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

A O T C - you decide

Postby Dave Wood on Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:41 am

This is a follow on from "Why Conical Boulders" and is a subject that I thought I would never be touching on,in fact from the start of this research it never entered my head until recently when I found an indication referring to it.

From Cone C the bearing and distance to location F is 130d 34m @ 522ft. and to the Welling Triangle 1499ft and to Cone B 720ft.
The Triangle plus it's arc has an area of 52sq.ft x 1499 = 77948 + 13034522 + 720 = 13113190

At the Triangle the base line is divided in two by the N-S line measured at 4ft to the left and 6ft to the right and 1ft to the arc giving 146

At the apex the two angles left and right of the N-S line are rounded off at 23d and 37d and the remainder of 360d is 300d.reduced to 3 and the area of 52 gives 352....2337 - 352 = 1985

The area of the Triangle is 43sq ft x 146 = 6278 and 1499ft = 17988 inches.....17988 - 6278 = 11710

The reason Cone C was placed where it was is because of it's proximity to Joudrey's Cove

Taking the results of the calculations

11710 - 146 - 1985 - 1311319.. 1-A 17-R 10 K 14 -O 6 F 19-T 8-H 5- E COVE 13- N 1-A 13-N 19-T

..........ARK OF THE COVENANT
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 Thu Jan 22, 2015 10:08 pm

Dave Wood wrote:From Cone C ... to the Welling Triangle 1499ft...

Just as a matter of interest, how did you determine this distance?
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

Re: A O T C - you decide

Postby Dave Wood on Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:51 am

I have the WT at 1131ft from the East line from Cone C,the resulting 90d triangle is a precise 49 - 41 - 90 and the distances are 983.5ft,1131.39ft and 1499.1ft to Cone C.The right side of the WT surveyed at 36d 34m from South then points directly to location F at 986ft.
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 Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:32 pm

Dave Wood wrote:I have the WT at 1131ft from the East line from Cone C...

I see that. But then how did you determine that a point 1131 feet due north of the Welling Triangle is due east of Cone C, and at the distance you state?
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

Re: A O T C - you decide

Postby . . . on Sat Jan 24, 2015 7:54 pm

Dave Wood wrote:I have the WT at 1131ft from the East line from Cone C,the resulting 90d triangle is a precise 49 - 41 - 90 and the distances are 983.5ft,1131.39ft and 1499.1ft to Cone C.

Dave

Some years back. I obtained what I hoped were a dozen fairly reliable GPS readings round the island, at points identifiable on aerial photographs. At that time, the Google Earth image was extremely poor. So, I plotted the points and then scaled and aligned an aerial photograph to match. This is what I used for my reconstruction, and in my book.

I can now identify on Google Earth the points I plotted. Some agree fairly well, and some don’t, by a good few feet. So, I don’t know where the error lies.

However, when I use Google Earth, I find that marked points (those that have been saved) can subsequently shift by several feet, and then go back, and then shift again, so I don’t think the software can be treated as any better than a reliable and fairly accurate GPS.

The point I really want to make is that we don’t know where on the image the apex of the Welling Triangle was placed, except that it was in the excavation (now partly water filled) south of the Money Pit.

Using the plan I decided to go with, in Google Earth run a distance from Cone C of 1480 feet at 139 deg, and you’ll still end up in the old excavation, but just above the current water line. If you then take a line 280 feet due north (verifiable from the Roper Survey) you’ll end up slightly southwest of the Hedden Shaft, which would be in the vicinity of the Chappell Shaft, and by most accounts this shaft was located at or very near the original Money Pit.

However, at 1499 feet from Cone C on the same bearing, your line goes well into the excavation on the south shore, but then the line due north of your end point runs through the middle of the Hedden Shaft, at about 297 feet, but the report by Harris and Blair observes that this is not the actual site of the Money Pit, and the distance is too great to match the Roper Survey.

My view is that we have to be extremely sensitive to the reported observations of distances, bearings and relative positions in order to use Google Earth, but this will never beat an actual survey. As we’ll never be allowed to conduct a survey, applying common sense to the use of Google Earth is the best we can do, but I don't think it can be considered as precise as you want it to be.

