Why would buried treasure be abandoned ?

[Ocean7]

there is nothing at 150 feet, nor 70 feet, nor 15 feet. It's all a big fat tall tale that just got bigger down the line. There was no Freemasons, nor Templars, nor Rosicrucians burying anything on this island.
But here you can bury my ring and then say the Mayans were there.
Official seal of the secret brotherhood

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[gazzahk]

there is nothing at 150 feet, nor 70 feet, nor 15 feet. It's all a big fat tall tale that just got bigger down the line. There was no Freemasons, nor Templars, nor Rosicrucians burying anything on this island.
But here you can bury my ring and then say the Mayans were there.
View attachment 1562439Official seal of the secret brotherhood

This is not a discussion about wether the story is true it is about wether there is even a theretical logical/plausable reason some group would bury treasure and then abandon it....

 

[Ocean7]

This is not a discussion about wether the story is true it is about wether there is even a theretical logical/plausable reason some group would bury treasure and then abandon it....

well I noticed you asked the question and Robot quickly had the answer almost as if you're a tag team. I'm sure that's not the case but wow how convenient! If you are looking for logic which is my strong suit - then I'm sure you've already answered the question.

 

[gazzahk]

well I noticed you asked the question and Robot quickly had the answer almost as if you're a tag team. I'm sure that's not the case but wow how convenient! If you are looking for logic which is my strong suit - then I'm sure you've already answered the question.

Huh! Why the insult? If you do not like the discussion don't participate..... I find that comment pretty offensive...

 

[Ocean7]

Huh! Why the insult? If you do not like the discussion don't participate..... I find that comment pretty offensive...

really? I found this post pretty offensive too! It just kinda rubbed me the wrong way. fact is i know exactly why you said it and you must think we're all
just born yesterday.

 

[gazzahk]

What... So you have just been waiting to insult me... You are a strange one. I just asked you a question? I do think your posting endless non-posts the filling them up with pictures and comments that have nothing to do with Oak Island is really weird. I have never seen such strange behavior on a forum before.... Thus I do not visit those threads anymore so it no longer is of a concern to me... You seem to just want to talk to yourself in those threads anyway. The mods do not seem to mind the behavior so I guess you are more then free to continue to do it. Good for you..

I still fail to see the relevance of the "born yesterday" comment.

But I am not really interested. I wish you best and will try to avoid having anything further to do with you....

 

[Ocean7]

just remember when you decide to 'troll' people on the Net - that works both ways. And I have much better things to do too!

 

[Dave Rishar]

In my one cell brain I keep wondering about the depth. "IF" they did bury something, the deeper they buried it the longer it would take to manually dig. The longer it took, the greater the chance of maybe a passing by ship could spot them and come and investigate. They would not want any undo attention. If a ship dropped off a crew and later returned to pick them up "might" make some sense ? If what was being buried was that valuable that it needed to be buried so deep then one might wonder if the whole crew was told or just a handful. The more that knew, the greater the chances are for someone to take off on their own. They could have easily found a captain and a crew at some port that would be interested and up for the challenge. But then whose to say that didn't happen anyway ?

The reason that I would never dig a 100 foot deep hole to bury something that I want is that I'd have to dig another 100 foot deep hole to get it back again.

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

The reason that I would never dig a 100 foot deep hole to bury something that I want is that I'd have to dig another 100 foot deep hole to get it back again.

Very profound, solid logic!

 

[Tom Slikes53]

There are few real fundamental problems with the basic theory of treasure buried on OI (I know there are many more actual problems). Given that it would take a reasonably sized group of people to have done what the legend speculates they are meant to have done.

1. Why would some group of people bury something that deep in the first place.
2. Why would they leave deliberate evidence of where they had buried the treasure.
3. Why would they abandon the treasure never to return and get it.

The more I have read about Oak Island and all the searches over the years it is so difficult to understand why anyone ever thought any treasure was actually buried in the pit at those depths. 170+ foot is getting near the same height as a 20 story building straight down. You just need to look at a building this height to picture the depth the legend is speculating this group dug.

There has been zero evidence ever found of treasure (other then the claim of the descendants but that had the treasure at 10ft).

The Laginas must of spent millions now investigating the theory and have found NOTHING. I really do not understand how anyone can still believe this legend. I fail to understand really how anyone did believe it enough to commit time and money to trying to recover the theorized treasure with the complete lack of evidence treasure existed and the complete lack of any plausible theory on why treasure would still be there..

It is an amazing story and I do thank the Laginas for showing us all the unbelievable level of folly that a 'hint' of treasure can cause..... Oak Island if nothing else is an amazing story....

concerning No 2 there, could you educate me on when digging equipment was found and when was it figured to originally have been used ?

