300 million year old pot found in coal

a reply to: Akragon

Our mitochondria have a genetic signature of 200 thousand years, to believe our progentitors were unable to fabricate tools would be ignorant.

All this story does, is provide further evidence that the watchers, aka nephilim did teach out species the knowledge they held. I would suggest reading up on that topic.

For me, it solidifies a time line more accurately than conjecture and theories. The ancients knew more than we think. What was really in the Library of Alexandria, for them to burn it down and hide the truth...?

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: Akragon

Our mitochondria have a genetic signature of 200 thousand years, to believe our progentitors were unable to fabricate tools would be ignorant.

What's REALLY ignorant is failing to realize what happened 200,000 years ago has no bearing whatsoever on what happened 300 MILLION years ago.
That was before even the first dinosaurs evolved.

Harte

Coal is not made over time. All the coal on the earth was made at the same time. that pot was buried in a coal deposit. It is NOT 300 million years old. Iron would have completely oxidized long before 300 million years have passed.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
Not where I thought this thread was going, but still pretty cool, dude

I'll second that. Was somewhat expecting ancient reefers and prehistoric bongs, lol. But as you said, it's still pretty cool.

a reply to: Akragon

The inaccuracy of carbon dating-This dating method presupposes an already established balance between the forming and decaying of radioactive carbon that has been maintaining its equilibrium for millions of years in earth’s atmosphere. The C14 forming however is actually greater than its decaying. No state of equilibrium has been reached yet. As a result, the C14 ratio in the atmosphere (0.0000765%) cannot scientifically be used as a benchmark in dating fossils. In other words, we cannot know the age of fossils by which we determine the age of earth strata. Therefore, we cannot be certain about the actual age of the earth features.

What about copper doorknobs found in a seam of coal? Their age is about the same. I think that this only means that our civilization is not the first on earth, and maybe not even the second ...

Nothing like this has ever been found embedded in coal.
These are all simple lies - "hoaxes" if you want to be nice about it (and I don't.)

Harte

a reply to: Akragon

Unfortunately, not enough evidence to be able to safely conclude that the vessel really is millions of years old ...

(This story refers to a metallic vessel also allegedly found in very ancient rock strata.

And then there's this modern object ....)

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: TamtammyMacx

And in the past 100 years, especially now when it's easier to verify these finds they no longer occur, interesting.

Sure they do.
archaeology-world.com...
Many times they are ignored or overlooked intentionally.

The following is an extract from a letter written by S. Kasatkin (translated from Ukrainian) in reference to his testimony of having been witness to the anomalous wheel imprint discovered by his team of miners.

‘This finding is not a PR action, we as a team of engineers and workers asked the mine director to invite scientists for a detailed examination of the object, but the director, following the instructions of the then owner of the mine, prohibited such talks and instead only ordered to accelerate work on passing through this section of lava and on fast ‘charging’ of the section with mining equipment.
Owing to that, this artifact and the smaller one found during further work came to be in a tunnel blockage and could not be taken out and studied. It is good that there were people, who in spite of the director’s prohibition, photographed this artifact.

Quad

originally posted by: Quadrivium

Sure they do.
archaeology-world.com...
Many times they are ignored or overlooked intentionally.

Exactly. Every time evidence like this emerges the excuse is that it must be a hoax because it doesn't adhere to the conventional theoretical timeline.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Quadrivium

Sure they do.
archaeology-world.com...
Many times they are ignored or overlooked intentionally.

Exactly. Every time evidence like this emerges the excuse is that it must be a hoax because it doesn't adhere to the conventional theoretical timeline.

So, why would your unconventional theoretical timeline be better?

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: TamtammyMacx

And in the past 100 years, especially now when it's easier to verify these finds they no longer occur, interesting.

Sure they do.
archaeology-world.com...
Many times they are ignored or overlooked intentionally.

The following is an extract from a letter written by S. Kasatkin (translated from Ukrainian) in reference to his testimony of having been witness to the anomalous wheel imprint discovered by his team of miners.

‘This finding is not a PR action, we as a team of engineers and workers asked the mine director to invite scientists for a detailed examination of the object, but the director, following the instructions of the then owner of the mine, prohibited such talks and instead only ordered to accelerate work on passing through this section of lava and on fast ‘charging’ of the section with mining equipment.
Owing to that, this artifact and the smaller one found during further work came to be in a tunnel blockage and could not be taken out and studied. It is good that there were people, who in spite of the director’s prohibition, photographed this artifact.

