Some more Stuff found in a lump of 300 million year old coal... Interesting Ooparts?

Good point Happy dog, and what if the earth is re-cycled over and over again with every pole shift, as I also read about a piece of coal dated 400 million years old, the guy broke it open to put in his wood burning stove and found a 9ct gold Rolex watch ring the sort that was high fashion in the 80's upon inspection when he turned it over it was stamped SWISS, now Switzerland was not around 400 million years ago, so maybe we are all re-incarnated over and over again hence the de ja vu experiences that we all have from time to time, just a thought it does make one think?

I have always been fascinated by this type of conundrum. It certainly poses quite a bit of confusion when objects such as these appear in coal, which defies logic and reason. It allows an opportunity for man to reconfigure his understanding, or lack thereof, of the origin of humanity.

I've read about other items such as a bell, tools, and other items that if accepted and proven by mainstream science, would rewrite the limited and vague history of the earth.

Were they man made, or are they remnant evidence of an "alien" race? There's so much to contemplate, and the items found in sandstone and coal become a stopping point for our minds, giving way to speculation and confusion.

Originally posted by PlanetxIsComing
Good point Happy dog, and what if the earth is re-cycled over and over again with every pole shift, as I also read about a piece of coal dated 400 million years old, the guy broke it open to put in his wood burning stove and found a 9ct gold Rolex watch ring the sort that was high fashion in the 80's upon inspection when he turned it over it was stamped SWISS, now Switzerland was not around 400 million years ago, so maybe we are all re-incarnated over and over again hence the de ja vu experiences that we all have from time to time, just a thought

it does make one think?

That story is also used with a time travel legend, as the watch ring was found in a Chinese tomb.
Daily Mail

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Harte
A piece of processing machinery came loose (or broke off) while the coal was being processed and was emmbedded.

Harte

Sounds like an easy answer.
But I do have questions.

Do they use a lot of aluminum gears on mining/processing equipment?
What sort of process embedded the aluminum in the coal to the point that it left the metal embedded in the coal. Coal is brittle, making it very difficult to embed a chunk of aluminum in it without it shattering into pieces.

Coal varies a great deal in hardness. Cast aluminum has a weight advantage over steel and thus costs less with regard to operation of the machinery in question.

Cast aluminum is often used for machinery for this reason. Not being in the coal business, I couldn't say where or for what purpose aluminum might be used in machinery involved in processing coal. If the part in question is in fact aluminum, I would say that this piece is prima facie evidence that it is used somewhere in the process.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Harte

 

Oh yeah, and where's your proof for this one? Gotta hate when someone throws that uncomfortable burden of proof on you, huh?

Certainly not.

Although, since you raise the (absurd) question of "proof," (as if anything in the real world can be "proven,") where is the "proof" that this piece of metal existed embedded in the coal prior to its being mined?

As for evidence, here:

Run-of-mine (ROM) coal

The coal delivered from the mine that reports to the coal preparation plant is called run-of-mine, or ROM, coal. This is the raw material for the CPP, and consists of coal, rocks, middlings, minerals and contamination. Contamination is usually introduced by the mining process and may include machine parts, used consumables and parts of ground engaging tools. ROM coal can have a large variability of moisture and maximum particle size.

The above indicates that finding bits of machinery in coal is not uncommon, or would you say otherwise?


Harte

reply to post by SuperFrog

God put it there to test us ( sorry just could not resist

sooo how did this aluminum survive being corroded to mush from the salts, sulfur oxides etc commonly found in coal seams? /sigh

An Excerpt from this particular site www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...


At Ur, city of Abraham, the Joint Expedition of the University Museum of Pennsylvania and the British Museum, under the leadership of Dr. C. L. Woolley, found (in 1929) near the bottom of the Ur mounds, underneath several strata of human occupation, a great bed of solid water-laid clay 8 feet thick without admixture of human relic, with yet the ruins of another city buried beneath it. Dr. Woolley said that 8 feet of sediment implied a very great depth and a long period of water, that it could not have been put there by any ordinary overflow of the rivers, but only by such vast inundation as the Biblical Flood.

The civilization underneath the flood layer was so different from that above it that it indicated to Dr. Woolley 'a sudden and terrific break in the continuity of history'" (see: Woolley's UR OF THE CHALDEES). "...The Field Museum-Oxford University Joint Expedition, under the direction of Dr. Stephen Langdon, found (in 1828-29) a bed of clean water-laid clay, in the lower strata of the ruins of Kish, 5 feet thick, indicating a flood of vast proportions... It contained no objects of any kind. Underneath it the relics represented an entirely different type of culture. Among the relics found was a four-wheeled Chariot, the wheels made of wood and copper nails, with the skeletons of the animals that drew it (see: "Field Museum-Oxford University Expedition to Kish," by Henry Field, Leaflet 28).

