Origin of Ancient Jade Tool Baffles Scientists

Yes sensationalism by journalist has a long tradition


I can see a boat over turning as the method providing the way for those items to have been embedded into the reef.

Kdog put up a map earlier that showed the relationship between where the stone probably came from and where it was found which was about 1k kilometers away

Kdog's post

Maybe it would help the mods to know that the MSM thinks ATS is nothing more than Sorcha fail type news.

Careful where you throw those stones, the glass here isn't that thick.

Originally posted by YouSir

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Jesus Christ, ATS....WTH? You really screwed the pooch with this thread.

Did the OP and subsequent deleted posts have inflammatory material about ATS? Or is this just another GLP-ATS feud e-peen type of thing going on here? If so, it is stupid, petty, childish, and embracing ignorance all due to a bruised ego and the defending of your brand. It has nothing to do with truth.

Ummmm............I totally agree...this site reminds me more and more of a government run op every day...shutting down threads, blocking content, deleting posts, and pray "God" you dont -tongue in cheek- criticise a mod for their heavy handed content quashing. Like i stated in another thread, "way to go with the censorship".

I like this site less and less everyday, who the hell needs the gubment to shut down free speech when ats is so damned handy at it and eager to be the thought police...........

Sorry OP, I'm attempting to deny some ignorance here....What a shame the site owners and operators have abandoned that philosophy.....

YouSir

As an independent member not affiliated with ATS, let me leap to their defense.

I have been on-line since the Internet was created, and in forums, on-line using slow telephone lines to BBSs and AOL, when it was born, and CRS Canada Remote Systems, and way back, and I know how difficult it is, to manage a forum. I know that without moderation, a forum will crumble to dust.
There are places such as USENET that is not moderated. And it was built to withstand nuclear attack, but most of those newsgroups all died of bad manners, flaming, and debunking, and ad hominem attacks.
Kudos to ATS for being so good at their jobs. This forum is a good place to discuss difficult topics.
Topics which many people for whatever reason, would love to shut down discussion in, but when forced to stay on topic, are unable to do so.
Thats real censorship, and I have seen it over and over again. People just attacking others, who want to bring some information to the public. ATS is one of the best forum websites on the net, and has been for years.

Anyway, having said that, that jade artifact looks like an Olmec tool. And yes, by examining a rock's composition, they can tell within a meter where a rock artifact came from. If they find the outcropping, they will be 100 percent sure of its origin. They have done so previously and even been able to tell that two distinct artifacts found a far distance apart, came from the same block, in a quarry. The composition is unique enough to determine its precise origin, when you find a match with the original quarry.

The tool is called an Olmec Celt Any archaeologist would recognize that immediately.

The fact that the scientists are calling it something else, is because they are being scientists, and avoiding controversy. Instead, they are showing an Olmec celt found in New Zealand, and asking the question, well isn't this proof of people crossing the Pacific? Seems to me it is, but then there is lots of proof of that.
From Peru, to Easter Island, to Yonaguni, there are distinct cultural markings that show that people made that trip.

Lets go way back again shall we? Remove the spaces in the http copy and paste in your browser
ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20080306053732/ht tp://www.altarcheologie.nl/
On the left under 'connections' select Yonaguni and Peru.

Originally posted by Rocketman7

The fact that the scientists are calling it something else, is because they are being scientists, and avoiding controversy. Instead, they are showing an Olmec celt found in New Zealand, and asking the question, well isn't this proof of people crossing the Pacific?

Why do you discount the availabilityof a possible site just 1,000 kilometers away by sea?

See Kdogs post above

Link to map and comments from the article

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by relocator

 

Very interesting find, thanks for sharing.

Before delving into other explanations, has anyone ruled out the more obvious explanations? For example, we know Captain Cook stopped in Papua on the way to Australia - the Endeavour sailed from Whitby and Whitby is famous for its Jade.

That is only a possibility before anyone jumps on me! However, with archeology the most obvious reason is usually (not always) proven to be the correct one.

Whitby is famous for Jet, not Jade. And the Endeavour while originally a Whitby vessel (under another name I think) was refitted when purchased by the Royal Navy and sailed out of Deptford or Falmouth, I think.

