Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

how did metal and advanced items end up in coal?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   
The mainstream "experts" threw out Velikovsky's model of a worldwide eruptive cataclysm within the lenegdary times of modern man (based on his research of legends from around the world.) But that kind of an event could explain coal and human artifacts too. If it occurred thousands of years ago instead of millions (geologists' dating of it being off due to stratum inversion of such a great cataclysm) then persisting deep chasms from the violence of the crustal upheavals would have carried lavic heat up and if there was a heaped up forest atop the heat vent, smothered combustion would have continued for a lengthy period - so coal could and probably did in my opinion -have formed only thousands of years ago while modern man existed.




posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   


Extensive quarrying was done near the city of Aixen -Provence, France between 1786 and 1788, to provide the large quantities of limestone needed for the rebuilding of the Palace of Justice. .......

......How a stonemason's yard equipped with the kind of tools used in France in the late 18th century, had come to be buried 50 feet deep under layer of sand and limestone 300 million years old is a mystery even more vexing today than at the time of the original discovery.

Err...so the 18th century French workmen discovered some tools of the type used by 18th century French workmen in a French quarry that people were working in? This is a mystery?!?

I don't think we will need Sherlock Holmes to crack this one somehow.



posted on Jan, 2 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Lying there on the surface, you can't tell if it was ploughed up from a farmer's field last year, or whether someone who collected arrowheads found it elsewhere and lost it in that field, or whether someone was off knapping out flints for a rock show/commercial demonstration and lost it, or whether it was dropped 1500 years ago or 4000 years ago.


A concern that the objects found imbedded within stone are being lied about by those who made the discoveries, etc., seems logical, though it seems unjustified, but I don't quite see where you're going with objects that are found laying around on surfaces rather than imbedded in them (ie, this thread's subject), especially when embedded into solid rock, which of course takes long periods of time to form.


Actually, the point I was making that got lost was about the glacial morraine finds... but it holds with other things as well: without seeing the object in place and digging it out and taking down the evidence of other things in the area, it's very premature to say that they're "30,000 years old" or a "million years old."




If you go here, you'll find part of an 1852 issue of Scientific American that carries the following article, titled "Relic of By-Gone Age":


A few days ago a powerful blast was made in the rock at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, a few rods south of Rev. Mr. Hall’s meeting house. The blast threw out an immense mass of rock, some of the pieces
weighing several tons and scattered small fragments in all directions. Among them was picked up a metallic vessel in two parts rent assunder by the explosion...


It'd be quite some work for someone to somehow place a metal vessel into solid rock 15 feet below the surface without the workers noticing anything odd the next morning, or whenever.


Okay... how do you KNOW the vessel was in 15 feet of rock?
* It was (according to the report) found in the debris.
* They were blasting out a hillside (not a pit.)
* There's no mention if they combed the hillside for artifacts and small caves first.

This is what I mean by "out of context." The vessel could have, for instance, been Pictish/Celtic and placed for sacred reasons in a small crevice in the rock as an offering and not uncovered till a blast flung it clear (although, honestly, it'd be more likely to simply dent the thing than to chop it in two.) The vessel could have been (as with a recent discovery of a necklace of unusual workmanship) a gift from Rome to a local chieftan by one of the Caesars and placed as an offering to a local deity (as was done with the necklace I cited.)

If the bowl exists (did you check to see if it's still in a museum and what other work was done on it) then it's a piece of history that was displaced by an explosion... and all other information about it is lost. But to say that it was in 15 feet of rock because it appeared after an explosion -- there's no evidence to say that it was.


Another article can be found based on an 1820 issue of The American Journal of Science and Arts. A Google Search reveals info on the publication, including this article:


I looked this up to see what other sources cited it... and in fact, I don't see ANY report of this (outside this journal and UFO pages) that document it.

And I did search in French, on French language sites.

Can you find a museum where the artifacts/coins/table, etc, are stored? In that age, they would have been put in the town hall or sold to a wealthy collector -- the coins in particular would have been valuable. Or can you find documents in French that mention this find?



A list of a number of similar occurences can be found here, for example.

You might want to investigate the claims on that website a bit more thoroughly... for instance, it claims "evolutionists speculate that humans have lived here for one to three million yearsand then, suddenly, stopped evolving 100,000 years ago" -- a rather direct contradiction to what scientists really believe (that would be when several species of hominids were alive -- but before there was any evidence of our group, homo sapiens.)

