What REALLY happened to the wealth of Knights Templar

[Kentucky Kache]

I don't necessarily believe Oak Island holds the Templar treasure...just trying to be funny. Sorry.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oroblanco]

Well amigo it is ME whom should apologize for being so slow on the draw as to fail to recognize good humor when I see it!

Funny or not, Oak Island is a fascinating place IMHO and at this point we can not really rule OUT any possible Templar connections. It seems unlikely, yet some of the most un-likely stories have (in the end) turned out to be all too true! (How many people were convinced for so many centuries, that the old story of Troy was nothing but myths made up by Homer?) Here is an extract from the Wiki article online

[edit] The voyage and the Knights Templar
Intertwined with the Sinclair voyage story is the claim that Henry Sinclair was a Knight Templar and that the voyage either was sponsored by or conducted on the behalf of the Templars, though the order was suppressed almost a century before Henry's lifetime.[6]

Knight and Lomas speculate that the Knights Templar discovered under the Temple Mount in Jerusalem a royal archive dating from King Solomon's times that stated that Phoenicians from Tyre, by orders of Solomon, voyaged to a westerly continent following a star called "La Merika". According to Knight and Lomas, the Templars learned that to sail to that continent, they had to follow a star by the same name, which became the origin of the name "America". Sinclair supposedly followed this route.[7]

The theory also makes use of the supposed Templar connection to explain the name Nova Scotia ("New Scotland" in Latin), basing themselves on the 18th century tale that some Templars escaped the suppression of their order by fleeing to Scotland of Robert the Bruce[8] and fought in the Battle of Bannockburn,[9]

Claims persist that Rosslyn Chapel contains Templar imagery. Andrew Sinclair speculates that the grave slab now in the crypt is that of a Templar knight[10]: According to author Robert Lomas, the chapel also has an engraving depicting a knight templar holding the sword over a head of an initiate, supposedly to protect the secrets of the templars.[11] Rosslyn Chapel was built by Sir William St Clair, last St Clair Earl of Orkney, who was the grandson of Henry. According to Lomas, Sir William, the chapel builder, is also the direct ancestor of the first Grand Master of Masons of Scotland, also named William St Clair (Sinclair).[11]

According to Lomas, the Sinclairs and their French relatives the St. Clairs were instrumental in creating the Knights Templar. He claims that the founder of Templars Hugh de Payns was married to a sister of the Duke of Champaine (Henri de St. Clair), [12] who was a powerful broker of the first Crusade and had the political power to nominate the Pope, and to suggest the idea and empower it to the Pope.

However, a biography of Hugues de Payen by Thierry Leroy [13] identifies his wife and the mother of his children as Elizabeth de Chappes. The book draws its information on the marriage from local church cartularies dealing chiefly with the disposition of the Grand Master's properties, the earliest alluding to Elizabeth as his wife in 1113, and others spanning Payen's lifetime, the period following his death and lastly her own death in 1170.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_Sinclair,_Earl_of_Orkney

There are other evidences too, which could support this rather far-out theory; including but in no way limited to, the ancient stone tower of Newport (R.I.) the "tomb" of the Westford Knight, (Sir Gunn) or the Amerindian legend of their hero 'Glooscap', as well as some odd stone ruins found near the St. Lawrence river, plus the natural crude oil seepage along the coast of Nova Scotia which is mentioned in the Zeno Narrative. Clearly someone had been to this side of the pond well before 1492, but was it Prince Henry Sinclair?

SWR wrote

I would venture to say your opinion of discussion protocol and mine are opposite. I look at it as bringing a knife to a gunfight, and you think those who challenge the lack of references as being lazy.

Well you are entitled to your views SWR, I have no problem with it. Not sure I would describe a discussion as a gunfight, your simile does help explain your approach however. All too often we may come across quite differently than we intend, as you have experienced sometimes just asking a question is taken as a personal attack. I also expect that a person presenting a treasure story ought to have at least SOME kind of documentation and/or evidence to support it, otherwise it is just a story. We likely disagree on what amounts to "enough" documentation, and on the premise that it is a sound argument to simply say a story isn't true and demand for others to prove it up. We are not, after all, in any kind of a legal "court" but simply talking with friends about treasures; the only 'court' thus is that of public opinion. Isn't the 'court of public opinion' a bit more like a Civil court than a criminal court, where the standards differ very greatly? I do realize that you are trying to help our friends NOT to waste their time, efforts and money going on some wild goose chase, and this is to be lauded.
Oroblanco

