Ancient Tile Floor Found in Oklahoma

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 08:59 AM
link   
On another thread ("Out of Place Artifacts" here in the "Ancient & Lost Civilizations" forum) someone mentioned that a "200,000 year old tile floor" had been found in Oklahoma in 1969, but had never been excavated.

Despite my skepticsm that the "tile floor" could be 200,000 years old, I did search the net, and found the following links (all of which seem to be based on two newspaper articles):

ufoinfo.com...
www.100megsfree4.com...
www.azoidx.com...
www.informantnews.com...

Unfortunately, these links don't really provide enough information to really make a determination as to whether the floor is man made or natural. I contacted the Oklahoma Historical Society and had them pull the articles related to this story (it turns out that there were many, from June - August of 1969 - then they abruptly stop and it is never mentioned again).

The articles did have some photos, which I will post below (please keep in mind that there is much more to the story than what these photos show):


external image

The geologist that originally said that this is not a natural formation appears to still be alive (as of a year and a half ago anyway), so my next step will be to contact him to see if he has further information.

I intend to post some more quotes from the articles that are of interest later this evening, when I return home from work.

(edit to reduce image size)


[edit on 28-6-2005 by pantha]




posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   
This is interesting, can't wait to hear what you find. I didnt read through all the links...(i'm at work hehe) but does it say waht kind of stone the tiles were made from? Sandstone, lime, Terracata (SP)?



posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Interesting, I'm looking forward to seeing what you find!



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 03:39 AM
link   

The Oklahoman: June 28th, 1969; It's Crack Puzzle
.... Delbert Smith, president of the Oklahoma Siesmograph Co. and past president of the Oklahoma City Geophysical Society, and Durwood Pate, independent petroleum geologist, traveled to the site Firday to study the area and take samples .... 'I am satisfied that it is not a natural earth formation, and that it is man made,' Smith said .... Smith and Pate took a core sample to make a microscopic investigation of the material in hopes of deciding what it is.


Another article talks about the mysterious "post holes" in the rock formation:


The Oklahoman: July 1st, 1969; Holes Exactly Rod Apart: Rock Mystery Growing
.... Discovery of a second hole through the rock strata heightened interest when measurement revealed the two holes to be exactly 16 1/2 feet apart or precisely one rod .... Pate said the rock is Permian limestone laced with quartz grains.


But, the most interesting is the one about the "stone object" found at the site; unfortunately there is no picture:


The Oklahoman: July 3rd, 1969; Stone Object Adds to Riddle
The mystery of a dolomitic limestone formation unearthed between Oklahoma City and Edmond was compounded Wednesday by the discovery of an object on the site which resembles a stone hammer. Geologists who have focused their attention on the unusual formation .... were at a loss to explain the origin of either the formation or the artifact. John M. Ware, an Oklahoma City geologist, said, 'It simply can't be explained within the field of geology - we need an archaeologist to give a final opinion.' .... However, its age and origin may remain a mystery unless an archaeologist can be persuaded to take on the project soon. Within 20 days, construction workers will continue their job of digging out the area to begin building on a food stuffs warehouse .... Another intriguing point about the rock is that is contains marine deposits, indicating that it was laid down in the ocean .... Pate said that the formation, 100 feet by 60 feet in area, is rapidly becoming a tourist attraction. 'People are flocking there and taking pieces of the rock away,' he said. 'We need to preserve it until something can be done about determining its origin.'


There is more.. but there you have three geologists claiming it is not a natural formation. I will post more in a while.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 06:19 AM
link   

quote: The Oklahoman: July 3rd, 1969; Stone Object Adds to Riddle
The mystery of a dolomitic limestone formation ................Another intriguing point about the rock is that is contains marine deposits, indicating that it was laid down in the ocean ....


Er, of course it contains marine deposits - it's limestone!

Looks to me like a natural outcrop of limestone. What may be post holes and the claim that a stone hammer were found are, of course, for archaeologists - not geologists - to investigate (so no mystery regarding the geologists being puzzelled)

I don't see anything to date the site though? Where did 200,000 years come from?

Edit - to correct quote marks



[edit on 28-6-2005 by Essan]



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 06:48 AM
link   
Get a load of this one...


In 1912, two employees of the Municipal Electric Plant of Thomas, Oklahoma, were shoveling coal into the plant furnaces, using fuel which had been mined near neighboring Wilberton. One chunk of coal was too large to handle, so the workmen took a sledge hammer to it. Once it broke open, however, the workmen found that the chunk contained an iron pot, and upon its removal, the two coal halves bore the "mold" of the pot in its interiors. Both employees signed affidavits testifying to the authenticity of the discovery, and the iron pot was subsequently examined by several experts - every one of which was most reluctant to comment on the pot, and the circumstances surrounding its discovery. This was most understandable, since the object came from coal dated from 300 to 325 million years.


www.informantnews.com...