It also claims "Using historical, archaeological, and astronomical data, dates for early mankind extend to about 2250 B.C" -- ignoring things like the Sumerian king lists which go back further as well as the Egyptian king lists (Menes, first Pharoah, dates to 2960 BC, for instance, and Djoser to 2630 BC... etc.)

Guadolupe woman? She was also mentioned on the site, which failed to note that she was part of a burial site and the mineralization was common... and that she's post-Columbian in age (dated from artifact types found with her and other things.) You could check with the British Museum on this one if you like. Bone mineralization isn't uncommon in high limestone areas (as i recall):
www.don-lindsay-archive.org...

...etc, etc, etc. Including the Glen Rose tracks (I've seen them... we live near there and to call them human is REALLY a stretch. (the real ones. There's a number of fakes, including the Paluxy Man Tracks (the sculptor confessed the hoax after scientists pointed out all the stupid mistakes he'd made in carving the so-called track.))


There are, indeed, out of place artifacts and stuff that archaeologists and paleontologists can't explain. But in investigating "odd objects" you need to play Sherlock Holmes and not just accept what one person says. Check to see what both sides are saying and check to see where the object is -- and what it looks like from other angles (like the 'wooden airplane" in the museum in Cairo which looks like a wooden bird toy from most angles.)

Find out what cultures were in the area and what other clues there are about the object.

History and archaeology are fascinating fields for armchair detectives to work on ... but you have to first know what the experts really say and what the other side really says. And know what makes for good evidence in this kind of detecting.

The "I found it in 800 feet of water" isn't good evidence at all.

[edit on 2-1-2006 by Byrd]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   
www.forbiddenarcheology.com...

www.mcremo.com...

The second page is reviews of the book.

If you go to the site, check out the page of anomalous artifacts. There is a metal sphere found in Africa, in strata 2.8 billion years old.
This 1000 page tome is stuffed with tons of this anomalous stuff. It is certainly a very popular hoax if they are all fake. I have read another book that touches on the subject, 'Ancient Mysteries' by Michael Baigent, who also co-authored the 'Holy Blood/Holy Grail' books.
The most disturbing thing, if it is true, that I see is that there is accusations the subject is being 'buried'. It claims that sometimes the person who is publicizing a find will end up discredited and ostracized by his peers, and the find will be filed away never to be seen again. That, if true, is far more important to me than whether we were here a few million years ago....

[edit on 03 22 2005 by BlackGuardXIII]

[edit on 03 22 2005 by BlackGuardXIII]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
www.forbiddenarcheology.com...
If you go to the site, check out the page of anomalous artifacts. There is a metal sphere found in Africa, in strata 2.8 billion years old.
This 1000 page tome is stuffed with tons of this anomalous stuff. It is certainly a very popular hoax if they are all fake. I have read another book that touches on the subject, 'Ancient Mysteries' by Michael Baigent, who also co-authored the 'Holy Blood/Holy Grail' books.
The most disturbing thing, if it is true, that I see is that there is accusations the subject is being 'buried'. It claims that sometimes the person who is publicizing a find will end up discredited and ostracized by his peers, and the find will be filed away never to be seen again. That, if true, is far more important to me than whether we were here a fewW million years ago....

[edit on 03 22 2005 by BlackGuardXIII]



We discussed this before (I remember it) and someone or several someones gave a lot of examples of real scientists who had odd findings (including the woman who supposedly lost her job) and gave a lot of links to show that none of the REAL scientists were hooted out of business.

One of the books (it may be this one) uses sensationalist advertising and then mentions that many of the "OOPARTS" are actually fake. They miss some of the ones I've seen here.

I forget the book. It was kind of dull but someone here was waving it around as "real proof" when the title was a bait and switch.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by pointlessness
most you know that people throughout history have found items such as coins metals and unusually advanced items within coal and untouched rocks and bed of rocks that are millions billions of years old?