 

[VICTORIO]

Duck.... What Duck.... A Duck is found at the end of a Treasure trail. It should not be a person. You will find several at the Omega. You will also find the " P " for " Pato " meaning duck in Spanish. The " P " will sometimes be in the shape of a duck head with a beak and a small triangle for an eye. The " P ' also is used as the symbol for pozo, also Spanish.. The Pozo was an old air vent for the mine and might have been used for easier access to the T room. This is the best/ safest way to enter a Treasure room. A Treasure room that " MIGHT " hold some of the wealth of the Knights Templar. SEE TOPIC ABOVE.


This I have learned from the Professionals on this forum. Some of which have left this Forum due to the endless off topic debates and senseless attacks on some of it's members. Please don't ask me to proof what I wrote above. I will tell you what the more experienced and knowledgable " professionals " on this site should of told you. Why should I, I don't have too, Take it or leave it, I don't care too, or simply......... NO.............!!!!!!


Victorio

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA MI AMIGO VICTORIO!

Haven't heard from you a quite a while - I hope you are doing well! You have brought up an excellent topic, what symbology did the Templars use? Anyone here have some knowledge in this area? Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco

 

[VICTORIO]

" We are not, after all, in any kind of a legal "court" but simply talking with friends about treasures; the only 'court' thus is that of public opinion "




That's what I'm talking about ORO!!!!!!!!!!

 

[VICTORIO]

I wish I knew MI Amigo. I 'm just sitting here in the back row waiting for all you " Knowledgable " persons to post. It's Profesionals and friends like you, Rangler, Olddog, Old Pro, Leones de Corazones, Stilldign, R Snow, to name a very very few that keep green horns like me coming back to this site. I really enjoy reading all your post. You don't have to prove anything to me. You are my Buddy. If I want to verify something I can go pound the desert and dodge Rattle snakes myself. It's just that no matter how good the show is you sometimes just have to BOOOOO and throw popcorn at the bad actors.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good evening Cache, wanna volunteer in your ranks? I am joining you whether you agree to it or not. he he

So SWR, Lamar, etc., what's next on the agenda of Narcissism?

Remember, yesterday's truths are today's jokes, but many of today's truism's are derived from yesterday's legends, and possibly will be the the basis of future hysterical laughs.

So if truths and legends etc are basically interchangeable "over time", and possibly neither are, err, true, what IS TRUE TRUTH then?

Just think, a single.presumably unknown,weather beaten old document turning up somewhere could change the history of the Knights completely, or even our basis of Religion.

And who are we to say that it couldn't exist somewhere.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Oroblanco]

Bilbo Baggins? I assure you my amigo Pippin, the Templars were a very real military Order, and they did amass a considerable fortune by their efforts. Some are convinced there never was any treasure, others are convinced quite the opposite.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Dear Real de Tayopa;
You wrote:
So SWR, Lamar, etc., what's next on the agenda of Narcissism?

Remember, yesterday's truths are today's jokes, but many of today's truism's are derived from yesterday's legends, and possibly will be the the basis of future hysterical laughs.

So if truths and legends etc are basically interchangeable "over time", what IS TRUE TRUTH then?

Just think, a single.presumably unknown,weather beaten old document turning up somewhere could change the history of the Knights completely, or even our basis of Religion.

And who are we to say that it couldn't exist somewhere.

I agree with your assessment of the situation in principle, my friend, however shouldn't we WAIT until the actual weatherbeaten document pops to the surface BEFORE making assumptions based on myths? And herein lies the difference between *us* and *them*. With *us* we believe in facts whereas *they* believe in psuedo-facts. It a verified document is found which changes the outlook of the Templars I'll be among the first to accept it for what it is, however the die-hard conspiracy theorists will NOT change, because it may cause their cherished beliefs to crumble.

I've presented facts to this forum and I've been ridiculed for my efforts my friend. Now, you tell me, who has the closed mind?
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good evening Lamar: you posted --> With *us* we believe in facts whereas *they* believe in psuedo-facts.

In my basic psychology / political science classes in the University it was easily proven that when a story was given to the class, then we were asked to repeat it a few weeks or months later, gave an interesting conglomerate of distorsions of the original story, some were extremely difficult to recognize ?

we were also shown how truth is very seldom whole truth, how a simple half truth or suggestion can change the original entirely in both context and wording over time. This change is often passed on as peer reviewed truth.....

