Perhaps I ought to explain how I come into this.
I've always had an interest in the obscure and mysterious. The ideas of secret societies, ancient civilisations, visitors from space and whatnot intrigue me. But there is another side to my nature; I am, by profession, a maritime historian, and one of my particular subjects is the history of piracy - not the legend of piracy, but the genuine history. So, as well as having an interest in the mysterious I approached the
Oak Island enigma from an historian's point of view, having had it thrust upon me because of my work.
There are a handful of genuine examples of buried treasure, but it certainly wasn't common. The interesting thing about buried treasure is that where we know any details about it there seems to have been a reason specific to the time and place for burying it. For example, the most famous buried treasure is probably that of Captain Kidd. After a short career as a pirate Kidd had amassed quite a fortune and was hoping to get a pardon from the Earl of Bellomont in New York. Kidd knew that if Bellomont got hold of his treasure then his life would be worthless and he'd have no bargaining tools, but as long as he alone knew the location of a large haul he ought to have been safe. So, Kidd buried the bulk of his treasure on Gardiner's Island, NY, and then sailed to meet Bellomont. The plan backfired, Kidd was arrested and the treasure on Gardiner's Island was recovered. Kidd maintained that he had a larger treasure buried somehwere else, but it was almost certainly just a ruse to avoid being hanged. That ruse didn't work either and he was hanged anyway. Of course, hundreds of people have set off to find the missing portion of Kidd's treasure, which probably doesn't exist. In the 1920-30s a handful of Kidd treasure maps turned up, but they are almost certainly forgeries - certainly the experts believe so. The fact that at least 4 were "discovered" by the same person makes it look very fishy.
There are other examples: Francis Drake buried a load of silver when he was being pursued by the Spanish in South America. He and his men could not out-run the Spaniards while they were carrying the silver so they buried it. They dug it up again a few days later when they were free of pursuit. Calico Jack Rackham and his men buried some of their loot (which was probably more commodities than gold and silver) in barrels because their ship was too full to fit any more loot in. There are probably 2 or 3 more examples.
Some buried, or at least hidden treasure has been found. People claim to have found gold on Cocos Island, and quite recently something like 600 barrels of silver was found on Crusoe Island in the Pacific.
I don't personally believe that there is any treasure buried on
Oak Island. The logic is just completely screwed up. If you're burying treasure then the chances are that you're in a hurry, and in any case the most important thing is to hide the treasure. The best, most effective way of hiding treasure is to dig a small hole (doesn't take long) stick the stuff in the hole, and cover it up. Then, remove all trace of your digging work so that nobody would ever know there was treasure buried there.
That might not be exactly how everyone would do it but there is one thing that you just wouldn't do. You wouldn't dig a 200ft pit, taking months of work and several expert engineers, leave your treasure at the bottom of it where even you can't get it back,
then leave such obvious clues as to its whereabouts as a clearing and depression in the ground, not to mention your lifting tackle, so that a 12 year old boy can find where you've hidden it. You'd have to be freaking stupid!
I don't believe that the wood and putty and suchlike are either a natural coincidence or a hoax. I don't believe they were ever there. The evidence for their existence is completely flawed and 100% unreliable. In my opinion they were invented by McNally or one of his associates when they were trying to raise funds in the 1860s. None of the important structures supposedly in the money pit were mentioned by any of the poeple who supposedly found them, and since McNally told the world about them none of them have ever been found. In short we are taking the word of one man with no personal knowledge of the supposed structures and an obvious ulterior motive for inventing them - and even he admitted that he wasn't sure about them! If it were anything else then even the most die-hard believer would admit that it was probably all lies, but as it is books and websites just take McNally's word for it.
The artificial beach is a bit of an odd one. "Experts" who believe in the money pit can give you good reasons why the beach is artificial, "experts" who don't can give you good reasons why the beach is not artificial. Since most
Oak Island websites believe everything they are told, and expect their readers to do likewise they tend to side with the experts who say the beach is artificial. Really the issue is inconclusive: if you believe in the money pit then you'll probably believe in the artificial beach; if you don't then you won't. One thing is certain though, despite what many websites say there just isn't enough evidence to say for certain either way.
The argument about making camp is a good one. Estimate vary but there is no doubt that if the Money Pit were real it would have taken a good lot of people a good long time to construct, yet there is no sign either of a habitation for them or of any external workings. Apparently they meticulously cleared up every sign that they had ever been there but failed to notice a pulley on a tree over a hole in the ground...
Anyone interested in questioning the "facts" about
Oak Island might like to have a look at
http://www.criticalenquiry.org/oakisland/index.html for a fairly good summary of the sceptical point of view.