 

[gazzahk]

concerning No 2 there, could you educate me on when digging equipment was found and when was it figured to originally have been used ?

Not digging equipment. The 70 foot stone, oak platforms every 10 feet and the other "alleged" clues like the stone triangle, nolans cross etc...

 

[Tom Slikes53]

Not digging equipment. The 70 foot stone, oak platforms every 10 feet and the other "alleged" clues like the stone triangle, nolans cross etc...

ok, so no obvious marker over the pit....i thought I read here not too long ago that there was some sort of ancient crane left behind from the original digging. concerning the 70 ft stone, I wonder if an investigation of where it is no has been thoroughly completed.Have experienced investigators been put on this to try and find it ?

 

[gazzahk]

ok, so no obvious marker over the pit....i thought I read here not too long ago that there was some sort of ancient crane left behind from the original digging. concerning the 70 ft stone, I wonder if an investigation of where it is no has been thoroughly completed.Have experienced investigators been put on this to try and find it ?

There is contemporary reports of people seeing it. (actually found at 80/90 ft i misquoted an earlier poster when I said 70ft - sorry for that) However no one knows if it was not just faked by those who claim to have found it. There are also no actual contemporary rubbings etc of what was alleged carved into it. Thus if the stone even existed it was probably/possibly a fake. If there were carvings on it no one knows if the alleged transcription of the carvings is accurate. Here is a really good article about it https://www.oakislandcompendium.ca/...lost-90-foot-stone-part-2-in-a-special-series It was found in 1803 but no deciphered until 1893 as a part of a prospectus to attract investors. Thus it is very questionable as to the accuracy of the decoding (or if they were even decoding the same stone). It appears the stone was part of a chimney in Smiths house in the intervening time. No one knows if it was the same stone or the same inscription that was deciphered later. By 1909 the inscription had worn away so no way to verify what it said if it actually existed at all.

The evidence of the stone and inscription are highly suspect at best....

edit: The referenced article also has this report

“Sixth – There never were any characters on the rock found in the Money Pit. Because: (a) The rock, being hard, they could not wear off. (b) There are a few scratches, etc., made by Creighton’s employees, as they acknowledged, but there is not, and never was, a system of characters carved on the stone.” –Page 20

- Source: 1911 August 19 – Collier’s Magazine [H.L. Bowdoin’s Eyewitness Account]

The logic for placing it at 80/90 ft is even more difficult to fathom. Why would a treasure hider place a stone telling people to dig deeper to find the treasure... Maybe the whole thing was one of the biggest practical joke ever conceived... And it still working over 200 years later....

 

[n2mini]

There claimed to be townspeople that saw the stone in a store front window back in the day...

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

There claimed to be townspeople that saw the stone in a store front window back in the day...

That was the fake stone carved by the company looking to seek investors....so fake in fact that is was tossed and used for a foundation stone in a building. I would argue that if the cryptic writing was a clue to a vast treasure, it would not have been thrown away...

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

ok, so no obvious marker over the pit....i thought I read here not too long ago that there was some sort of ancient crane left behind from the original digging. concerning the 70 ft stone, I wonder if an investigation of where it is no has been thoroughly completed.Have experienced investigators been put on this to try and find it ?

Rope marks on a branch over disturbed ground first mentioned in print around 1856 as having been seen in 1799 by McGinnis. That's it. McGinnis mentioned "marks" every 10 feet. Wood Platforms came later in the retelling.

In 1862 a published article mentions a stone found around 1807 at 90 ft that [allegedly] had markings on it. But that was lost/stolen/inaccurate.

 

[n2mini]

Assuming the stone was fake. Do you think the ones who claimed to have found it still truly believe there is treasure below? The next day they supposedly couldn't pump the hole dry and gave up. Not much use in getting more investors to give money if your giving up. It would have taken weeks to use it to try to round up more money yet they supposedly had quit well before then...

 

[Singlestack Wonder]

Assuming the stone was fake. Do you think the ones who claimed to have found it still truly believe there is treasure below? The next day they supposedly couldn't pump the hole dry and gave up. Not much use in getting more investors to give money if your giving up. It would have taken weeks to use it to try to round up more money yet they supposedly had quit well before then...

The ones who "found it" are the ones who made it.....and yes, when digging a hole below sea level on an island riddled with natural underground water passages, holes will flood...

 

[sasquash]

Woo woo woo woo woo, I found a full box of cow..ins !

I had to scan each one for the dating process, look like old copper cow..ins used long time ago ...

Could it be that possibly a new thread about cow...ins will be started !

 

[n2mini]

Back to the OP topic, as to why a treasure would be abandoned.. If it was something like the Holy Grail maybe there was never a plan to retrieve it. They just didn't want it to be taken or destroyed.