A O T C - you decide

Please post your theories for discussion here. Expect plenty of questions and devil's advocacy.

Moderators: Jo, admiralbenbow, Keeled_over

Re: A O T C - you decide

Postby Dave Wood on Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:30 am

So far I have 3 confirmations that the Triangle was as stated,
1. Graham Harris in his book "Oak Island Treasure Revealed" pg 79. that the triangle was in the perimeter of the pool.
2. My source, who does not want to be named,that it was in that pool past the Stone Triangle sign
3. The sign itself saying "30ft beyond this point etc",which is where I have the triangle sited,within the perimeter of the pool.
That then puts my N-S line in the correct position,but admittedly the position on that line marked as the MP is not the original site.
I do know where that original position is and how it is determined but I am keeping that as an Ace up my sleeve for the moment.
Dave Wood
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:55 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: A O T C - you decide

Postby . . . on Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:25 pm

Dave Wood wrote:So far I have 3 confirmations that the Triangle was as stated,
1. Graham Harris in his book "Oak Island Treasure Revealed" pg 79. that the triangle was in the perimeter of the pool.


Your location is not on the perimeter of the pool, it’s in the middle.

Dave Wood wrote:2. My source, who does not want to be named,that it was in that pool past the Stone Triangle sign.


Any point in the pool excavation would be past the sign.

Dave Wood wrote:3. The sign itself saying "30ft beyond this point etc",which is where I have the triangle sited,within the perimeter of the pool.


You cannot know that this distance is correct, and you cannot know the exact bearing from the sign. Once more, the location you identify is not at the perimeter of the pool, it's in the middle.

The triangle - the entire figure - was just inland from the beach, well above high tide mark. You’re point is well below the shoreline currently indicated on Google Earth, and if a point twelve feet below this (that is, the bottom of the design) is anywhere near being touched by the tide then it would have to be wrong.

You're also not addressing the evidence that contradicts your claim. R.V.Harris's reports concerning the excavations at the Chappell and Hedden shafts indicate that the Chappell shaft was most likely overlapping the original Pit. The triangle was due south of where they believed the original pit to have been. Therefore, the triangle could not have been due south of the centre of the Hedden Shaft, which is where you're stating it was.

Dave Wood wrote:I do know where that original position is and how it is determined but I am keeping that as an Ace up my sleeve for the moment.

IMO, what I've reported above seems to be the best indication of where the triangle was. I'm sorry to say that I currently have more confidence in Hedden, Chappell, R.V. Harris and Blair than in any aces from this or any other pack that you choose to slip up your sleeve.
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

Previous

Return to Your Theories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


Fatal error: ./cache/ is NOT writable. in /home/oakislan/public_html/forum/includes/acm/acm_file.php on line 103