I have heard such claims, I have never seen a single one shown to be true.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 12:05 PM
link   
There are literally 1000's of these claims. Just for fun, imagine if 1 was real. Does it matter really? Who cares? If someone is skeptical, great, that is good. I am less skeptical, but it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. If they're all fakes, good. If some are real, good. Not worth worrying about.
I read that an assistant curator of Indian antiquities for the National Museum of Canada named Thomas Lee was unlucky enough to find a site with stone tools that were between 65000 and 125000 years old, in Ontario. That was unacceptable. His findings were misrepresented, discredited, and forgotten. He lost his professional reputation, his job, and of course, his discovery. It apparently was backfilled and is now covered by a tourist resort. I am unable to confirm this, of course, it's far away, but there appears to have originally been a great deal of corroboration on his dating by others. He was urged to forget what he had found.

[edit on 03 22 2005 by BlackGuardXIII]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

* Intelligent humans date back much, much further than we realize.
* Other intelligent beings and civilizations existed on earth far beyond our recorded history.
* Our dating methods are completely inaccurate, and that stone, coal and fossils form much more rapidly than we now estimate.

In any case, these examples - and there are many more - should prompt any curious and open-minded scientist to reexamine and rethink the true history of life on earth.


There's a link (at the underlined text above) to this article, which apparently details more oddly-placed objects, but I just scrolled down it and didn't really read it.

About.com also provides this image of the object in question:



So there's something for him.


Interesting stuff, for sure.

[edit on 1-1-2006 by bsbray11]

one detail (out of many) i find fishy on this particular page is the important ammount of links to creationist sites or phrases like "The Revolution Against Evolution has had over one million visitors since 4/28/97.".
Looking at dates aswell is quite a good hint , have you ever noticed that these artefacts have mostly been unearthed during the 19th century which is filled with accounts about findings and sightings of all sorts , golden age for press, darwinism/evolutionism spreading it's wings and creationists trying to fight it . I'm open to te idea that there might have been another "advanced" civilisation before the current one , but has to be proven with a bit more solid evidence than these (if anyone ever finds any that is) , they were surely a bit more difficult to debunk at the time of their finding but now ...? Preserved mermaids and dragons where quite common aswell . It was the century of the rebirth of atlantis , the Thule organisation , Helena Blavatsky and other people looking for fame and fortune (not that that has changed much)
"here be dragons"



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 01:12 AM
link   
What would happen if we had some world disaster that killed all but 200,00 people and knocked us back technilogically to the stone or bronze age.

Then 2000 years from now, civilization developed to our level of safictication (sp?).

Know lets speculate that most of the worlds mines have caved in or filled in with sediment.

Lets say the humans 2000 years from know are drilling for oil, or mining for coal and come across our 2000 year old equipment. They deduct by the depth that the artifacts are from 100,00 years ago and there is no way that this is possible blah, blah, blah. Then some scientist comes along and says its impossible because of this and that.

Well they would be right that an advance civilization came before them but that they may just have the date wrong.

And the scientist would be right that no advanced civilization lived 200,000 years ago but would be wrong in the overall argument.

I firmly believe others came before us, but we can not be sure of the date of when this happened.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   
From what sources I've been impressed by, the guess I would offer is this. Before the beginning of recorded history, at least one time, people just like us in every way, having plenty of time, unremarkably, developed to a level similar to ours. I bet it was different. But resulted in some technologies that we would call advanced, like the vimanas, for example. They may not have been quite so numerous as us... maybe they were smart enough to take precautionary steps to prevent growing to as high a level of unsustainability as we have. Around 9 500 BC the big disaster hit. Possibly a large object(s) impacted causing global extinctions. Nearly did us in. But not quite. The horrific effects of the collision destroyed most of their achievements. The last 12 000 years broke down most of the rest.
But, some things survived. Signs that suggested they were indeed here.
The plausibliity of at least one prehistoric advanced civilization is good to me. The timeframe is plenty long enough, and for me anyways, certain anomalous historical explanations and objects make it probable. I have a pretty strong belief in it. It is far more probable than there not having been even one, in 190 000 years. We did it in 10?



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 03:27 AM
link   
well for links just read "forbidden archeology" micheal cremo.

civilizations come and go. its the way it is. When mankind gets to big for his own good, the Earth usually puts us back to square one.

back to the original question. I really don't think many of the artifacts we are talking about were really dated to millions of years old mainly just a shoe print that was right next to a dinosaur print, get this, made at the same time era. That doesnt necessarily mean the shoe print is millions of years old, it just may mean dinosaurs may be younger then everyone thought. People still remember dragons and what not in legends so maybe it was a dragon print, but even so what would a shoe be doing there?

