Guest DWA Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 I hope DWA isn't referring to this. Know the position of the publication and you'll know how unlikely it is. http://www.icr.org/article/possible-human-artifact-found-coal/ I WASN'T REFERRING TO ANYTHING SPECIFIC. And I certainly never mentioned the example cited by SWW, nor was I aware of it. My God, you people sometimes. The things I am referring to many, if not most, are not only public record but have been brought up here more than once. Only one of them - my bet would be on the Minaret skull, but there are more candidates - would have to be authentic to match the fossil record we have for many things we accept as real. Of course, I have pointed out many times the folly of discounting something people are seeing right now by pointing to zero fossil record. And I certainly don't intend to get in a back and forth regarding specifics with anyone who appears bound and determined not to even look at or think about the evidence until a sasquatch has him by the scruff of the neck so instructing him.
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) Coal was laid down by carboniferous era plants, so no, it does not defy logic and occur recently. Same with fossils, exceptions prove the rule and these are not true exceptions even. If you think time lines of evolution are subject to amateur hour debate missing most of the facts it is your own understanding that is at fault and not science. These types of beliefs are often held by people who do not bother to study scientific literature on the subject but they think they possess special knowledge based on cherry picked facts that "prove" the scientists are wrong. Often from suspect articles on the internet and youtube, as if this crud is serious or peer reviewed, or even credible (if you look you can find all of it has been debunked). The more you know the more you know you don't know, and so scientists are very aware of their own limitations; debating much more robustly than on BFF, say..., too bad pseudoscience followers were not as humble. If you want to learn and sound knowledgeable, study science and read books by science authors. There really isn't any shortcut, realy! Edited June 8, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
WSA Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 That you might find a piece of metal tooling imbedded in piece of coal mined...wait for it...using metal tools is as worthy of a face-palm as just about anything I've ever heard about or read. What next? "Look at this! I found this lead artifact INSIDE a deer I butchered?!"
norseman Posted June 8, 2016 Admin Posted June 8, 2016 I hope DWA isn't referring to this. Know the position of the publication and you'll know how unlikely it is. http://www.icr.org/article/possible-human-artifact-found-coal/ Cross checked the article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/300-million-year-old-tooth-gear_n_2527424.html The huffington post is AP wire, the story at least is legit.
MIB Posted June 8, 2016 Moderator Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) The term "forbidden archeology" is often used to simultaneously label and discredit anomalous discoveries that seemingly contradict the prevalent paradigm. Each one is isolated and discredited / scoffed aside. I don't know how valid any of it is or is not, but looking at each as a lone anomaly certainly doesn't paint an accurate picture. Kinda like the scoftic approach to bigfoot reports, huh? Don't look at that big picture. There's no big picture in here. Pay no attention to the big picture behind the curtain. MIB Edited June 8, 2016 by MIB
Incorrigible1 Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 Boy, there are a lot of paranoid personalities associated with bigfoot.
SWWASAS Posted June 8, 2016 BFF Patron Posted June 8, 2016 That you might find a piece of metal tooling imbedded in piece of coal mined...wait for it...using metal tools is as worthy of a face-palm as just about anything I've ever heard about or read. What next? "Look at this! I found this lead artifact INSIDE a deer I butchered?!"t The fault I have with your statement is that if a piece of metal is truly "encased" in a solid piece of coal, one has to explain how you insert something into a solid rock without a seam or other evidence. The only way to do that would be to take make a coal metal coal sandwich then using the tremendous pressures that created the coal compress the sandwich and reform the coal into a solid lump. Not something some hoaxer is likely to be able to do. Admittedly a metal artifact on a coal mine conveyor belt mixed with coal certainly can be explained in many ways. But something genuinely "encased" most likely had to form when the coal did. The problem with most of these anomalous finds are that modern coal mining is mostly mechanized and humans may be operating the mining machines on the coal formation face and it would be hard to determine if the item was actually encased or just fell out of a fissure from overhead. The days of pick axe miners in mines is long gone, at least in this country. In those days you had to trust the miner to know if some artifact was actually encased or could have come from some other source. While we may have a 200 year supply of coal left in the ground to mine, the present political climate is such that much of it will never be mined. Who knows what will not be found because of that? Now if a team of paleontologists were chipping a dinosaur fossil out of its rock matrix and encountered a metal arrow head obviously embedded in the fossil bone there would be some vetting involved and require serious explaining to do. Honestly I think such a finding would never be revealed because it would stand science on its head and cast doubts on many scientific processes.
WSA Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 Let me just hazard an untested hypothesis though Randy: If your long wall continuous miner throws a piece of gearing or a tooth, it is not a stretch to suppose it has the velocity and force to imbed itself in a piece of the coal face it is cutting. Coal, being a mineral, has all kinds of fissures, cracks and weak spots. Mechanical coal washers/sorters/conveyors are also prime candidates. I'm betting also this was soft bituminous coal too, and not anthracite. Encased? Depends on how you want to look at it too. I'm not doubting there are anomalies found in coal seams on a regular basis, or that the history of N.A. couldn't stand with some serious revisions. I'm only saying a piece of a mag/al alloy embedded in a lump of coal is not a "WHOA!" discovery for me, any more than finding a cockroach in my Bare Naked granola was last week (true story....poor little blighter) .
