt you don’t challenge the back story or the clues. Everyone accepts that when these are brought together they provide a solution.

I’m simply observing that when a subset of the Oak Island clues are taken to be genuine and meaningful they actually make sense, that is, when nobody dismisses them simply because they don’t like the look of them. It’s because people summarily dismiss the clues when they’re applied to Oak Island, demonstrated by all the comments above, that they can’t see that there is actually a mystery and that it has a solution.

It can be demonstrated that such a ‘Holm Oak Island Armchair Treasure Hunt’, based solely on Oak Island clues, can actually be solved, because when you stop declaring the clues to be bullshit they actually begin to make sense.

Thus, the possibility exists that the worked solution to the ‘Holm Oak Island Mystery’ may well be the answer to the Oak Island mystery. That would imply that there is actually some mystery to Oak Island that we’re not seeing because we’re declaring the clues to be outright nonsense when they’re not.

So, maybe we should be giving these specific clues a break and seeing what they’re actually telling us.

 

[chalkoutline]

You are correct that the mere mention of oak island is very polarizing so cutting/putting the story of 3 boys, the money pit and flood tunnels in the clipboard for now, makes sense if there is a second mystery to pursue.

What clues do you suggest are pertinent to solving this mystery?

 

[TruthbeTold]

Now that I’ve got the responses I was expecting (and was actually hoping for), I’ll go back and reconstruct. If we accept that what’s written about the Oak Island mystery makes little or no sense then we can safely strip off all the supposed clues together with the back story and hold them in limbo.

Obviously, we could then place them wherever we want, even in the trash can.

However, we might devise an armchair treasure hunt, which I’ll call ‘The Holm Oak Island Armchair Treasure Hunt’ and incorporate within it the back story and all of the clues thus extracted from Oak Island. Bear in mind that in an armchair treasure hunt you don’t challenge the back story or the clues. Everyone accepts that when these are brought together they provide a solution.

I’m simply observing that when a subset of the Oak Island clues are taken to be genuine and meaningful they actually make sense, that is, when nobody dismisses them simply because they don’t like the look of them. It’s because people summarily dismiss the clues when they’re applied to Oak Island, demonstrated by all the comments above, that they can’t see that there is actually a mystery and that it has a solution.

It can be demonstrated that such a ‘Holm Oak Island Armchair Treasure Hunt’, based solely on Oak Island clues, can actually be solved, because when you stop declaring the clues to be bullshit they actually begin to make sense.

Thus, the possibility exists that the worked solution to the ‘Holm Oak Island Mystery’ may well be the answer to the Oak Island mystery. That would imply that there is actually some mystery to Oak Island that we’re not seeing because we’re declaring the clues to be outright nonsense when they’re not.

So, maybe we should be giving these specific clues a break and seeing what they’re actually telling us.

So you are suggesting creating yet another fictional story about the island since the one in your book didn't sell?

That's the thing about oak island, after 200+ years without a single piece of evidence as to a treasure ever being buried there, when folk's fictional stories get debunked they create new ones.

 

[TruthbeTold]

You are correct that the mere mention of oak island is very polarizing so cutting/putting the story of 3 boys, the money pit and flood tunnels in the clipboard for now, makes sense if there is a second mystery to pursue.

What clues do you suggest are pertinent to solving this mystery?

Please explain what mystery you are referring to?

 

[chalkoutline]

Please explain what mystery you are referring to?

Once i know the pertinent clues then ill know if there is a mystery

 

[Carl-NC]

Bear in mind that in an armchair treasure hunt you don’t challenge the back story or the clues. Everyone accepts that when these are brought together they provide a solution.

As I mentioned in post #2, what you are saying is that an armchair treasure hunter is required to be a gullibilly. Can you explain why that is?

I’m simply observing that when a subset of the Oak Island clues are taken to be genuine and meaningful they actually make sense, that is, when nobody dismisses them simply because they don’t like the look of them. It’s because people summarily dismiss the clues when they’re applied to Oak Island, demonstrated by all the comments above, that they can’t see that there is actually a mystery and that it has a solution.

Anyone can take a set of claims and weave them into a story. Problem is, if the claims are bullsnort then the resulting story is bullsnort. If you demand that no one can challenge the claims and must accept them at face value, then the whole exercise is useless, except for the purpose of weaving a fanciful story.