Many metal arifacts: miners found a gold chain in a mine at a certian level of soil that must have been hundreds of thousands of years old. Miners in Cuba found a cave with pottery so deep that at that point they were using the most advanced drilling mechanisms and using breathing devices similiar to scube diving and the reach a manmade cave with paintings and pottery thousands and thousands of feet down?


I really don't know any explanations but it is very interesting.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   
Hi All, I know this is an "Old Thread", but it was the closest I found to what I'm looking for. Several years ago I saw pictures of what appeared to be "Space Shoes" as our Astronauts wore, embedded in "Coal" on a Conveyor Belt going to be processed having just been dug. The Feds grabbed them up, but not the pictures. Does anyone know the name of the Book this was in??? The friend who showed me has passed away & I never did get to read the Book. Searches have turned up nothing so far. Help???



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I've read quite a bit on this topic, having an interest in alternative history. Most of the time these stories are based on second or third hand accounts with no corroberating evidence. Though Cremo and Thompson do present an impressive amount of well documented and verified archeological anomalies in Forbidden Archeology, for the most part, these particular types of stories(modern looking item found in mine/blast derbies/coal) are bunk.

I remember reading one of the strongest theories to help explain a lot of these "ooparts" found in the 1800's/1900's was that in these mine shafts and pits where items such as the Dorechester Pot are discovered, there is often a large amount of slurry(a watery mixture of insoluble matter) collecting on the bottom of these man made holes. After a relatively short period of time, items accidentally dropped into this mixture as it solidified would appear to be encased in a solid rock matrix of ancient origin, when in fact it would be of very recent origin.

Found the link.
www.talkorigins.org...

[edit on 26-7-2009 by RoboKy]



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
|The above is from the Boston Transcript
and the wonder to us is, how the Transcript
can suppose Prof. Agassiz qualified to tell how
it got there any more than John Doyle, the
blacksmith. This is not a question of zoolo-
gy, botany, or geology, but one relating to an
antique metal vessel perhaps made by [Tubal?]
Cain, the first inhabitant of Dorchester.



Not to sidetrack this thread, but what an incredibly strange thing to say. TubalCain? Are they serious? First inhabitant of Dorchester, Mass? Is this a joke?



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
This is one out of place artifact that has always intrigued me. The hammer embedded in stone from London Texas.

paleo.cc...



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I don't know about coal, but I'm familiar with the Coso artifact.

www.talkorigins.org...

Which is a hoax, of course. It was a sparkplug. And it wasn't inside of a geode.

That's all that came to my mind.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
An interesting case is that of the Coso artifact, as it has come to be known.
en.wikipedia.org...
Basically, it was a corroded spark plug from the '20s found in a rock in California in 1961.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Moosemose
 



Several years ago I saw pictures of what appeared to be "Space Shoes" as our Astronauts wore, embedded in "Coal" on a Conveyor Belt going to be processed having just been dug. The Feds grabbed them up, but not the pictures.


C'mon, this has the elements of untruth straight away. Why would astronaut (or alien) boots be in a coal seam? How could the boots remain intact as the process of creating coal involves compression over 300 million years? Why would they be photographed on the conveyor belt? Why would the Feds take the boots and leave the photos?

A lot of the wildest ooparts have very flaky back stories!



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
This leaves larger objects out. Here in the Summer during a hot, dry, streak, we'll get some pretty large cracks in the ground. I've never seen one wider than say, three inches. Can't tell you the depth, but you won't fill one up with a garden hose.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by daddyroo45
This is one out of place artifact that has always intrigued me. The hammer embedded in stone from London Texas.

paleo.cc...


Yes, like the spark plug, it's a "concretion" of a modern object.

In a limestone area, concretions (encasing stuff in stone) happens pretty quickly. We traveled to "Cave Without A Name" several years ago and saw a modern bat embedded in a stalagmite. It had, the guide said, died 5 years previously and already had a layer of stone over it nearly half an inch thick.

The Paluxy area is composed of limestones (I live near there), and has a few Karst sinkholes and caves.






top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join