SWWASAS Posted June 8, 2016 BFF Patron Posted June 8, 2016 Have you held a lump of coal in your hand? It is a rock and can be fairly large depending on the mining operation and the amount of natural fracturing and if they crush it. I an talking about something actually fully encased in a homogeneous rock of coal. Anything else and I will grant you there may be a lot of sources. As a kid, my job was to put coal in a bucket and carry it into the house to burn in a stove and I stoked the stove too. So I know coal. Coal is also very brittle and natural formations usually have a lot of fracturing. If a tooth of a gear were propelled at coal, it would fracture the coal, and not likely even stick in it. Another famous anomaly was a rock wall of stacked hand hewn stones fully encased in a carboniferous coals seam. The wall ran several hundred yards. These finds were all made when coal was still hand or mostly hand pick out of the rock face. Mid 1800s or earlier. So such finds are simply not possible today because they have machines that grind at the seam face and all the operator really sees is a lot of dust as the machine grinds away and transports the coal away from the seam face on conveyor belts. They could dig out dinosaur and probably not be aware it happened now. Present mining methods would destroy such finds and that and extreme rarity is why such finds are not being made any more. Assuming they were legitimate in the first place. Just like bigfoot witness we have to believe the accounts of poorly educated miners in the early 1800s to believe any of these stories. Most miners probably did not go to school beyond the 8th grade.
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 The term "forbidden archeology" is often used to simultaneously label and discredit anomalous discoveries that seemingly contradict the prevalent paradigm. Each one is isolated and discredited / scoffed aside. I don't know how valid any of it is or is not, but looking at each as a lone anomaly certainly doesn't paint an accurate picture. Kinda like the scoftic approach to bigfoot reports, huh? Don't look at that big picture. There's no big picture in here. Pay no attention to the big picture behind the curtain. MIB Scoffic approach to science, "forbidden archeology". There is always new information and outliers informing and overturning established scientific theory The problems with forbidden archeology is that is not even credible as an outlier, just plain wrong with an alternate explanation. Kind of like 300 million years old human bones mixed in with dinosaurs in Texas. really not even worth an explanation since the problem is that proponents have no clue as to actual science, not that there isn't enough science attention to a irrelevant invented problem. I think we all fall for pseudo science at times but sooner or later common sense, logic, and study give us an aha! moment when we see that is is all B.S. I have not had that moment yet in Bigfoot land but I am open to the fact it could happen. Finding out that the P.G. film was a suit would meet that benchmark, for me.
Guest DWA Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 That you might find a piece of metal tooling imbedded in piece of coal mined...wait for it...using metal tools is as worthy of a face-palm as just about anything I've ever heard about or read. What next? "Look at this! I found this lead artifact INSIDE a deer I butchered?!" Your Honor, I move to strike, wishing to cite Counsel Hee-Haw Statute...
norseman Posted June 8, 2016 Admin Posted June 8, 2016 That you might find a piece of metal tooling imbedded in piece of coal mined...wait for it...using metal tools is as worthy of a face-palm as just about anything I've ever heard about or read. What next? "Look at this! I found this lead artifact INSIDE a deer I butchered?!" Well if instead of lead? You found a metal object that was 98% aluminum and 2% magnesium? And the Deer was 300 million years old? You might have a story to tell. Seriously though, I have no idea what it is or why its there. I dont think it proves the Earth is 10,000 years old though.
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted June 9, 2016 Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) Go to the Grand Canyon, try to figure how long it takes for particles floating down to form that much stone and then how much more long for the river to cut down through the stone. And water wasn't even around for the for half billion or so years and there are many more layers under the Grand Canyon. Then consider finding a human fossil skull at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. Of course the only logical conclusion is ALIENS! (or that I made it up) Edited June 9, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
WSA Posted June 9, 2016 Posted June 9, 2016 Have you held a lump of coal in your hand? It is a rock and can be fairly large depending on the mining operation and the amount of natural fracturing and if they crush it. I an talking about something actually fully encased in a homogeneous rock of coal. Anything else and I will grant you there may be a lot of sources. As a kid, my job was to put coal in a bucket and carry it into the house to burn in a stove and I stoked the stove too. So I know coal. Coal is also very brittle and natural formations usually have a lot of fracturing. If a tooth of a gear were propelled at coal, it would fracture the coal, and not likely even stick in it. Another famous anomaly was a rock wall of stacked hand hewn stones fully encased in a carboniferous coals seam. The wall ran several hundred yards. These finds were all made when coal was still hand or mostly hand pick out of the rock face. Mid 1800s or earlier. So such finds are simply not possible today because they have machines that grind at the seam face and all the operator really sees is a lot of dust as the machine grinds away and transports the coal away from the seam face on conveyor belts. They could dig out dinosaur and probably not be aware it happened now. Present mining methods would destroy such finds and that and extreme rarity is why such finds are not being made any more. Assuming they were legitimate in the first place. Just like bigfoot witness we have to believe the accounts of poorly educated miners in the early 1800s to believe any of these stories. Most miners probably did not go to school beyond the 8th grade. Yup. Been there and done all that too, sure. Inspected a coal mine once as well. I know how coal is supposed to behave, and how it does behave when burned. (Woke up many a morning to my grandfather shaking down the clinkers). As I said, the extent to which an artifact is actually encased is the crucial piece of information. Embedding happens, under all kinds of weird circumstances. The forces that can embed a broom straw into a tree are always lurking. The incredible torque and RPM's of coal equipment has to be accounted for. As for the other things you describe, who am I to say? It is a mysterious world.
Recommended Posts