300 million year old pot found in coal

originally posted by: Hanslune


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

Because they have the same knee-jerk reaction you did.

"It can't be true because it contradicts what I believe. It must be a hoax"

And that's the end of the investigation. There is soo much evidence out there that disrupts the entirety of evolutionary theory. I showed you primary documents detailing human footprints in limestone and sandstone, the same layers as dinosaurs. There's also soft tissue found in dinosaur bones.





But it gets ignored or obfuscated because of the aversion to considering that your long held beliefs could be incorrect.









Fossilized trees that span multiple geological strata standing up, which shows a rapid deposition process for these layers.



This is an ancient stegosaur figurine found after a mudslide in Europe. Its actually common in history for our ancestors to have seen dinosaurs, you just have to look for it your self:

evidence for the co-existence of humans with dinosaurs

a reply to: cooperton

This is such an important concept that seems oddly lost in modern archaeology/anthropology.

I can't count the number of times that some enigmatic metal object has been found and dated at after some specific date because "ancient man didn't know how to make alloys like this until x or y date". There are so many instances of this behavior where something is dated based on an assumption we have, and then you end up with a massive stack of objects like this.

Obviously a mystery but also a dead end because there's no acceptable answer with our current stack of assumptions. And instead of challenging assumptions that it doesn't jive with, we just say it must be a hoax.

originally posted by: ChrisBlack
a reply to: cooperton

This is such an important concept that seems oddly lost in modern archaeology/anthropology.

I can't count the number of times that some enigmatic metal object has been found and dated at after some specific date because "ancient man didn't know how to make alloys like this until x or y date". There are so many instances of this behavior where something is dated based on an assumption we have, and then you end up with a massive stack of objects like this.

Obviously a mystery but also a dead end because there's no acceptable answer with our current stack of assumptions. And instead of challenging assumptions that it doesn't jive with, we just say it must be a hoax.

yeah it's sad when mounting evidence continually gets ignored

There's enough human-made objects found in coal beds that it is worthwhile to speculate how/why this could have happened. My best guess would be that coal simply forms quicker than we assumed. We can even make coal in the lab under the right conditions. The recipe is pretty simple - organic matter (i.e. humus) that is exposed to high temperature/pressure and low/no oxygen.

My guess would be that a large flood deposited massive amounts of material on top of organic matter, which the high pressure and low oxygen conditions resulted in coal. A faster process for coal production would then explain how human artifacts are found in them. There's also carbon-dating data that says coal is much younger than previously thought, which also corroborates with everything above.

a reply to: Harte
You are stuck in your own mind. Your belief system is overloading your perception.



nar·​row-mind·​ed | ˈner-(ˌ)ō-ˈmīn-dəd , ˈna-(ˌ)rō-
Definition of narrow-minded
: not willing to accept opinions, beliefs, behaviors, etc. that are unusual or different from one's own : not open-minded

originally posted by: Quadrivium
a reply to: Harte
You are stuck in your own mind. Your belief system is overloading your perception.



nar·​row-mind·​ed | ˈner-(ˌ)ō-ˈmīn-dəd , ˈna-(ˌ)rō-
Definition of narrow-minded
: not willing to accept opinions, beliefs, behaviors, etc. that are unusual or different from one's own : not open-minded

Here it's called "Denying Ignorance," which is the motto of this forum.
Facts aren't opinion. I deal with the facts.
There has NEVER been any human-made object claimed to have been found in ANY coal seam that wasn't entirely cleaned of any coal and presented in pristine condition.
Ask yourself why this might be.
The answer is that none of these objects were found embedded in coal.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

I don't mean ask this as a "gotcha" but why lie about this?

It doesn't seem to me that they benefit financially from these types of finds. Finding items of archaeological significance is even a risk for an active mining project as they might be asked to stop depending on the country. Is it just for the love of the hoax? Normally when someone is faking a ghost/bigfoot etc they're at least trying to get views or gain legitimacy.

originally posted by: ChrisBlack
a reply to: Harte

I don't mean ask this as a "gotcha" but why lie about this?

It doesn't seem to me that they benefit financially from these types of finds. Finding items of archaeological significance is even a risk for an active mining project as they might be asked to stop depending on the country. Is it just for the love of the hoax? Normally when someone is faking a ghost/bigfoot etc they're at least trying to get views or gain legitimacy.

Yeah exactly. And it wasn't just once, but multiple times objects were reportedly found in coal.

other artifacts found in coal

There are some people that "believe" whether it is a reality to them or not? I don't know... That the "earth" this earth is destroyed utterly every six days and then the person they call "god" rests on the seventh then restarts on the first day again as if "nothing" happened... They also believe that a day to that "god" of theirs is equal to 1000 years.

It's the only way I can say a melt pot is that "old"

Other than a mining operation collapsed in that area and it and who knows what else was in the tunnel beneath it when it did collapse.

