OAK ISLAND CROSS SOLVED
There exists on Oak Island a most marvelous megalithic construction. It is a deceptively simple looking layout of six ten ton granite boulders in a shape which many have compared to a crucifix. Indeed, one might readily accept the notion that this layout was intended to represent a common Christian cross were it not for the fact that there is a seemingly superfluous boulder oddly positioned between the one at the bottom of the "cross", as we will call it for lack of a better term, and the one at the center of its arms. The approximate position of this cross on Oak Island is shown in the image below. The precise position of the cross has never been published, as markings on an aerial photo for instance. The best we have is this diagram published in William Crookers excellent book, Oak Island Gold (Nimbus Publishing), which I highly recommend.
Certain individuals have made bizarre claims to the effect that the actual positions of the stones are different than Crooker stated. I have reason whatsoever to doubt Crooker's figures. He was a respected land surveyor and book author. Nothing in his book suggests that he was in any way biased in his reporting. It is very clear from his book that he was interested only in ascertaining the true facts as best he could. He personally surveyed the cross and confirmed the dimensions given to him by the landowner, also a professional land surveyor, Fred Nolan. If anyone ever provides convincing evidence that Mr. Crooker and Mr. Nolan either lied or were both incompetent land surveyors then I will be sure to take that into consideration.
The dimensions of the cross are most puzzling. The distance between the stones at the ends of the arms and the one at the center of the arms is ordinary enough, this distance being 360 feet. Thus, the full width of the cross is 720 feet. So far, we have been dealing with nice round numbers, multiples of 10, and it is easy to imagine why such a figure as 360 would have been chosen, being simply the number of degrees in a circle. Here we have our first clue that we are dealing with a geometric figure, rather than a simple crucifix, and we shall see that the geometry in question is astonishingly complex.
We now leave the realm of nice round numbers because we will now be investigating the "stem" of this "cross". We find that the distance from the top stone to the one at the center of the arms, which we will hereafter refer to as the "centerstone", is 145 feet. Again we are dealing with dimensions in increments of feet, but this time the number has no known significance and is not a multiple of 10, though it is at least a multiple of 5. Perhaps, we think to ourselves, the builders were trying to establish a specific angle between the arms and the top of the cross rather than seeking to choose a dimension which would reflect a number of some fairly obvious significance. This hypothesis is also found wanting because the resulting angle is found to be 21.938480468 degrees, not an even angle at all nor one of any apparent significance.
We now move to the dimension between the centerstone and the bottom stone of the stem of the cross. This is found to be 722 feet. Again, we have a perplexing dimension. Again, we look to see if a significant angle is produced between the stem and the arms and, again, we find a completely meaningless angle, this one being 63.498469616 degrees.
Now we'll look at the dimension between the centerstone and the oddly positioned stone which is less than halfway up the stem (I say "up" but the cross is actually laid out flat on the ground). This dimension is 429 feet, producing an angle of 40.0020579023 degrees. The remaining distance between this stone and the bottom stone of the stem is 293 feet, another number of no particular significance.
This time we actually have what might be considered a significant angle between the arms and the superfluous stem stone when a line is drawn to connect them as seen in the image shown earlier, 40 being a very common number in the Bible. Of course, the angle at the other point of this right triangle would be 50 degrees (90 minus 40), which could also be regarded as significant, the number 50 being associated with the Pentecoste. However, we must still explain how the unusual dimensions of this entire cross were originally derived, not simply note that one particular dimension appears to produce angles which could be regarded as significant in regard to religious scriptures. How were such odd dimensions arrived at in the first place so that they could be replicated on a grand scale with the construction of this huge layout of conical granite boulders? I will address the question of how the dimensions of the Oak Island Cross were derived in the next page. http://sinclair-clan.blogspot.com/2007/ ... b-job.html