???



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Thanks for starting the thread!

Here's the stuff (in specific) I noticed about the pictures that I just glossed over. We need better pictures, though (I'm not close enough to Oklahoma City to check things out):

Tiles are generally regularly shaped (they're made in molds) and they tesselate. These cojoin, but there's not an overall pattern (like squares or diamonds or another tesselation.

Tiles (because they are oven baked) are thin and flat. From what I can see of the "posthole" picture, the layer isn't thin and flat, but several inches thick.

Decorated tiles (mosaics) were even thinner and were infused with color that would have stayed (glazed or baked through.)

I think the material is limestone (and not ceramic) or possibly a shale/mudstone.

HOWEVER, I do think that the "posthole" is what's called a "bedrock mortar" and really might be of native American manufacture.

Can we get a better picture of the "floor"?



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Can we get a better picture of the "floor"?


I am almost positive that the site is now destroyed (it said in the last article that if an archaeologist did not agree to excavate the site, the construction would resume in 20 days). I can try to get a better copy of the picture that was in the newspaper, but I'm not sure it will turn out better than what I've already uploaded.

I do plan on writing a letter to J. Durwood Pate (one of the geologists) this week to see if he has any additional information.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Do check on it!

Just for reference, here's a picture of a Roman tile floor (scroll down to the bottom of the page). The sections are regularly shaped, and even if they were broken or cracked, you could tell they'd been made in a kiln of some sort. I know ancient Egyptians made tile floors; perhaps we can find a photo of that:
www.archaeology.org...

I don't see any examples of tile floors here in the Americas, but I'm tired and haven't done a lot of looking. If someone's got a picture of an ancient tile floor (Olmec, Pueblo, etc) do post it.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
I don't see anything to date the site though? Where did 200,000 years come from?


Good question; it appears to be a goof by the reporter. That statement is attributed to one of the geologists, but it's not in quotation marks. The only thing that the geologists are on record as saying is that the floor "appears to be very old".



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by JustMe74

The Oklahoman: July 3rd, 1969; Stone Object Adds to Riddle
The mystery of a dolomitic limestone formation unearthed between Oklahoma City and Edmond was compounded Wednesday by the discovery of an object on the site which resembles a stone hammer. Geologists who have focused their attention on the unusual formation .... were at a loss to explain the origin of either the formation or the artifact. John M. Ware, an Oklahoma City geologist, said, 'It simply can't be explained within the field of geology - we need an archaeologist to give a final opinion.' .... However, its age and origin may remain a mystery unless an archaeologist can be persuaded to take on the project soon. Within 20 days, construction workers will continue their job of digging out the area to begin building on a food stuffs warehouse .... Another intriguing point about the rock is that is contains marine deposits, indicating that it was laid down in the ocean .... Pate said that the formation, 100 feet by 60 feet in area, is rapidly becoming a tourist attraction. 'People are flocking there and taking pieces of the rock away,' he said. 'We need to preserve it until something can be done about determining its origin.'


There is more.. but there you have three geologists claiming it is not a natural formation. I will post more in a while.

That's what I find contradictory... we've got geologists who say it's a dolomitic limestone (that's probably where the 200,000 year old figure comes in) and yet say it's manmade (meaning quarried(?) and not fired in a kiln(?))

Now a geologist ought to know rocks, but yes they need an archaeologist to do a better determination. There's lots of natural things that "resemble stone hammers"... hmm. I wonder if the museum records (I cited around here somewhere) would have this as an out of place artifact?

There's stuff that looks human made (but isn't) and dating stone tools is iffy if there's not other stuff with it (I've seen plenty of flint flakes from chipping operations sitting on top of Cretaceous limestone in Del Rio, but that just means the soil is thin and doesn't cover up things quickly. It doesn't mean primitive people sitting around and knapping up flints in the Cretaceous.

Still... interesting. I don't think it's quarried rock, either, because you'd quarry out blocks and not weird shapes to make a floor.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
That's what I find contradictory... we've got geologists who say it's a dolomitic limestone (that's probably where the 200,000 year old figure comes in) and yet say it's manmade (meaning quarried(?) and not fired in a kiln(?))

Now a geologist ought to know rocks, but yes they need an archaeologist to do a better determination. There's lots of natural things that "resemble stone hammers"... hmm. I wonder if the museum records (I cited around here somewhere) would have this as an out of place artifact?


The geologists, at least as they were quoted in the articles, did not make a judgement on the age of the "floor" or if the object they found was a tool or just a natural rock. They said that the "tool" was very unusual but they needed an archaeologist to examine it.