Now if we couple this, with the normal human tendency to involuntarily flavor any documents in favor of his or her beliefs, can we be sure that "any" documents from the past are the entire, unblemished truth. Logically, no, we cannot..

Subsequent authors will tend to aggravate the changes until after a succession of them, while we still can recognize the original - if we knew what it was - it is no longer the unblemished truth yet will be accepted as such.

So saying that a document is true since a group of peers have said so, isn't acceptable as such, except to the peers.

Today the Japanese children are being taught that the attack on Pearl Harbor was in retaliation for the Atomic bombing of Japan. In 1000 years who will be correct, the US or Japan, especially in Japan? Of course this document has been reviewed by Japanese peers Sheesh, A peer reviewed document he hehe .

There are documents in existence, which are not made public, in which it can be shown that the US deliberately forced Japan into attacking somewhere in order to survive as a country and so using this as an excuse to arouse the American Public in to supporting the entry into the European war which was considered inevitable in any event . Will the future know of these documents.

Soo, coupling these with interpretations from different languages form different times, creates an interesting situation.

As I have mentioned, look how many expressions and meanings I can create with the simple English word of "OH" ? many would be determined upon my intended context, but would a future translator know of this ?

All of this long winded post is simply to say "Please don't post that is worn phrase - peer reviewed" - to me.

Frankly I knew absolutely nothing about the Knights until I commenced reading about them in here. Now I am getting curious.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,
Lamar wrote

I've presented facts to this forum and I've been ridiculed for my efforts my friend. Now, you tell me, who has the closed mind?

Well amigo I have tried presenting facts and been ridiculed for my efforts as well, but do not feel discouraged because of that. I do try to keep an open mind to all possibilities, as I hope we all do. From both ends of the spectrum, facts can be un-welcome. To an ultra-skeptical mind, for someone to come forward with proof that some long-lost treasure is very real is offensive as encouraging the pursuit of fantasies, likewise to the 'dreamer' (if you will allow that terminology) for someone to come forward with solid proof that the lost treasure they are seeking never existed, is the same as someone trying to destroy their very dreams so they react on a personal level. Treasure hunters are persistent and eternal optimists, they believe that where there is smoke, so also we will find fire - it will take quite a lot of 'wind' to blow away the smoke that has attracted their attention in the first place. We ought not expect that if one of us tears down their dream "for their benefit" that they will have much appreciation for the effort thus expended.

Don Jose', Dueno de Real y Minas de Tayopa wrote

Frankly I knew absolutely nothing about the Knights until I commenced reading about them in here. Now I am getting curious.

You and I both amigo - this is all new water for me, have only begun to 'scratch the surface' as it were. I always dismissed the Templars treasure as being somewhere in Europe if it exists, so well out of my range; however it is a fascinating period of history, even if quite terrible. I am learning much here!
Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good morning SWR: You posted --> It is more than obvious that you have no clue what peer-review is.

A) To use your favorite resource Wiki,

"Peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field"

A peer review at it's best, can only involve personnel that are supposedly competent at that time, for that subject, based upon the knowledge available at that period. Sooo a peer review is somewhat problematical

May I refer you to medical peer reviews throughout history? In my life time I have seen so many
shibboleths verified, over turned, reverified, then over turned again and on. all by peer reviews.

May I also suggest the Piltdown man. For many years certified as genuine by many, many peer reviews, later shown to be a hoax.

But enough of Peer reviews sheesh,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You also posted --> Narcissism, eh? Coming from someone who boasts about owning "lost mines" and finding the lost city of Atlantis you should know all about narcissism. Give yourself a big pat on the back

A) As for the pat on the back, yes, I have already done so, thanks heheheh But acknowledging a proven performance and making flat statements of "superiority" for one reason or another, are two different things. .

Lost mines? no problem, just come on down and I will give you a personal tour. Incidentally, there were five that I found, plus several normal mining properties, 4 of which I still own.

Atlantis? First that was a tongue in cheek thingie, just playing, but as time went on it became more viable. Can you show me where it "isn't" Atlantis? I have submitted it to my peers, the Explorers club for evaluation. Also explain the curious connection between the names Aztlan, the supposed unknown origin of the Aztecs. Aztlan / Atlantis ??

www.explorers.org

So much for this mornings post, and thanks for keeping me on my toes.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[ClonedSIM]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

I don't think SWR referred to himself as threatening. That was the opinion of another well-respected member of T'Net. What's the point of asking him what someone else is thinking?