I lay no claim as to the authenticity of others research and that site may or may not be credible but a good read nonetheless and I would suggest trying to contact either the university's credited or the Washington and British Library's to track down this data as though I am here is Blighty it is a bit of a long walk to London from my neck of the wood's.

A footnote though Harte is obviously critical of this his opinions do hold merit most of the time and He has a history of researching this matter that is longer than most of us, Does not mean Harte is right every time though Intelligent opinion and correction with proof are indeed invaluable.

There are three possibilities:

1. Aliens had once settled the planet and for some reason left.

2. Humans had repeated cycles of development where they had high intelligence and technology and low points of meager primitive existence.

3. Humans are traveling back in time and are (or were) trying to establish civilization with repeated failures. Something like the Tv series Terra Nova only 300 million years ago.

Originally posted by Fromabove

There are three possibilities:

1. Aliens had once settled the planet and for some reason left.

2. Humans had repeated cycles of development where they had high intelligence and technology and low points of meager primitive existence.

3. Humans are traveling back in time and are (or were) trying to establish civilization with repeated failures. Something like the Tv series Terra Nova only 300 million years ago.

Only 3?

reply to post by MichiganSwampBuck


In the UP we have a strange situation, it is the same in a lot of the area around the great lakes and some other areas around the world. Carbon dating doesn't always work right here for some reason. An artifact can be a million years old but only carbon date to ten thousand. That either means that there is less radioactive decay or that this area ascended through time and dinosaurs were living her ten thousand years ago I'd put my bet on radiocarbon dating not working right.

I believe that there may have been a few dinosaurs here and there a while back but I do not think that could be the reason for this difference. I think it is just that we are a little prehistoric here in the UP, it's a lot more fun being that way anyway

Anyway you look at it, no matter what people say, the old bones and shells are all rocks now. It really doesn't matter if they are permineralized or fossilized I guess.

These artifacts came from outer space.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Harte
A piece of processing machinery came loose (or broke off) while the coal was being processed and was emmbedded.

Harte

Sounds like an easy answer.
But I do have questions.

Do they use a lot of aluminum gears on mining/processing equipment?
What sort of process embedded the aluminum in the coal to the point that it left the metal embedded in the coal. Coal is brittle, making it very difficult to embed a chunk of aluminum in it without it shattering into pieces.

Yes aluminum is common and preferred in many cases with extraction and refinement of coal. They use it wherever possible because it does not spark or conduct electricity well. Coal can also be softened to some extent when exposed to water making it easier for objects to be pressed in.

Occam’s Razor

Originally posted by LABTECH767
An Excerpt from this particular site www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...


At Ur, city of Abraham, the Joint Expedition of the University Museum of Pennsylvania and the British Museum, under the leadership of Dr. C. L. Woolley, found (in 1929) near the bottom of the Ur mounds, underneath several strata of human occupation, a great bed of solid water-laid clay 8 feet thick without admixture of human relic, with yet the ruins of another city buried beneath it. Dr. Woolley said that 8 feet of sediment implied a very great depth and a long period of water, that it could not have been put there by any ordinary overflow of the rivers, but only by such vast inundation as the Biblical Flood.

The civilization underneath the flood layer was so different from that above it that it indicated to Dr. Woolley 'a sudden and terrific break in the continuity of history'" (see: Woolley's UR OF THE CHALDEES). "...The Field Museum-Oxford University Joint Expedition, under the direction of Dr. Stephen Langdon, found (in 1828-29) a bed of clean water-laid clay, in the lower strata of the ruins of Kish, 5 feet thick, indicating a flood of vast proportions... It contained no objects of any kind. Underneath it the relics represented an entirely different type of culture. Among the relics found was a four-wheeled Chariot, the wheels made of wood and copper nails, with the skeletons of the animals that drew it (see: "Field Museum-Oxford University Expedition to Kish," by Henry Field, Leaflet 28).

I lay no claim as to the authenticity of others research and that site may or may not be credible but a good read nonetheless and I would suggest trying to contact either the university's credited or the Washington and British Library's to track down this data as though I am here is Blighty it is a bit of a long walk to London from my neck of the wood's.

Woolley did indeed say that, a hundred years ago (or so.)

Later, the extent of the flood was determined (by Woolley himself, IIRC) to be small and thus it was a local, if larger, river flood. Excavations below the flood at Kish showed the same culture above it as below it - Ubadian.

Woolley was himself a believer in the great flood. His own research, however, proved to him that he had yet to find evidence of it.

Originally posted by LABTECH767A footnote though Harte is obviously critical of this his opinions do hold merit most of the time and He has a history of researching this matter that is longer than most of us, Does not mean Harte is right every time though Intelligent opinion and correction with proof are indeed invaluable.

I'm only "right" about the evidence I've been able to find - which does not include such things as some poster's YouTube upload or some webpage copied part and parcel from some previous webpage which itself was copied from some predecessor, the trail of such pages leading directly back to some fabricated "news" story (Irradiated cities in India) or some fringe writer's blatantly false statements (Pacal was an ancient astronaut.)