The good news for Russia? Hey lots of coal and that no one set fire to it creating a catastrophe.

The above two choices are known as the Two Truths doctrine. Somehow both and neither are correct and yet likely and believable at the same time as "reality".

It's small it's cute and carbon dating anything surrounded by carbon is kinda silly. Lemme just swallow a lump of that drink lots of water then go wander off in the desert and die... OMG! A skeleton was found of a time traveler that is over 300 million years old... the "third" story to cover all ATS bases.

Does it say 'Made in China' on the bottom?

These artefacts have been definitely found in coal seams. Age? Ok, forget carbon dating. Known fact, coal was made by deposits of materials thousands/millions of years ago, even scientists agree on that one. Now the millions of years factor comes in to play with just where are these coal seam. They aint on the surface. Well some are close to the surface but where these artefacts are found they are hundreds of feet underground.
So you have a layer of coal material, then on top of that thousands/millions of years forming of layers of sediments, hundreds of feet thick, to compress the material into coal.
Also as Augustus postulated, grinding the coal into a slurry and compressing it around an object does not work because if you haven't handled any coal I'll tell you natural coal has "layers", "grains" "seams". Yes, you could do it but the nature of the coal would be totally different.

a reply to: crayzeed

One of the most interesting story's I ever heard was of a buried building about two miles down in coal, like the mine in the Ukraine or Russia not sure where were limestone impressions of Chariot type wheels were found *** this mine was closed down afterwards though this happened much earlier and over in the US.

I read about this in another source but this is the best source I can find on the net.
And read W.A. McCormick's comment as you scroll down that page.
www.hecklerspray.com...


***


Also whether you believe in UFO's or not this guy makes a very interesting comment about one of the craft he was working on (According to him and those of us whom believe he may be telling the truth).
An ARCHAEOLOGICAL find?.
6:05 mark


Why I mention this is that I have heard claims and rumours in the past of Archaeological dig's or find's were the military closed them down or stepped in and took over often with the people involved being silenced or threatened if they did not keep there mouth's shut (men in black style) something bad would happen to them.

If true then not only was there a more advanced civilization than ours in the past but one FAR FAR more advanced.

Or these could be remnants of the technology of the Watchers.

Or BOTH could be true.

I am one whom believed our World was indeed created as it is said in the bible BUT also am open to the possibility that "The earth was DESOLATE and DARKNESS was upon the face of the deep", Desolate does not mean uncreated but destroyed, same planet different epoch's and creations and for those that mock the six days' (so definitely not aimed at you or any other with an open mind or belief and if they do not mean to mock then I apologize to them for taking there seemingly condescending tone as such) lets remind them that it also says a thousand years are as a day to the Lord, he can fast forward time for us and slow it down as he see's fit and it also says he created the beginning from the end, he is as much there as he is at the beginning and time is not something he is trapped within, for us Time flows, we get older with each second and can not go and get the past back but for God he knows the end and the beginning and they are both right in front of him right now with nothing in between missing, he can spend eternity upon a single instant if he chooses or make a billion years into an instant and he is NOT a time traveller but outside of the bounds of time.

originally posted by: ChrisBlack
a reply to: Harte

I don't mean ask this as a "gotcha" but why lie about this?

It doesn't seem to me that they benefit financially from these types of finds. Finding items of archaeological significance is even a risk for an active mining project as they might be asked to stop depending on the country. Is it just for the love of the hoax? Normally when someone is faking a ghost/bigfoot etc they're at least trying to get views or gain legitimacy.

There's many kinds of benefits here... not only financial.

Quite often it supports a religious conviction (called a "pious fraud" -- such as the Jewish 10 Commandments Stone (the Jews don't venerate/revere/have any particular adherence to the 10 Commandments... they're just the 10 major sections of the 613 laws)). And often it acts as a "gotcha" to a group that the "finder" doesn't like.

In addition, there's the fame and social capital. That can be more useful than money in some cases.

The "Cretaceous hammer" is a good example of it. It's a modern hammer that's been encased in limestone concretion (which happens rapidly in certain environments) and it's been taken to a Creationist museum where its value is that it supports the idea that humans and dinosaurs lived together. The object is viewed very positively and used as supporting evidence by those espousing that view - and it brings in revenue and supports the belief of Creationists that their views are absolutely correct and everything else is a lie.

The Ica Stones (carved by locals) brought a lot of money to the villages of Ica, Peru.

originally posted by: cooperton

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

You do understand that scientists gain tenure, larger salaries, book deals, foundations, and fame by DISCOVERING THINGS? People who don't do not have successful careers. Many if not a large majority of scientists are also religious.

Because they have the same knee-jerk reaction you did.

No a theory in response to what appears to be false information. You will note that the reported site is unreachable - so no one can 'investigate it' further.