Not meaning to jump on you...just to correct

reply to post by Rocketman7


I am sure I read the other day, that 'celt' is just another name for an axe-head...I think it was in The Once and Future King...so the Olmec Celt, really just means the Olmec Axe-head surely...so that doesn't necessarily mean that all 'celts' are of Olmec origin...does it? I don't know, it is quite an obscure term...I've not seen it used outside of your reference and the one that I refer to Which doesn't mean that I am disputing that it is a celt, just disputing whether it necessarily would be Olmec in origin...if that makes any sense...

reply to post by Rocketman7


You see perhaps the reason, some people want to censor archeology, and such things as pre-history, is that not only can you back trace, things such as Yonaguni, to Easter Island, to Peru, but you can keep going, to Marcahuasi, then to outer space.

Way back again, remove the spaces in http below
ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20080306053732/ht tp://www.altarcheologie.nl/

And on the left take a look at Marcahuasi and ask yourself, what OUR civilization might look like in 2 million years.
What would be left?

25000 years A.H.

Earth enters a new Ice Age and glaciers expand south covering most of the Northern Hemisphere. The last traces of New York City are completely erased.

(From Wiki Life After People)

In just 25,000 years.
The footprints of modern man in central Mexico are 1.3 MILLION years old.
But because of the controversy, and also because of religious beliefs, people have made investigation of the facts difficult.
But as I say, there in no need to insist that history was like this or that at all. It MAY have been like this or that.
You can always debunk anything from the past. Lets suppose you find an ancient text, what makes you think the people in charge at that time were truthers, when ours are anything but?
Did people tell the truth in the past but sometime since then they stopped? So you see its a difficult thing to know for sure what the past really was.
There is an Ica stone, that has an image of a man, and a large upright dinosaur engraved on it.
And at first, you would think well its poor artwork, except, it is a copy, of a scene, that is made out of the landscape, as seen only from space.
Its in Peru.
There are lots of scenes that can be seen from space in Peru, that mimic the style of scenes in Marcahuasi and other places in Peru. Where you could question if they are made on purpose, or made by nature.
In terms of the simulated reality theory, that would be some early code you are looking at.
And in earthly terms, a time when the gOds payed attention and man's relationship with them, was quite casual.
Take a look at that Hidden Archeology video I posted from youtube, the underground tunnels under Cuzco, and see if you can spot the Marcahuasi - like faces in those tunnels. They are there.
Just as these tourists saw them here at Ollantaytambo

Ahahahaha That tool baffles scientists lol omg hold onto your hats guys

Wonder if this would make their heads explode.

Originally posted by Rocketman7


You see perhaps the reason, some people want to censor archeology, and such things as pre-history, is that not only can you back trace, things such as Yonaguni, to Easter Island, to Peru, but you can keep going, to Marcahuasi, then to outer space.

Like who?

Way back again, remove the spaces in http below
ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20080306053732/ht tp://www.altarcheologie.nl/

Doesn't work with the spaces removed

And on the left take a look at Marcahuasi and ask yourself, what OUR civilization might look like in 2 million years. What would be left?

A great deal, in your example what was NYC would be reduced to a sediment that was rich in non-natural materials, from cut gems, glass, pottery, brick etc---all which will survive for tens of millions of years

The footprints of modern man in central Mexico are 1.3 MILLION years old.

Investigated and found to be incorrect

There is an Ica stone, that has an image of a man, and a large upright dinosaur engraved on it.

Debunked decades ago, a rather blatant hoax

Suggestion Rocketman don't just stop at the first claim, see what happened after the claim was made and how it was addressed.

i guess they wont let you flag-unflag this thread as the box has gone black..
maybe they want it buried?

Originally posted by fatdad
i guess they wont let you flag-unflag this thread as the box has gone black..
maybe they want it buried?

I think that it must just be you, my ability to flag-unflag, remains undiminished

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Rocketman7

The fact that the scientists are calling it something else, is because they are being scientists, and avoiding controversy. Instead, they are showing an Olmec celt found in New Zealand, and asking the question, well isn't this proof of people crossing the Pacific?

Why do you discount the availabilityof a possible site just 1,000 kilometers away by sea?

See Kdogs post above

Link to map and comments from the article

edit on 6/2/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

Here is a link...

Article:
Ancients Traveled 1,800 Miles for Pretty Axes

Aside from Guatemala, the world’s only other known source of jadeite jade is Myanmar (Burma). Further testing by the American Museum of Natural History—using non-invasive techniques like X-ray diffraction—will look at other potential sources in fragments taken from Cuba and Puerto Rico.