And this statement "If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong" is ludicrious at best. Try this on for size.
"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
These two statements are very different, so be sure you understand them before replying.

Af, we can count on you to say something ridiculous. Do you think the earth was flat before it was proved to be round? You see, there WAS something there to prove.

"well respected" is a relative term.

Well, I did ask you to make sure you understood the difference in those two statements before responding.

"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
You tell me that you can fly. You cannot produce proof of this statement, so there's nothing for me to prove wrong, but neither have you proven your statement correct.

Let's apply your statement.

"If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong"
I tell you I can fly. I cannot produce proof of this statement, so according to you I must actually be able to fly, and you must believe this without proof since you can't prove me wrong.

Understand now?

Good example. Now, suppose I am Wilbur Wright and this is the early 1900's. Are you getting what I'm trying to say? No, I guess you're not. BEFORE FLIGHT WAS PROVED, IT WAS POSSIBLE. BUT MANY DOUBTERS WOULD NOT BELIEVE IT WITHOUT THE PROOF. IN THE MIDDLE AGES THERE WAS NO PROOF THE EARTH WAS ROUND. WAS THE EARTH ROUND IN THE MIDDLE AGES, AF?
Now do you see that before proof exists, thruth exists? I'll bet you still don't see it.

If you want to assume I don't understand something you're claiming, you should also assume it would be because you explained it poorly.

Try this on for size. BEFORE FLIGHT WAS PROVED, IT WAS POSSIBLE.
Was it, though? Was it possible for a man to fly before the plane (hot air balloon, hang glider, etc.) was invented? Your example here doesn't support your argument because until certain advances were made, it was not possible for man to fly, and it's still not possible for man to fly unaided.

My point it, even if something is "technically" possible, there's no reason to believe it has been accomplished until you see it for yourself.

Just the same as if I walked up to you, a total stranger in the street, and told you I could fly by flapping my arms up and down. According to your credo as written above, since you hadn't actually seen me do this, there would be no reason to doubt my claim. (No proof = not proven incorrect.) This does not make you open-minded, it simply makes you gullible.

 

[lamar]

Dear group;
What happened to the Templar treasures? Nothing, my friends. It did not go anywhere at all. It stayed right where it was the entire time, safely housed in the Royal treasuries throughout Europe. First and foremost, the Templars were lending money to nobility. This is and of itself was wrong and as such, it was a sin. It was called *usury* and NO Roman Catholic was permitted to do this, much less a Roman Catholic monstatic Order.

Because the Templars were loaning money, most of their capitol was most probably loaned out at the time of their arrests. King Phillip took out exhorbiant loans with the Templars, therefore it is indeed most porable that the Templars treasuries had dwindled significantly. What King Philip the Fair ended up doing to the Templars was by no means unique to the Templar Order, my friends. Phillips' plan was to rid France of the Templars, thus not having to pay back his loans to them, however there was a deeper, more sinistet reason behind the arrests.

With the Templars gone, Phillip wished to appoint Royal collectors to collect the debts, however (and this is strictly a supposition on my part) what most likely happened was that because theTemplars encoded all of their monetary transactions, only a very few Templars were able decipher the cryptic debit and credit accounts, therefore with the Templars gone, everyone who owed money to the Templars in France became relieved of their respective debt burdens and the Royal collectors could not collect on the debts owed.

Phillip did the same thing to the Jewish money lenders two years prior to the arrests of the Templars and he did install collectors to collect the debts which had legally been passed to the crown after the Jewish expulsion.. He also did the same to the Italian merchants and bankers four years after the Templar arrests. it was both legal and profitable for him to do so.

In retrospect, the Templars were very smart to encode all of their monetary transactions, as they must have realized they were committing the clerical sin of usury AND a secular crime at the same time, and not only were they obviously guilty, but so were the people who received the loans from them. Therefore the encoded records were not only to protect the Templars themselves, but also to protect those who had taken out loans from them.

These very same encoded documents were paraded before the courts and used as evidence against the Templars as showing them to have committed the sin of esotericism. I feel that the jurors perhaps most likely divined the original intentions of said documents, however, in order to avoid full-blown scandals which would have involved a very large number of noblemen, they chose to accuse the Templars of esotericism and Satanic rituals instead.