Given early reports, your placing of the Welling Triangle may well be too far east by up to ten feet, and too far south by more. However, who knows, these reports could be wrong, and you could be right!
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

Re: A O T C - you decide

Postby Dave Wood on Sun Jan 25, 2015 1:17 am

I do get what you are saying but I can only go by what this geometry gives me which is something very close to the positions in question even though I only initially used Cone C as my datum point and the surveyed position for Cone B,the remaining positions of the Triangle and the MP etc. were a product of that geometry.I didn't use any surveyed positions for them and use reverse geometry.
When I first started using google earth it had that fuzzy image and I took an educated guess as to the position of C and overlayed the geometry,which gave the N-S line produced by the side of the 720ft hexagon as running to the right of the MP by approx 12ft.I eventually shrugged it off as an amazing coincidence until last April when they replaced the old image with the high resolution one we have today and found my datum point was several feet to the left of C so I redrew the overlay.I was pleasantly surprised to find that the N-S line went directly through the MP.
continued..
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 Dave Wood on Sun Jan 25, 2015 1:41 am

I have to do these in spurts as I keep getting logged off before I've finished.

When I measured the distance ffrom the MP to the top corner of the side of the hex at 576ft it gave me the idea that maybe there was a second cross so I measured 429ft North of the MP as it's centre and drew a line to the centre of Nolan's cross.Cutting a long story short I eventually ended up with location F where both lines from C to the MP and centre to centre met then positioning the Welling Triangle till its right angle of 36d 34m was in line with that position determined the position for the Triangle I have now,which at the time I thought measured 294ft.I have since revised that in that the distances are 293 - 429 - 145 the original surveyed distances by Nolan.
My position on Google for the Triangle is on the N-S line 12ft from the Northern rim of the pool and 27ft from the Eastern rim.

i overcame the problem of the distances varying by plotting at a low altitude of 200ft and adjusting the distortion at that height with the South arrow on the N-S tool till it gives an overhead view on the image.The measurements have stayed exactly the same since I did the new overlay last April.
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 Sun Jan 25, 2015 5:11 pm

I understand that, and trust that you’re saying the Welling Triangle might have been at the point you identify rather than that it was. However, should we not be attempting to place the Welling Triangle first, and building up hypotheses afterwards?

Putting my previous observation another way: given that the excavation at the Money Pit site is the remains of the Hedden Shaft, we may reasonably conclude, from the documented history of excavations, that the original Money Pit was southwest of this. Then, given that the Welling Triangle was due south of the Money Pit, and based on Google Earth. the triangle could not have been where you suggest. This is all backed up by Harris and others, and supported by the Roper Survey.

Surely, you have to convince people that you know where the Welling Triangle was, to within a few feet, but there are a lot of ‘ifs’ surrounding this. However, I feel that on the basis of all I’ve read about Oak Island, the likelihood is that it was some fifteen to twenty feet (4.5m to 6m) northwest of where you say it was. and that's a huge difference.

As your geometry presumably cannot be faulted, your hypothesis would be severely undermined if you cannot demonstrate that the Welling Triangle was, in all likelihood, where you say, and not because you declare it must have been because you’re hypothesis requires this to be so.

That’s just my view. So, I’m looking for you, or others, to tell me where I’ve gone wrong in my reasoning, and by reference to existing documentation, not by counter-proposition. I’m looking for you to present a counter-argument supporting the claim that the Welling Triangle was where you say it was rather than where I think it was, because if I’m wrong, I’d very much like to know.
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

Re: A O T C - you decide

Postby Dave Wood on Sun Jan 25, 2015 8:53 pm

There is one way of finding the exact position of the Triangle and that is through Dan Blankenship who has said that he remembers precisely where the Triangle was,in fact after the new image on Google appeared I did try to contact him through someone else on the island asking if he would place a dot on a Google image I sent showing the position of the apex stone.That didn't happen and all I got was a general description of its position.
I'll give it another shot and if successful I'll show you the result and to tell you the truth considering the latest encryption I hope I am wrong.
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 Mon Jan 26, 2015 1:07 am

It’s like getting blood out of a stone! I wouldn’t bank on Dan’s memory. I’ve met three people who claimed to have seen the triangle, and not one of them felt they could pin-point the spot after all the destruction. All said it was a short way off the beach - one said the base was some fifteen feet inland. Another said that about 30 feet below the apex he could see into the break at the roadway. This is all very vague. Carol Nauss depicts the triangle much the same way - a short distance off the beach, as it was then.

I reckon the best bet would be Fred Nolan’s survey, because that should tie the triangle to other known points, hopefully not moved! I seem to recall that in Season One of Curse of Oak Island Rick Lagina consulted it (on a large sheet.) No chance of seeing that, then! I did try to contact Nolan a dozen times, but he didn’t reply.

Anyway, this is a treasure hunt, it's definitely not a search for answers to the mystery - so maybe we shouldn't expect anyone to tell us anything that might prove useful!
User avatar
. . .
Digging for Diamonds
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:58 pm
Location: West Midlands, UK

Next

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