Did you note the reported age? Wooden wheel. Okay that should bring a ? to you what do you that might be? may I suggest you look up when trees that could provide wood evolved. The oxygen level was around 31% which would be very harmful to 'humans'.

"It can't be true because it contradicts what I believe. It must be a hoax"

No information was provide to show it was true. When a 'theory' is presented with no valid information you consider it unevidenced. Which that images are. As noted it cannot be investigated which makes one believe it is a hoax.

And that's the end of the investigation. There is soo much evidence out there that disrupts the entirety of evolutionary theory.

Nope none the theory remains one of the most evidence in science.

I showed you primary documents detailing human footprints in limestone and sandstone, the same layers as dinosaurs. There's also soft tissue found in dinosaur bones.

Newspapers are not scientific studies .

Nope and I will stop there. Look Creationism is utterly dead. Please don't take this personally but your ideas are just complete nonsense. I know you believe it but we cannot have a serious scientific discussion about stuff that isn't scientific. We cannot converse about 2+2=5.123?

Regards

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: crayzeed

Howdy Labtech

Good to see you are still post here at ATS

Lazar is a fake from decades ago. One of the great weaknesses of fringe thought is that they never just dump dumb stuff that has been debunked long ago. Some things, are, in fact, wrong.

originally posted by: Hanslune

You do understand that scientists gain tenure, larger salaries, book deals, foundations, and fame by DISCOVERING THINGS? People who don't do not have successful careers.

If evolutionary theory is proven invalid, then everyone with a major or paid study in evolutionary biology is immediately out of a job. So yeah I doubt they'll ever confess there is even a slight possibility they may be wrong, especially since they are the gate-keepers of what gets published or not.

Did you note the reported age? Wooden wheel. Okay that should bring a ? to you what do you that might be? may I suggest you look up when trees that could provide wood evolved. The oxygen level was around 31% which would be very harmful to 'humans'.

No you're looking at it backwards. A wooden wheel in this layer shows that the dating of the layers is drastically wrong. Which further corroborates with human footprints in sandstone and limestone layers.

No information was provide to show it was true.

Besides the testimony of the person who found it and the witness who affirmed it.

"While I was working in the Municipal Electric Plant in Thomas, Okla[homa], in 1912, I came upon a solid chunk of coal which was too large to use. I broke it with a sledge hammer. This iron pot fell from the center, leaving the impression or mould of the pot in the piece of coal. Jim Stall (an employee of the company) witnessed the breaking of the coal, and saw the pot fall out. I traced the source of the coal, and found that it came from the Wilburton, Oklahoma Mines."

As noted it cannot be investigated which makes one believe it is a hoax.

With this logic, evolutionary theory is a hoax then. Evolution can not be replicated in a lab. A population of organisms cannot change into a distinctly new kind of organism... E. Coli remains E. Coli, Mice remain Mice, fruit flies remain fruit flies. Despite laboratories trying, with over 70,000 generations in a lab studying E. Coli, there is no evidence that they can become anything else. Organisms and populations of organisms can adapt, but they cannot evolve into a distinctly new organism

The only way that evolutionary theory can be "proved" invalid is for a better theory to emerge.

Not one single person would be "out of a job" in such a scenario.

Harte

originally posted by: cooperton

No information was provide to show it was true.

Besides the testimony of the person who found it and the witness who affirmed it.

"While I was working in the Municipal Electric Plant in Thomas, Okla[homa], in 1912, I came upon a solid chunk of coal which was too large to use. I broke it with a sledge hammer. This iron pot fell from the center, leaving the impression or mould of the pot in the piece of coal. Jim Stall (an employee of the company) witnessed the breaking of the coal, and saw the pot fall out. I traced the source of the coal, and found that it came from the Wilburton, Oklahoma Mines."

And you notice that nobody has EVER seen this "impression or mould of the pot in the piece of coal."

This what I already told you.
You don't listen well.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

It was shown in the video

originally posted by: Harte

And you notice that nobody has EVER seen this "impression or mould of the pot in the piece of coal."

This what I already told you.
You don't listen well.

Harte

Go to 0:55 in the video in the OP.

So now that you see it in the coal, you admit it's real right? Or are you gonna move the goal posts?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Harte

And you notice that nobody has EVER seen this "impression or mould of the pot in the piece of coal."

This what I already told you.
You don't listen well.

Harte

Go to 0:55 in the video in the OP.

So now that you see it in the coal, you admit it's real right? Or are you gonna move the goal posts?

I suppose you mean this poor B&W photograph of the pot sitting on a piece of coal with a smaller piece of coal placed inside the pot:


So, where is this "mould" of the pot in the coal itself?
And why (if there are "many examples" of such things) are there NO such examples ever shown still embedded in the coal they were supposedly found in?

Harte