When I say the Ancient Alien "theory" is bull, I'm expressing an opinion. It's an opinion which I believe is right, and anyone may disagree. However, there is no question that my opinion is informed by what I know about the so-called "evidence" presented by these AA professional buffoons.

Harte

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by butcherguy

 

Did you also notice the angle the photograph was taken? We see one end only of the piece of metal "embedded". The sides are obscured from view. Liked to have gotten a better close up.

There is a closer picture on page two of the link..along with the rest of the story.

Originally posted by Harte
A piece of processing machinery came loose (or broke off) while the coal was being processed and was emmbedded.

Harte

As the story goes the coal was unmined. scrap that, I'm telling it wrong, the coal was mined, but from an area where the coal deposit is known to be 300 million years old. Elsewhere, similar artifacts have been found in unmined coal.

reply to post by Harte


Thanks for the reply and I accept your opinion after all it is your field of expertise, however the ancient astronaut theory, lets say while I may not believe they were alien I do think it would not totally prudent to throw it right out despite the fantastical claims out there as there are so many story's from ancient myth and religion that may have a parcel of truth somewhere in them but then every little boy whom has lay on his back looking up at the clouds and the bird's flying so high has wondered what it would be like to fly.

I know you may call photo artifact (though remember the tight stringent quality control and the triple checking and check again of every part of the lunar mission's so I find that argument flawed to say the least), it appeared on a recent post by Covertpanther called Large ring found in solar system, Now what if long ago such a station as I Believe it to have been was partially destroyed though on the two frames it appears on it is evidently still rotating though the outer ring looks damaged with whole sections blown out, then its orbit due to the decrease in mass would have catapulted it into a Asymmetric higher orbit somewhere between the earth and the moon.

Anyway look at covert panther post.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then compare the anomaly with this concept from the friendly Nazi Von Braun whom I would not have had working for me but that is another argument.


And of course what exactly is this is it a ancient ceremonial phallic symbol or king riding a spear tip or is that just swamp gas.


Despite my sarcasm (it seems a little too good to be a real contemporary artifact and as Zechariah sitchin is involved you would likely not pee on it if it was on fire) there I most certainly do respect you though not some of the other debunker's as you are not debunking you are disproving and that is an entirely respectable approach and I don't think I have ever heard your real opinion on the UFO subject but the ancient alien well we can take it or leave it but like I always say the micro is also part of the macro.

Still I would like your opinion on that artifact as I am sure you are more familiar with it than we are and like the Egyptian flying bird model it seems out of place in ancient Turkey.

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Harte
A piece of processing machinery came loose (or broke off) while the coal was being processed and was emmbedded.

Harte

Sounds like an easy answer.
But I do have questions.

Do they use a lot of aluminum gears on mining/processing equipment?
What sort of process embedded the aluminum in the coal to the point that it left the metal embedded in the coal. Coal is brittle, making it very difficult to embed a chunk of aluminum in it without it shattering into pieces.

Yes aluminum is common and preferred in many cases with extraction and refinement of coal. They use it wherever possible because it does not spark or conduct electricity well. Coal can also be softened to some extent when exposed to water making it easier for objects to be pressed in.

Occam’s Razor

Aluminum is actually a good electrical conductor.
aluminium conductor handbook
I have sold coal for use in water filtration. If it did soften when soaked in water, it would be unsuitable for that purpose.
I have worked with anthracite and bituminous coal. I have carved anthracite. I have broken up lump bituminous to feed the furnace at home. It is all brittle and chips easily. I regularly find coal in the Schuylkill River when I am fishing there. It has been soaking in water for who knows how many years, and it is not soft.

ETA: I did some research on aluminum use in coal mining. It is used and has been the cause of numerous explosions in mines. It tends to throw an incendiary spark when it strikes rusty steel. In the presence of methane, thiscan ge disastrous.

Originally posted by LABTECH767
And of course what exactly is this is it a ancient ceremonial phallic symbol or king riding a spear tip or is that just swamp gas.

What way it it supposed to be viewed, or rather is it being shown in the correct viewing position, it looks just as appropriate if you stand it on end.

reply to post by butcherguy


My grandfather worked in the coal mines and there is a difference between coal you are finding and what is excavated which hasn't seen the light of day in who knows how long it could also be Bituminous coal which some call soft coal. Finding things in coal is nothing new here is a story from 1948 where a pot was found.

www.ricter.com...

Aluminum, however, is approximately 60% less conductive as copper. Brass is often used however brass also increases the weight of machinery as well. Aluminum is used because of reduced risk of creating a incendive spark and the use of aluminum to make selected equipment lighter and easier to handle.

Originally posted by rickymouse
The aluminum could have melted out of the soils and run into a crack filling a void melted from the heat of a much hotter event above.

they said it was too pure to have naturally occurred.