All three geologists (two of which had relatively impressive credentials) did beleive that the rock floor was not a natural formation. There is a quote in one of the articles (I'll find it for you later) where Durwood Pate talks about the diamond shaped patterns of the stones (hard to see from the picture) and how all of the patterns face East. It is very interesting.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Let's see if we can pinpoint a location for this, then. If we can get a good location, we can check the limestones in that area and whether or not they were broken during the Ouachita mountain building.

Two other things to look for: stone floors from ANYwhere in America that aren't European-contact era.

Museum or other acquisition of that axe-like thing.



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   
In case anyone still cares about this:

Unfortunately I hit a dead end. I was unable to contact the geologist (no answer to two postal mailings, could not find a valid phone number) and the newspaper articles abruptly stopped as I noted above. My assumption would be that the construction started again and the site was likely destroyed. I have no idea what happened to the "stone tool" either. If anyone has any suggestions on more places to look for information, I'd be willing to pursue it. I've pretty much exhausted everything that the Oklahoma Historical Society had on this.



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Does noone live near Oklahoma who could go to the site, see what is there now and ask a few questions?



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
All though the above posted photo is not high def (lol) I actually can see the repeated diamond pattern.

I swear I recall a mosaic tile floor from somewhere in the South American continent, that was retrieved prior to flooding some area to build a modern dam. I remember this was something I watched on the HISTORY CHANNEL. I can see the design in my minds eye.....I do not recall the age of this and if it was created pre European contact or not.......but the tiles were diamond shaped and then painted in a colorful design of many peoples......men, woman all together in splendid dress.

[edit on 16-8-2007 by theRiverGoddess]



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Odds are the paper added a few zeros to get 200,000.... more like 2,000. There were several large scale civilizations in the Mississippi river valley, most notably the Hopewell and the mound builders (not the same culture, the Hopewell's came later) and there are regular finds in the area.

I checked and my correction, the Hopewell did build most of the big mounds in the Mississippi and Ohio river valleys but there was also a mound building society that proceeded them as well; the Adena.

[edit on 16-8-2007 by grover]



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   
What? A dead end? Giving up? Nonsense.

You haven't even scratched the surface yet. (Pun intended).

I found a few more leads for you to chase down.


One of your articles mentioned one of the men being ex president of the Oklahoma Geophysical Society. You could phone or email them to see if they have any record of it, or can provide any more info.

But heres a big breakthru.

"200,000" Year Old Inlaid Tile Floor


On June 27,1969, workmen cutting into a rock shelf situated on the Broadway Extension of 122nd Street, between Edmond and Oklahoma City, came upon a find that was to create much controversy among the experts.

Delbert Smith, a geologist and president of the Oklahoma Seismograph Company, summed up the mystery concerning the tile floor in the Tulsa World of June 29, 1969:

"There is no question about it. It had been laid there, but I have no idea by whom." Yet another facet of the mystery involved the question of age. There are some differing opinions as to the geology involved, but the best estimate places the tiles at 200,000 years old.

Edmond Booster of July 3, 1969 (newspaper)
Tulsa World of June 29, 1969 (newspaper)


Map of Broadway extension & 122 St.

Ok Byrd, you've got your specific location. What can you tell us?

Forgot to add that another geologist mentioned in one of your articles, (John M. Ware), also shows up in the Journal of Palontology, thus proving he was a real person, and a real geologist around the correct timeframe.

Edit to add this: On June 27, 1969, workmen leveling a rock shelf at 122nd Street

"To the layman, the site looked like an inlaid mosaic floor. It apparently looked very much like someone's floor to some of the experts, as well."

"Dr. Robert Bell, an archaeologist from the University of Oklahoma, expressed his opinion that the find was a natural formation. Dr. Bell said that he could see no evidence of any mortaring substance.



[edit on 8/16/07 by makeitso]



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 09:48 PM
link   
I don't have a specific map of the area, but the fractured limestone bed theory looks better and better. Here's a list of the formations in the area... "Woodbine" caught my eye, since that's a very prominent limestone formation. Many of the names on there are limestones;
pubs.usgs.gov...

(sorry... I'm very very tired tonight and not able to find a good map off the top of my head.) Looks characteristic of the Ordovicians.

There's several pages of "tiled floors" somewhere that show these "foolers"... but I'm really too tired to look it up now.



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 07:50 AM
link   
I'd have to say I lean towards Byrd's conclusion. However, it is odd that two of the three geologists who looked at it were unable to identify it as a natural formation. My background is in History, not Archeology or Geology, so I'm not really comfortable making any kind of determination based on the photos and newspaper articles.

The native cultures that lived in Oklahoma were the "Mound Builders", Clovis, Osage, and Quapay tribes. In Ohio, a few hours from where I live, is the "Great Serpent Mound" which was built by the Adena people (~ 800 BCE - 100 CE). I have seen the mound, and it is very impressive, but I have never seen anything like the "tile floor" in the picture.





 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join