But what you are referring to here... (unquoted to identify it as from here)


The researchers don't think it's likely that Neolithic people of thousands of years ago could have transported it across the Pacific, but they couldn't find any other explanations for its composition. That is, untilthey came across an unpublished 20th-century German manuscript.
The manuscript's author, C. E. A. Wichmann, collected some curious rocks from Indonesia in 1903 — about 600 miles (1,000 kilometers) from the site where the jade tool was found — and the chemical properties he reported seem very similar to that of the artifact. Researchers are now investigating those samples to see if modern techniques can prove that the tool came from Indonesia.

that does not say, those rocks were in a quarry. Those rocks they are referring to were probably thought to have been transported there from South America. Its an aside. A sly reference.

Just as this from the previous quoted page...

“Groups in Central America called jadeite jade the ‘stone of the loin,’” Harlow said. “It’s possible it was thought to have some health properties.”

Is also a scientific aside. It refers to the Olmec celt and what it was used for in antiquity.
What we used to say was similar, we used to say, it was used by women, for ceremonial purposes.

Ancients Traveled 1,800 Miles for Pretty Axes link

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Rocketman7


You see perhaps the reason, some people want to censor archeology, and such things as pre-history, is that not only can you back trace, things such as Yonaguni, to Easter Island, to Peru, but you can keep going, to Marcahuasi, then to outer space.

Like who?

Way back again, remove the spaces in http below
ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20080306053732/ht tp://www.altarcheologie.nl/

Doesn't work with the spaces removed

And on the left take a look at Marcahuasi and ask yourself, what OUR civilization might look like in 2 million years. What would be left?

A great deal, in your example what was NYC would be reduced to a sediment that was rich in non-natural materials, from cut gems, glass, pottery, brick etc---all which will survive for tens of millions of years

The footprints of modern man in central Mexico are 1.3 MILLION years old.

Investigated and found to be incorrect

There is an Ica stone, that has an image of a man, and a large upright dinosaur engraved on it.

Debunked decades ago, a rather blatant hoax

Suggestion Rocketman don't just stop at the first claim, see what happened after the claim was made and how it was addressed.

Thanks for providing an example of debunking for the others.

There are two methods of debunking that you should be aware of if you want to keep your tools sharp.

One is to have a stooge say he made it and uploaded it to youtube.

The second is to fake an artifact that disproves an orginal. Then say the fake clearly proves, the original is fake.

There are lots of methods but the main point to remember as you waste your life debunking, is that no one really cares.

Originally posted by Rocketman7


Thanks for providing an example of debunking for the others.

There are two methods of debunking that you should be aware of if you want to keep your tools sharp.

The best way is to point to the evidence showing the report is wrong, that is fairly simple and direct

One is to have a stooge say he made it and uploaded it to youtube.

Did you read the report of the investigation on the '1.3 million year old footprints'?

The second is to fake an artifact that disproves an orginal. Then say the fake clearly proves, the original is fake.

So someone made a fake set of footprints? lol

There are lots of methods but the main point to remember as you waste your life debunking, is that no one really cares.

Obviously you must care, and a great deal, since you mentioned it. Debunking keeps fraud, hoaxes and other misinterpretations from distorting the real picture of the archaeological record. Very necessary too, due to the large number of such cases and a population that doesn't dp research on its own.

As I said before and I'll suggest it again. Read the follow up reports on any claim; as we use to say, the first report is always wrong-until confirmed

reply to post by Rocketman7


I think we are getting confused as there are two reports, one on stones found in Pacific and the others in the Caribbean.

To clarify the one in the Carribean just shows that trade was more pronounced in the Americas that previously thought

The other report is that tools found on a Pacific island couldn't initially be ID and the only known source was in the Americas - then it was found that there might be a possible source in Indonesia (PNG).

Sorry for any confusion and for mixing up the reports

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Rocketman7


Thanks for providing an example of debunking for the others.

There are two methods of debunking that you should be aware of if you want to keep your tools sharp.

The best way is to point to the evidence showing the report is wrong, that is fairly simple and direct

One is to have a stooge say he made it and uploaded it to youtube.

Did you read the report of the investigation on the '1.3 million year old footprints'?

The second is to fake an artifact that disproves an orginal. Then say the fake clearly proves, the original is fake.