Quad

"Hey! Look at that round thing!"
"Hmmm... we don't know what it is!"
Since we don't know what it is, it MUST BE A WHEEL!!!!!!"
"Yeah! That's the ticket! All unknown things must be wheels!"

Harte

originally posted by: Hanslune


So, why would your unconventional theoretical timeline be better?

Because it accounts for observed phenomenon rather than ignoring it

It's not just artifacts found in layers where they shouldn't be, there's also human footprints in sandstone and limestone layers

human footprints in limestone and sandstone

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Hanslune


So, why would your unconventional theoretical timeline be better?

Because it accounts for observed phenomenon rather than ignoring it

It's not just artifacts found in layers where they shouldn't be, there's also human footprints in sandstone and limestone layers

human footprints in limestone and sandstone

Ah nothing like bringing creationism to a scientific discussion. Sorry rejected with deep laughter. So, you are saying that cherry picking a few hoaxes you like and ignoring all other evidence you can determine a viable 'time line?

Okay show us how you did it.

PS. Newspaper articles are NOT scientific studies.

there is no evidence for this 'findings'. Any scientific institute would be happy to 'prove' those.
always the same style of hoax sites.
lolz.

stupidity has stopped being ashamed some years ago.

If it seems like an impossible find - it probably is. Faked. That's the simplest explanation.

I personally don't believe anything about the evolutionary timeline but I'll still go with the simplest explanation on this one.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: TamtammyMacx

And in the past 100 years, especially now when it's easier to verify these finds they no longer occur, interesting.

Sure they do.
archaeology-world.com...
Many times they are ignored or overlooked intentionally.

The following is an extract from a letter written by S. Kasatkin (translated from Ukrainian) in reference to his testimony of having been witness to the anomalous wheel imprint discovered by his team of miners.

‘This finding is not a PR action, we as a team of engineers and workers asked the mine director to invite scientists for a detailed examination of the object, but the director, following the instructions of the then owner of the mine, prohibited such talks and instead only ordered to accelerate work on passing through this section of lava and on fast ‘charging’ of the section with mining equipment.
Owing to that, this artifact and the smaller one found during further work came to be in a tunnel blockage and could not be taken out and studied. It is good that there were people, who in spite of the director’s prohibition, photographed this artifact.

Quad

"Hey! Look at that round thing!"
"Hmmm... we don't know what it is!"
Since we don't know what it is, it MUST BE A WHEEL!!!!!!"
"Yeah! That's the ticket! All unknown things must be wheels!"

Harte

Have you looked into it?
Do you have another explanation?
Here is a quote of my very own that kinda says it all:
"All the knowledge we have is equal to a single drop in the ocean of knowledge we have yet to learn."- Quad
We do not know everything.
Accepting that is how we continue to learn.

originally posted by: Quadrivium

‘This finding is not a PR action, we as a team of engineers and workers asked the mine director to invite scientists for a detailed examination of the object, but the director, following the instructions of the then owner of the mine, prohibited such talks and instead only ordered to accelerate work on passing through this section of lava and on fast ‘charging’ of the section with mining equipment.
Owing to that, this artifact and the smaller one found during further work came to be in a tunnel blockage and could not be taken out and studied. It is good that there were people, who in spite of the director’s prohibition, photographed this artifact.

Quad
"Hey! Look at that round thing!"
"Hmmm... we don't know what it is!"
Since we don't know what it is, it MUST BE A WHEEL!!!!!!"
"Yeah! That's the ticket! All unknown things must be wheels!"

Harte

Have you looked into it?
Do you have another explanation?
Here is a quote of my very own that kinda says it all:
"All the knowledge we have is equal to a single drop in the ocean of knowledge we have yet to learn."- Quad
We do not know everything.
Accepting that is how we continue to learn.



We don't know the history of the mine and whether it was used in ancient times. To me it looks like limestone concentrated around earlier mining equipment but the information given it is sandstone. Given the lack of data and only a photograph its not really possible to make a good explanation.

However we currently have no evidence of people (nor were there any people] making stuff like that in the time frames suggested.

If it were real it would change history but oddly no one seems interested...

a reply to: Hanslune

oddly no one seems interested..

On that we agree.

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: Harte

"Hey! Look at that round thing!"
"Hmmm... we don't know what it is!"
Since we don't know what it is, it MUST BE A WHEEL!!!!!!"
"Yeah! That's the ticket! All unknown things must be wheels!"

Harte

Have you looked into it?

How would one go about looking into it?
It's a couple of pictures.
I could ask you the same question.
Have YOU looked into it?
Why not?

Is it your standard procedure to simple swallow whole any BS story coming out of fringe websites?
If so, that explains a lot.

Harte