Unfortunately there remains none of the original encoded Templars documents, for they were destroyed after the trials, again with the offcial reason being that they were Satanical, or at least esoterical in context, but most likely the true reason was to avoid having the documents divulge the names of those who had taken out loans. It was a neat, tidy arrangement to protect all parties involved.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good morning my old friend AA, and you are:

You posted --> Try this on for size. BEFORE FLIGHT WAS PROVED, IT WAS POSSIBLE. Was it, though? Was it possible for a man to fly before the plane (hot air balloon, hang glider, etc.) was invented? Your example here doesn't support your argument because until certain advances were made, it was not possible for man to fly, and it's still not possible for man to fly unaided

A) Certainly it is possible, even though sustained flight hasn't been attained yet. It is quite possible that man will colonize the Moon and Mars.

As for a man flying unaided, the actual definition must be clarifed. Man does fly in a crude form when he jumps out of an aircraft or off of a cliff and does certain controlled and repeatable maneuvers which require aerodynamic usage.. It is done daily by Sky divers.

I am a bit curious about certain canonized Priests, which the Vatican, or it's representative , personally witnessed flying and also levetation by certain priests.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[ClonedSIM]

Good morning my old friend AA, and you are:

You posted --> Try this on for size. BEFORE FLIGHT WAS PROVED, IT WAS POSSIBLE. Was it, though? Was it possible for a man to fly before the plane (hot air balloon, hang glider, etc.) was invented? Your example here doesn't support your argument because until certain advances were made, it was not possible for man to fly, and it's still not possible for man to fly unaided

A) Certainly it is possible, even though sustained flight hasn't been attained yet. It is quite possible that man will colonize the Moon and Mars.

As for a man flying unaided, the actual definition must be clarifed. Man does fly in a crude form when he jumps out of an aircraft or off of a cliff and does certain controlled and repeatable maneuvers which require aerodynamic usage.. It is done daily by Sky divers.

Don Jose de La Mancha

Morning, Don Jose!

I do see your point here, but even you have to agree that even if something is possible, this does not mean it has been done. Flight by man was not possible before the advent of the airplane (I'm using this as but one example.) Prior to that, no matter how possible it may have been, it simply was not going to happen.

Just as you said, it's possible that man will someday colonize Mars, but you wouldn't take the word of a single man that walked up and told you he owned a bank of condos on Mars he was leasing out, would you? No matter how possible it may be, it's not possible now.

Look at it this way. Would you be willing to put money on it? If someone claimed to have invented a pill that cures AIDS, and he needed backers, would you give him ten thousand dollars? Even though it may someday be possible that such a pill may exist, would you take that claim at face value, or would you want to see it in action?

The same applies to the Wright brothers. It they ran around towing their plane behind a car telling everyone they invented a working flying machine, would anyone have believed them if they didn't unload that plane and physically fly it around?

And, Jose, seriously. There's a pretty big difference between falling and flying.... Yes, they may share some physical elements, but the end results are very different.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Af, you're over thinking things. I was making a simple point that, flight was always possible. And you never answered my question, was the earth flat or round in the dark ages?

 

[lamar]

Dear group;
OK, let's take a current situation. Can a spaceship travel beyond the speed of light? According to Einstein, no, nothing can attain the speed of light. This DOES NOT mean that space travel beyond the speed of light is impossible however. It simply means that space travel at velocities greater than the speed of light are impossible AT THIS TIME! Period. One CANNOT predict that which is UNKNOWN with any degree of certainty.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Dear group;
OK, let's take a current situation. Can a spaceship travel beyond the speed of light? According to Einstein, no, nothing can attain the speed of light. This DOES NOT mean that space travel beyond the speed of light is impossible however. It simply means that space travel at velocities greater than the speed of light are impossible AT THIS TIME! Period. One CANNOT predict that which is UNKNOWN with any degree of certainty.
Your friend;
LAMAR

So, was Einstein wrong, or do the laws of physics change as we learn more and are able to achieve more?

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Cache Crazy;
You wrote:
So, was Einstein wrong, or do the laws of physics change as we learn more and are able to achieve more?
It means that if your ancestors hadn't married their sisters, you'd be able to figure it out on your own.
LAMAR

But I don't need too, I've got Pinkie and the brain to do that for me.
Insults instead of answers. That's what you do when you don't know what to say. How does it feel, Lamar...being stumped by an inbred?