So someone made a fake set of footprints? lol

There are lots of methods but the main point to remember as you waste your life debunking, is that no one really cares.

Obviously you must care, and a great deal, since you mentioned it. Debunking keeps fraud, hoaxes and other misinterpretations from distorting the real picture of the archaeological record. Very necessary too, due to the large number of such cases and a population that doesn't dp research on its own.

As I said before and I'll suggest it again. Read the follow up reports on any claim; as we use to say, the first report is always wrong-until confirmed

edit on 6/2/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

You're right, I shouldn't say nobody cares. There is a slightly disinterested fat lady sitting on a counch in middle America, you know the one, she is the same one sponsors are always worried about too. Oh and an old bald guy in a library in Britain reading old books. He cares a bit. Some day when he gets to to any book that mentions it, he will raise his eyebrows a bit.
Other than that no one cares a hoot. They won't even be discussing it over coffee the next day.

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

I think we are getting confused as there are two reports, one on stones found in Pacific and the others in the Caribbean.

To clarify the one in the Carribean just shows that trade was more pronounced in the Americas that previously thought

The other report is that tools found on a Pacific island couldn't initially be ID and the only known source was in the Americas - then it was found that there might be a possible source in Indonesia (PNG).

Sorry for any confusion and for mixing up the reports

They are suggesting that if they could get there by boat, then they could get to other places by boat as well.

You need to understand the way scientists address delicate issues.

You can't just come out and proffer up a theory that makes your ardent associates look like fools.
Even though it happens occasionally.

You are just missing the point completely because you are not on the leading edge.

You just said that the footprints in Mexico are not 1.3 million years old, and debunked the world leading lava dater, the same person who dated the lava at Olduvai gorge. From Berkley. Renne et al.

There is no more expert scientist in the world, than the man who said that lava was 1.3 million years old.

And there is no more prestigious authority on anthropology than the Royal museum, which had a special exhibit on those footprints and called them footprints of modern man.

So you have also debunked the Royal Museum. You have debunked the Royal Academy.

In days gone by they would put you in an orange jumpsuit for that for certain.

Originally posted by Biliverdin

Originally posted by fatdad
i guess they wont let you flag-unflag this thread as the box has gone black..
maybe they want it buried?

I think that it must just be you, my ability to flag-unflag, remains undiminished

The ability to unflag a thread disappears after a set time, as does the ability to edit a post. (4 hours i think?)

reply to post by Rocketman7


This may help you to understand how science works in this situation...

The investigation of scientific progress has found a rule for how such a process develops: at first the data that doesn’t fit is ignored, when it gets a bit more it is suppressed by disqualifying its sources, and when finally the amount of data gets too much or some decisive fact is found, the overall community changes its opinion in the sense in that they say that they always silently supported the new view, but it was the collegues who held them back. This process is so widespread, that there is has gotten its own name: paradigm shift.

From the way back link (remove spaces in the http)

ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20071108020135/ht tp://www.altarcheologie.nl/index.html
bottom left index, Ancient Civilizations.

And that website was first made in 2005, and no one cared then, and the footprints website from the Royal Museum, was in 2005, and no one cared much then either.
It didn't change the world then, and it won't change the world now, until there is a paradigm shift.

When the holes in the dike can no longer be plugged, there will be a paradigm shift, and people will say that secretly they thought that was the case all along.

The world leading expert on lava dating for anthropology, dated some lava in Central Mexico at 1.3 million years old. Fact one. An associate expert examined the magnetic alignment of the lava, and asserted it was magnetically aligned, hence not a sedimentary deposit. Fact two. Ipso facto prints were made in fresh warm lava 1.3 million years ago.

The most prestigious anthropological museum in the world, the Royal Museum of London, Home of Charles Darwin et al, and backed by the Royal Academy, the most prestigious scientific association in the world, home of Sir Isaac Newton, et al, made claim those prints were the prints of modern man, along side dogs and cats and cloven hoofed animals.

That is fact three.

The rest is just people talking.

Now then to move the rest of the scientific community towards their needed paradigm shift, articles such as this one in this thread, regarding an Olmec celt, found in New Zealand, will appear as holes in the dike.
To encourage people to accept reality.

reply to post by Rocketman7


Rocketman7,I am offering a public apology for the way I acted towards you.
It was inexcusable and wrong.

Never ever post under the influence of alcohol.

But ,it was the super bowl........................