Hammer found in Cretaceous rock (75 to 100 million years old)

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
In the dvd Origins of Man they stated the hammer was 2-3 million years old and the user lived during the age of the dinasaurs. They also said the hammer was an exotic metal mix of wroght iron and sodium cloride?
With something else... I should have wrote it down. I was just blown away
about a hammer, a fancy hammer being that old. It was found with the foot prints in the strata of rock with the dinasaur prints. Just Amazing. I
hope the truths emerge now, it's too obivous, wasn't this year a record breaking for UFO sightings reported?




posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by frugal
 


It wasn't found in rock. It was found with a concretion on it. There's a difference. When steel objects rust, you can get a concretion around the object, the concretion can also protect it.
In this case, this is a fairly modern hammer that someone lost and rusted.
Sort of like the "coso artifact" that was a car's spark plug.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
A convoy has taken the hammer to the creationism museum where it will be put on display for the world to see. This is the smoking gun!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 06:50 PM
link   
did you guys know it only takes 800 years to petrify wood, and scouring by water takes only weeks to cut twenty feet of rock, and when Dallas love field was carbon dated on the ramp, it was found to be 15,000 years old.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by GBP/JPY
did you guys know it only takes 800 years to petrify wood,

Link please.


Originally posted by GBP/JPY
and scouring by water takes only weeks to cut twenty feet of rock,

Link please.


Originally posted by GBP/JPY
and when Dallas love field was carbon dated on the ramp, it was found to be 15,000 years old. [sic]

Link please.

Note, I am not being sarcastic or condescending. I am merely requesting sources for how you came up with these numbers and to which circumstances they apply. Assuming all those numbers are true (I doubt it) it seems to me that you are looking at a few extreme and rare cases, committing a Hasty Generalization Fallacy, and then using that fallacious reasoning to justify your disregard for well established methods of science in order prop up your own beliefs which have no evidence.

Either that, or you are trying to demonstrate that the hammer could have been petrified in a few hundred years, cut out of rock by a waterfall essentially overnight, found by a hoaxster, and then carbon dated to an incorrect date. If so, what does an incorrect dating have to do with debunking the hammer myth?

Instead of listing un-sourced tidbits, please provide positive evidence for your claim (including sources) and list your conclusion so that we know your position.





new topics
 
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum