Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man as old as Coal? (Why are the test results dismissed without reason?)
Ed Conrad web site ^ | VARIOUS - FR post 1-15-03 | Ed Conrad

Posted on 01/20/2003 2:55:58 PM PST by vannrox

Man as Old as Coal?

Are Scientists afraid of Ed Conrad?

Wrote Bill O'Brien:

"There was a time when Conrad regarded the integrity of the scientific establishment as beyond reproach. But after seven years of dealing with paleontologists and archaeologists, he said he has found them to be a devious and untrustworthy bunch whose actions in relation to him have been downright dishonest and deceitful."

"Conrad believes his discovery has frightened members of the archeological/ paleontological establishment out of their wits. They dread the truth, he says, because they know their cozy little clique will be gone with the eons. No longer will they be able to sup at the trough of Darwinism, enjoying soft jobs with huge salaries."


This is the very first specimen that Ed Conrad discovered in the Carboniferous- dated anthracite region of Pennsylvania but the Smithsonian's experts dismissed it as a concretion, a rock. However, petrified teeth were found inside the jaw-like area and an infrared scan revealed the material is "compatible with either tooth or bone in origin."




Smithsonian shenanigans!

Since the early 1980s, Ed Conrad has been accusing the Smithsonian Institution of a lack of integrity in the honest investigation of the object (pictured above) and other rock-like specimens he has found in Pennsylvania's anthracite region, including one which bears a distinct resemblance to the outline of a human skull embedded in a boulder.



In June 1981, while exploring abandoned anthracite surface-mining operations near Mahanoy City and Shenandoah, Pa., Ed accidentally discovered a large object which bore a dramatic resemblance to a large anthropoid skull.



Ed sent a color photograph to the Smithsonian Institution and had a response from Raymond Rye II, museum specialist in its Department of Paleobiology. Rye invited Ed to bring the specimen to the Smithsonian so its experts could examine it.

Rye and Conrad agreed on a date and Rye mailed Ed a National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) permit allowing his car onto Smithsonian property so he could get to its west loading dock at the rear of the museum.

On Aug. 25, 1981, Conrad and his friend Clayton Lennon, then 81, paid their visit, at which time Rye had different specialists examine Ed's specimen resembling a large skull.

However, they performed no scientific testing whatsoever while briefly examining it, then unanimously concluded it was not an anthropoid skull, definitely not bone and undoubtedly a worthless concretion (a rock).

At no time did Rye or any of the experts inform Ed that the only authoritative manner of determining whether an object is bone is by examining its cellular structure.

Ed was disappointed but respected their educated opinion and offered to leave the specimen in the Smithsonian's possession.

When one of the experts asked why, Ed explained that perhaps, if the interior of the jaw like area was examined, teeth possibly might be found. His response drew sarcastic chuckles and, consequently, he took the specimen back home.

It is interesting to note that, had the Smithsonian accepted the invitation to keep the specimen -- even if it dropped it into the nearby dumpster soon after the visitors had left -- Ed undoubtedly would've thrown in the towel and today there would be peace, not heated controversy, about Ed's claim of having discovered petrified bones, including human remains, in strata dated at more than 280 million years old.

However, instead of giving up, Ed expanded his exploration of the same strip-mined area and kept finding more and more objects which bore a similarity, in appearance, to the contour of bone. Many of them were attached to -- or embedded in -- slate (or shale), meaning they obviously were older than the material that had formed around them.

Meanwhile, Ed had penetrated the jaw-like area with a nail-like tool and, using a coat hanger fashioned into a miniature shovel, was amazed that he was able to remove soft, mud like material.

Eventually, there was a sizeable cavity inside the "jaw" and, after that portion was broken off, Ed learned that the interior contained a pair of hardened inclusions on what resembled a dental arch.

A photos was taken of one of the inclusions, then blown up and forwarded to Wilton Krogman, author of "The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine" and one of the world's foremost human comparative anatomists.

Krogman excitedly identified it as a premolar tooth, explaining that he could easily see that it possesses a pair of cusps.



An American dime is positioned near what Krogman had identified as a premolar tooth and later the author of "The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine" advised Ed that an infrared scan be performed on it.



This is the other inclusion that was found inside the jaw like area of Ed's original specimen. A veteran dentist had taken an X-ray and, in writing, stated that it "reads" just like a tooth.



This is the jaw like interior of Ed's original specimen. The object which Wilton Krogman identified as a premolar is seen from above.



On Krogman's recommendation, the infrared scan was performed on what he had identified as a premolar at the American Medical Laboratories in Fairfax, Va., in September 1981.

However, when the graphic chart and accompanying data arrived back from the lab, Ed learned that Krogman nor the pathologist who had submitted the granules for testing possessed the expertise to interpret the scan results.

Ed even phoned American Medical Laboratories but was told that it does not interpret scans, only performs them.

Ed therefore sent a copy of the scan to Rye at the Smithsonian but his request for an interpretation was ignored.





As time passed, Ed continued to search the same locality and kept finding numerous unusual objects that bore the contour of bone, although rock-like in their brownish coloration and weight.

Approximately a year later and in the same general area _ only a short distance from where he had found the specimen resembling an anthropoid skull -- Ed discovered the large boulder in which was embedded the object that bore a distinct resemblance to a human cranium.

Actually, Ed had passed the specimen hundreds of times but only after doing a bit of study about human skulls was he able to recognize it, since the jaw like area was facing downward.



This is the boulder with the human skull protruding that Ed Conrad discovered in 1982, about a year after finding the specimen resembling the anthropoid skull. It was found in the same general area in precisely this position, with the jawbone facing downward. The Smithsonian had admitted that the protrusion does indeed resemble a human skull.



This is another view of the human skull-like specimen protruding from the boulder.



At left, a viw of the boulder from a slight angle reveals how the skull-like specimen extends above the surface. At right, here's how prehistoric human skulls sometimes are found. Note similarities to the specimen embedded in the boulder.

Ed took some photos and forwarded them to Rye at the Smithsonian, informing him it had been found in the same general locality as the specimen resembling the anthropoid skull.



Rye Responds After Seeing Photos Of The Boulder



Ed Sends Smithsonian Granules from Object in Boulder

Ed favorably followed up on Rye's request and removed some granules from the rind of the object resembling a human cranium protruding from the boulder.

However, before mailing them, Ed examined the granules microscopically.

This is because, at this point in time, he had learned something about the identification of bone that he hadn't known during his visit to the Smithsonian a year before.

Ed was now aware that bone contains minuscule Haversian canals and their presence is the conclusive evidence of bone, even if the bone had petrified.

This scientific fact appears in the book, "Science in Archaeology," which states that neither age nor the petrification process can remove what are known as Haversian canals, an integral part of the cell structure of bone.

He had learned that, since the Haversian canals are actually passageways for nutrients to living bone, even the process of petrification cannot displace them because, as tiny tunnels, there was nothing there to begin with.

Therefore, prior to sending the granules, Ed's microscopic examination revealed the presence of "pinholes" in the thinnest pieces, virtually identical to cadaver bone at the same low magnification.

Rye Denies The Granules Are Bone



Examination of Cell Structure Was Ignored

On Oct. 11, 1982, Ed wrote to Rye, wondering why the Smithsonian tested for mineral composition when it was supposed to examine the cell structure of the granules that had been removed from the rind of the boulder.

After all, Ed maintained, Rye had stated in his letter: "We must do a microscopic study of the outer rind to determine if it has the structure of bone." But, according to Rye, this was not done. Or, if it was, the Smithsonian wanted to hide that fact.

Ed insists the Smithsonian had supplied an answer to a question -- about mineral composition -- that did not even apply in this particular case.

In any event, in his response to Ed's follow-up letter, Rye rather surprisingly agreed about the necessity of having the cell structure examined.

However, he offered an extremely weak and sad explanation why the Smithsonian had not done so (although only a imbecile would even think its experts had not viewed the cell structure of the granules and HAD SEEN the Haversian canals, thus confirming the material IS bone and that the object embedded in the boulder IS INDEED a human cranium).



Ed: Ground Section Wasn't Needed

First of all, Ed notes that the Smithsonian certainly didn't have to prepare a ground section to examine the cell structure since it easily could've used the granules (as he had done).

The plain and simple fact is that Rye HAD REQUESTED the granules for the specific purpose of examining the cell structure.

Meanwhile, if the preparation -- and examination -- of a ground section was so important, Ed wondered why Rye had not even mentioned it in his letter.

But even worse was Rye's explanation that, because of budget restraints, the Smithsonian could not prepare a ground section at taxpayers' expense.

Then -- same as now -- the Smithsonian's laboratories are fully equipped to prepare ground sections at minimal expense and they are made almost every day. The expense involved would have been peanuts.

It was then that Ed had very serious questions about the Smithsonian's integrity. He knew for sure that, coupled with earlier events, it wanted nothing to do with the honest investigation of any of his specimens and was playing him for a fool.

Ed had a good idea back then -- and later would become 100 percent certain (as you'll soon see) -- that the human-like skull embedded in the boulder is indeed a human skull but the Smithsonian didn't want it known, obviously because of the repercussions it would cause.

Most importantly, the Smithsonian's experts knew that if a human skull was discovered in Carboniferous strata, it means that man inhabited the earth multi-multi-millions of years before Darwin's evolutionists have put him here.

They also knew -- in one felt swoop -- it would decimate the evolutionary theory of man's origin from some lowly animals of 60-65 million years ago, since Ed's discovery means man was around long, long before.

Since established science has long maintained that coal was formed more than 280 million years ago, the Smithsonian was well aware that if it confirmed Ed's discovery, it would shake the very foundation of its most close-vested theories.

And now Ed offers proof of the Smithsonian's lack of integrity by presenting microscopic photos of granules removed from the boulder, proving that he indeed had found a petrified human skull that is, indeed, as old as coal -- if not older!





What the Smithsonian didn't want you to see



Granules that were removed from the specimen resembling a human skull embedded in the boulder reveal Haversian canals, the telltale indicator of bone. This photo was taken at 400X, using top lighting and a dark field. It is important to note that, because of height differential, portions of the photo are blurry.



The Haversian canals in granules from the boulder are seen at approximately 800x magnification.



Photograph of cross section of bone, showing Haversian systems. Each Haversian system is seen as a nearly round area. The light circular core of each system is the Haversian canal, through which blood vessels pass. Artwork of compact bone shows details of the Haversian systems. According to "Science in Archaeology," the Haversian canals always exist and are always identifiable in bone, despite its age or that it has been subjected to the process of petrification.

It is important to emphasize that, when Ed was getting the royal runaround from the Smithsonian in the honest investigation of his specimens, Ed brought the matter to the attention of Gus Yatron, his congressman, in 1984.

Ed pulled no punches with Yatron, accusing the Smithsonian of a lack of integrity concerning the honest investigation of his specimens.

Yatron's office then diplomatically contacted the Smithsonian on Ed's behalf and, in response, was promptly greeted with an extremely sarcastic, hostile letter from the office of its top administrator, Secretary Robert McCormick Adams.



Ed Accuses the Smithsonian of Lying





Presented here is a random sampling of photos of petrified bones

discovered by Ed Conrad in Pennsylvania's anthracite region.

All are embedded in slate (or shale), which means they had existed

before the hardening of the slushy material in which they are embedded.

Perhaps the most golden rule of geology is that

coal is of Carboniferous age, having solidified

a minimum of 280 million years ago.

Established science also has long contended that

anthracite is the oldest of the coals, a minimum

of 300 million years old.


Intriguing specimen of a petrified object is revealed. Close-up views below are just as puzzling as to its identity.


The package of Lark 100's cigarettes in many of the photos had been used by Ed Conrad to offer a comparison of the size of the specimens.
   
Excellent examples of well-preserved petrified bones embedded in slate.



 
Petrified bones are shown from different angles.


 

Misc. collection of examples of petrified bones



 




 



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Pennsylvania; US: West Virginia
KEYWORDS: bible; bones; coal; crevolist; edconrad; history; mystery; past; radical; unusual
THis is a good read. I personally believe that man kind, or other creates like man have been around far longer than a mere 7000 years. This is an interesting read. Of course it flies in the face of established studies so it's a hot potatoe that is easier to dismiss than explain.
1 posted on 01/20/2003 2:55:58 PM PST by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Check this rock out, and nobody ever tested it to see if it was real, either. A conspiracy!


2 posted on 01/20/2003 3:04:49 PM PST by PaulJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
That skull looked more like a large hominid skull from a species other than sapiens. I doubt it is human, but if its even just a large ape from 280 million years ago, that's enough to set modern day anthros' timetable on it's head.
3 posted on 01/20/2003 3:24:22 PM PST by SandfleaCSC (Yes, I'm bad, but you all knew that anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandfleaCSC


Humans are descended from Rabbits!!!

Rabbits with currency, no less!

4 posted on 01/20/2003 3:43:17 PM PST by JohnnyZ (Everyone knows that square is the shape of evil! -Spongebob Squarepants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
This must be a hoax. I briefly showed this to a paleontologist friend of mine and he says that >7,000 years ago people only smoked Pall Mall and Lucky Strikes...
5 posted on 01/20/2003 3:45:55 PM PST by gnarledmaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gnarledmaw
I have it on good authority that Pall Malls are part of a healthy well balanced breakfast for blacksmiths.

From the teachings of Clifton Ralph.
6 posted on 01/20/2003 3:56:27 PM PST by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tet68
Interesting. I like Pall Malls, Im interestested in blacksmithing and Im looking for a career change....

Dont laugh. Have you heard how much a good blacksmith can make?

7 posted on 01/20/2003 4:09:38 PM PST by gnarledmaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SandfleaCSC
"... but if its even just a large ape from 280 million years ago, that's enough to set modern day anthros' timetable on it's head."

...not to mention their grant money.
8 posted on 01/20/2003 4:20:40 PM PST by Jumpmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Thanks for the post. You see that in other fields, like Archeology.

It is a shame...I agree with one of the other replies that it looks more ape like, yet it would still upset the "scientific" apple cart...much like those Dinosaur foot prints mingled with Humanoid ones in that riverbed in Texas.

9 posted on 01/20/2003 4:23:09 PM PST by Lael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ
Does the author actually expect us to believe that someone still smokes Lark cigarettes today?
10 posted on 01/20/2003 4:28:48 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
I was told something ( second or third-hand ) several years ago about "humanoid" remains being found inside coal strata by a knowledgeable mining engineer , in Pennsylvania. The "remains" were called to the attention of the Pit Boss, who ordered them destroyed; because reporting them would have brought hordes of scientists to the scene, and resulted in the shut-down of the mine by the state.

My informant reported the "remains" were "not quite human-looking", and were of varying sizes, suggesting a family grouping.

As you can well imagine, this sort of "report" is merely intriguing, as there is no way of verifying it, or of establishing the credibility of the original source.

11 posted on 01/20/2003 4:35:00 PM PST by genefromjersey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Typical crank behavior.

His "best" evidence to date is:

1. "Looks sort of like a skull to me".

2. "An expert said this piece of another rock was shaped like a tooth".

3. "Bones have little holes, so does this rock, I saw them myself, so there."

Based on this, he's *sure* he has something that'll revolutionize science, but The Man is keeping him down, so he spends the next several *years* beating the same dead horse.

Hell, he apparently hasn't even had his rock(s) dated. Depending on the nature of the strata there, there's no guarantee that rocks found near/on a coal seam of a given age actually originated *in* the coal seam. They may have been deposited there by glacier during the last ice age, for example. From the photos, it looks like he's finding his specimens in *surface* rocks, which could have originated at any date and been deposited on the open coal seam at any time.

Real scientists take the time to cross their t's and dot their i's. This guy just keeps waving his rocks around and yells about the conspiracy to hid his "discoveries."

Crank.

12 posted on 01/20/2003 4:37:00 PM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Anthacite coal seams are rarely horizontal. Because of their age and the mountain building process (plate tectonics) these seams can actually form a "U" shape with outcrops of the same seam identifiable in the same general acreage. Its a known fact that early man made use of coal where he found it. The voids made a convenient place for burials and other storage.
13 posted on 01/20/2003 4:51:57 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: vannrox; longshadow
This seems like an appropriate thread for pics of crop circles:


14 posted on 01/20/2003 4:52:53 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Purity of essence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Don't see any human skulls there. However, the thing in the picture with the dollar bills is clearly a giant rabbit, of the species Bugsbunnius giganteus, and it's not unlikely it is being pursued by an Elmerfuddius.
15 posted on 01/20/2003 4:57:53 PM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Hey, PatrickHenry, everyone knows that crop circles are bogus. But now contrails, thems the real thing...

By the way, did you notice how Ed Conrad overlooked the most important find in all those rocks? You mean you didn't notice all those petrified remains of Lark cigarette packages?

--Boot Hill

16 posted on 01/20/2003 5:10:57 PM PST by Boot Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
"medved," the seven-time banned ex-Freeper, used to tout Ed Conrad's amazing discoveries before he left FR due to illness: the management got sick of him.

Now, that doesn't prove that Ed Conrad's claims are bogus, but keep in mind that "medved" ALSO touted Velikovskian catastrophism, Saturn hovering over the Earth's North Pole reducing the "felt effect of gravity," Venus being spit out of Jupiter within the past several thousand years, psychic pets, and a Lyndon Larouche-like theory about Great Britain, the East India company, and drug trafficking in the 18th Century, to name but a few of his favs.

That he would also tout Conrad's work doesn't exactly bode well for Conrad.

17 posted on 01/20/2003 5:17:09 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: longshadow; VadeRetro; PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer; Piltdown_Woman; jennyp
I knew this stuff would eventually make its way onto FR. It was only a matter of time.

Junior, do you have links to this stuff in the crackpot section of your Ultimate Resource? You should.
18 posted on 01/20/2003 5:19:03 PM PST by Physicist (The real miracle is that Ed Conrad hasn't registered as a Freeper, yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Ah, here we go.

This is an independent analysis of some of Condrad's specimens, by Andrew MacRae, a paleontologist with the University of Calgary's Department of Geology.

Short summary of his conclusions -- they're rocks, not bones (fossilized or otherwise).

Here's a side-by-side comparison of one of Conrad's specimens, and an actual dinosaur bone, at the same 128x magnification:

The difference in structure should be obvious to all.

Even Dr. Kurt Wise, a well known young-Earth creationist geologist (!) wrote a letter to the editor of a journal declaring his professional opinion that Conrad's specimens are just rocks, not bones.

19 posted on 01/20/2003 5:19:14 PM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
Man as old as Coal?

If they find one, the Dems will surely run him for something.


20 posted on 01/20/2003 5:20:42 PM PST by socal_parrot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: *crevo_list
Pinging the crank-watchers.
21 posted on 01/20/2003 5:21:30 PM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lael
much like those Dinosaur foot prints mingled with Humanoid ones in that riverbed in Texas.

You mean the long since discredited ones in the Paluxy riverbed?

see: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html

22 posted on 01/20/2003 5:21:36 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
The real miracle is that Ed Conrad hasn't registered as a Freeper, yet

ROTFLMAO!

23 posted on 01/20/2003 5:23:15 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

ANCIENT MAN - 2

Your ancestors have been found, and they were human beings. Here is more information about them. Evolutionary theory is a myth. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.

CONTENT: Ancient Man - 2

Early Man - Here are facts about some real people who lived in the past
Human Footprints - Large man-made footprints from ancient times
Remains in Coal and Rock - Did you know that man-made objects have been found in coal, rock, and other things?

Page numbers without book references refer to the book, ANCIENT MAN, from which these facts are summarized. An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the set of books this Encyclopedia is based on (see order sheet), only 164 statements are by creationists.

EARLY MAN

After more than a century spent trying to figure out people, the experts still declare that all the races of man belong to only one species. Regarding the dates concerning mankind, evolutionists speculate that humans have lived here for one to three million yearsand then, suddenly, stopped evolving 100,000 years ago.

Yet actual historical dates go back less than 5,000 years. Using historical, archaeological, and astronomical data, dates for early mankind extend to about 2250 B.C.

But using results of the notoriously inaccurate carbon 14 dating system, the earliest dates for mankind extend back about 15,000 years.

Let us now consider some actual evidence of early people on our planet.

We will find they were real human beings. And where they were located disproves evolutionary theories.—p. 27.

The Guadeloupe woman. In 1812, on the Caribbean island of Guadeloupe, a fully human skeleton was found, lacking only the head and feet. It was found inside extremely hard, very old limestone, which was part of a formation over a mile in length.

In accordance with their theory, evolutionists date that rock at 25 million years! You will not find the Guadeloupe woman mentioned in the textbooks, since this find would disprove evolutionary strata dating.—p. 29.

The Caveras skull. In 1876, 130 feet below ground, a skull was found in the "2 million-year-old" Pliocene strata. It was certified as completely mineralized, yet totally human. Dozens of stone mortars, bowls, and other man-made artifacts were found near this skull.—p. 29.

The Castinedolo skull. A group of perfectly human ancient skulls were found in Castinedolo, Italy, and, with the Caveras Skull, are considered among the most ancient skulls. Yet they are perfectly human.—p. 29.

The Moab Skeletons. Two skeletons were found in Cretaceous rock (supposedly dated at 100 million years) in Moab, Utah, about 15 feet below the surface.

Both skeletons were definitely human and ancient. They had been undisturbed till they were found. When tested for age, they were only a few thousand years old.—pp. 29-30.

HUMAN FOOTPRINTS

Evolutionists theorize that man did not evolve until the late Tertiary Period, and cannot be over one to three million years old.

But human footprints have been found in very old rock strata. These are human footprints, not ape prints. (Apes have very different footprints and styles of walking.)

These prints disprove evolutionary theories about rock strata—and reveal it is quite young, and place dinosaurs as living at the same time when people did. The prints also reveal that giants once lived on our planet.—p. 30.

Laetoli tracks. At a site in Kenya, called Laetoli, 30 miles south of Olduvai Gorge, Mary Leakey discovered human footprints in 1977. Although some evolutionists reject them as human, other scientists recognize them to be clearly human—and therefore date those who made the tracks to be 3.75 million years ago. But evolutionists teach that no people lived back then.

At about the same time, Mary Leakey and Dr. Johanson found human teeth and jawbones from around the same 3.75 million-year period.—pp. 30-31.

The Gediz track. A footprint found in volcanic ash, near Demirkopru, Turkey, was found in 1970. The track of a running man was found in strata dated by evolutionists at 250,000 years in the past.—p. 31.

The Glen Rose tracks. A remarkable number of human tracks have been found in a Cretaceous limestone formation near Glen Rose, Texas. Many are of giant men. The prints have been found in the bed of Paluxy River, when it is dry in the summer. Some are next to, on top of, or under dinosaur tracks.

The Glen Rose tracks are 15 inches long [38.1 cm], and were probably made by people 8.3 feet [25,38 dm] tall. Some, 21½ inches [54.6 cm] long, would have been made by people 11.8 feet [25.38 dm] tall.

*R.T. Bird, a paleontologist with the American Museum of Natural History, also found a trail of Brontosaurus tracks which were shipped to the museum. That means people were alive when the dinosaurs were! Some human tracks overlaid the dinosaur tracks, and some were found in layers below the dinosaurs.—pp. 31-32.

The Paluxy Branch. In August 1978, Fred Beierie spent the afternoon searching for tracks in the Paluxy riverbed. He found a tree branch encased in Cretaceous stone, with only the upper part showing. So it was as old as the tracks.

Beierie sent a sample of the wood to *Reisner Berg of UCLA, who tested it by radiodating at 12,800 years. Corrected, it would yield a date agreeing with the Flood. (Carbon 14 dating tends to skew toward greater age on older dates, because of atmospheric differences back then. See Dating of Time in Evolution for details.)

That would date both the giants and the dinosaurs as being recent.—p. 32.

Antelope Springs tracks. In June 1968, *William J. Meister, Sr., an evolutionist, was searching for trilobite fossils in the mountains of Utah. Splitting a piece of rock in two, he found inside a human footprint stepping on trilobites. The human was wearing a sandal!

Thoroughly shaken, he took other men back who confirmed it and found still more, including some with sandals stepping on trilobites.

As a result, Meister became a Christian. The strata was primarily Cambrian, which is supposed to be the oldest on the planet.—pp. 32-33.

The Alamogordo tracks. Near Alamogordo, New Mexico, 13 giant tracks, each about 22 inches [55.8 cm] long were found. The stride is from four to five feet [121.9-152.4 cm].—p. 33.

The Arizona tracks. Tracks of a barefoot human child were found, in the late 1960s, alongside some dinosaur tracks. The location was the Moenkopi Wash, near the little Colorado River in northern Arizona.

In 1984, similar tracks were found not far from the Moenkopi site. Many human tracks, dinosaur tracks, and a handprint of a child that had fallen.

More adult tracks were found in 1986.

The Arizona tracks are located in the Glen Canyon geological Group, which is part of late Triassic to early Jurassic strata and supposedly 175 to 100 million years old.

In addition to 300 tridactyle dinosaur tracks, sheep tracks, bivalve prints, large amphibian and lungfish marks have been found. Over 60 human tracks have been mapped and photographed.—pp. 33-34.

Other human prints. Many other human footprints have been found, which we will not mention here.—p. 34.

Other giant people. The skeletal remains of giants have also been found. Giants, twice the size of gorillas, were found in Java.

The petrified remains of a giant were found in South Africa. A well-known anthropologist declared that these remains showed that man's ancestors must have been giants.—p. 33.

REMAINS IN COAL AND ROCK

Human remains and man-made objects have been found in coal and rock—where they should not be found. The evidence disproves evolutionary theories about the age of rock strata. As far back as we can trace, people were people. They were not apes.

Human remains in coal. A fossilized human skull was found in coal that was sold in Germany (mid-1800s). A jawbone of a child was found in coal in Tuscany (1958). Two giant human molars were found in Montana (1926). A human leg was found by a West Virginia coal miner. It had changed into coal.—pp. 34-35.

Man-made objects in coal. A lady, in Illinois, found a gold chain in a chunk of coal which broke open (1891). A small steel cube was found in a block of coal in Austria (1885). An iron pot was found in coal in Oklahoma (1912). A woman found a child's spoon in coal (1937).—p. 35.

Man-made objects in rock. An iron nail was found in a Cretaceous block from the Mesozoic era (mid-1800s). A gold thread was found in stone in England (1844). An iron nail was found in quartz in California (1851). A silver vessel was found in solid rock in Massachusetts (1851). The mold of a metal screw was found in a chunk of feldspar (1851). An intricately carved and inlaid metal bowl was found in solid rock (1852). An iron nail was found in rock in a Peruvian mine by Spanish conquistadores (1572).—pp. 35-36.

Man-made objects found in the ground. A doll was found near Nampa, Idaho (1889). A bronze coin was found 114 feet below the surface near Chillicothe, Illinois (1871). This means there were coins in ancient times in America! A paving tile was found in a "25 million-year-old" Miocene formation in Plauteau City, Colorado (1936).

Several discoveries were made during the California gold rush (1849-1850s). A prehistoric mining shaft, 210 feet [640 dm] below the surface in solid rock was found. A mortar for grinding gold ore was found at a depth of 300 feet [914 dm] in a mining tunnel. A human skull was also found at a depth of 130 feet [396 dm] under five beds of lava and tufa. Bones of camels, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, horses, and other animals were also found in California. The findings are almost always in gold-bearing rock or gravel.

Man-made markings on petrified wood. Evolutionists declare that petrified wood is millions of year old, yet humans have worked with it.

Hand-worked petrified wood was found in India. It was shaped prior to fossilization.

Prior to mineralization, several petrified pieces of wood had been hacked with a cutting tool. The wood was dated to the Pliocene Epoch, before humans were supposed to have lived.—p. 36.

Man-made markings on bones. At a site near Paris, France, fossilized rhinoceros bones had human cutting marks on them. No rhinos have been in Europe in recorded history. Another rhino bone, cut by a sharp tool, was found in Ireland.

Two saurian bones were found in a Jurassic deposit.—pp. 36-37.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

To the NEXT PAGE to conclude what you are now reading (Ancient Man - Part 3 of 3)
Back to ANCIENT MAN. It has the topic list to related data on this general subject
Back to the INDEX PAGE. It has a master table of contents to topics in many fields of science which disprove evolution
COMMENTS
ORDER SHEET

Home pageAncient Man topic listCommentsOrder Sheet
Back to Ancient Man - 1TopForward to Ancient Man - 3

  PATHLIGHTS HOME

PATHLIGHTS

PO Box 300

Altamont, TN 37301

COMMENTS  

 BOOKSTORE

IMPORTANT! For many more facts against EVOLUTION—

Visit our Sister Website:  http://evolution-facts.org


24 posted on 01/20/2003 5:39:03 PM PST by vannrox (The Preamble - without it, our Bill of Rights is meaningless!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Permit me to revise your title:

Original: Man as Old as Coal?. Revised: Man Dumb as Rocks?

25 posted on 01/20/2003 5:41:17 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Purity of essence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
From Pathlights.com: "A science-fiction writer, *George Gamow, led out in promoting it to the scientific community"

Science fiction writer? You may want to rethink who you pull your "facts" from:

George Gamow: http://spot.colorado.edu/~gamow/george/prof_life.html
26 posted on 01/20/2003 6:00:56 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Science fiction writer? You may want to rethink who you pull your "facts" from:

Gamow; a "science fiction writer"?????

LMAO!

You know the story about how he got roped into putting his name on a paper along with Hans Bethe and Alpher, don't you?

The "authors" read: "Alpher, Bethe, Gamow"

(geek humor alert)

Entirely true, though.

27 posted on 01/20/2003 6:17:22 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
bump for later read
28 posted on 01/20/2003 6:23:34 PM PST by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
The first picture resembles a human skull. On the other hand, I have seen rocks that resemble all sorts of things. Clouds tend to do that too.

After the first picture, it goes downhill. I can't imagine how he sees anything unusual in most of those pictures.

29 posted on 01/20/2003 6:25:11 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
The "authors" read: "Alpher, Bethe, Gamow"

Yup, I still get a chuckle every time I see that :-)

30 posted on 01/20/2003 6:36:54 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Gamow was a real author, but physicist Hans Bethe had to be roped in.
This theory is sometimes called the Alpher-Bethe-Gamow theory, Gamow having added Hans Bethe's name to the paper so that this theory of cosmogenesis would be associated with three men whose names approximate the first three letters of the Greek alphabet.
George Gamow (b. March 4, 1904, Odessa, Russia [now in Ukraine]--d. Aug. 19, 1968, Boulder, Colo., U.S.). (Not an SF writer.)
31 posted on 01/20/2003 6:55:00 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
End-of-session placemarker.
32 posted on 01/20/2003 7:13:36 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Purity of essence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
From your link, Andrew MacRae

Ed and Ted's claims:

You can read the details of the claims being made for these fossils at: 'human bones in Carboniferous-age rocks". Basically, they can be summarized as three key claims:

By examining specimens, only the first two claims can be tested. Even if the specimens are fossil bone (#1), and are human (#2), Ted and Ed would still have to fully document the geologic context for these specimens (#3) before their claims would be fully substantiated. The importance of this can not be overemphasized -- fossil human bone without unambiguous, detailed, irrefutable documentation of the collection point of the same specimen (not just any specimen) is an absolute requirement. Without this, the isolated specimens are worthless for demonstrating the case even if they are fossil human bone.

Ted makes additional claims, but they implicitly depend upon the validity of the ones stated above.

I'm still waiting for the full geologic context for a lot of these claims, but I'm not holding my breath.

33 posted on 01/20/2003 7:27:06 PM PST by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Interesting question. Have there been any studies or attempts to duplicate in a laboratory the rate of mineralization of bone? One could perhaps vary the nature and concentration of different salts and vary the temperature and pressure using; say, cow bones. Any rate just a question to those who have knowledge of such things. I've asked some geologist acquaintances-(more practical geoligist types oil soils etc.)-and they did not know.
34 posted on 01/20/2003 7:29:59 PM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (Further, the statement assumed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
You know the story about how he got roped into putting his name on a paper along with Hans Bethe and Alpher, don't you?

Actually, it was Gamow's idea. Gamow and Alpher wrote a paper and Gamow, on an impish whim, put Bethe's name on it, with the affiliation "in absentia".

Many people at the time took the paper as a joke because of the names, but it wasn't: the paper was one of the most important of the 20th century, the first on Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

35 posted on 01/20/2003 7:43:16 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PaulJ
Paul, the photo you snapped is definitely semi-humanoid. It is a picture of a typical hard-headed, flint-hearted resident of New Hampshire.

We are familiar with them, because like the moose, for whom the better looking residents of New Hampshire (pro. "NAM-sha")are often mistaken on dark nights, they often wander into our state.

36 posted on 01/20/2003 7:45:51 PM PST by Kenny Bunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
Granules that were removed from the specimen resembling a human skull embedded in the boulder reveal Haversian canals, the telltale indicator of bone.

Wait a tick...don't skull bones form by intramembranous ossification??? That would mean there would be NO evidence of Haversian Canals in fossilized skulls...hmmm.

37 posted on 01/20/2003 7:46:40 PM PST by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Actually, it was Gamow's idea. Gamow and Alpher wrote a paper and Gamow, on an impish whim, put Bethe's name on it, with the affiliation "in absentia".

Many people at the time took the paper as a joke because of the names, but it wasn't: the paper was one of the most important of the 20th century, the first on Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

Very cool.

Thanks for filling in "the rest of the story!"

38 posted on 01/20/2003 8:06:26 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
I wish I was 1/1000th of the freeper that you are my friend. Good one.
39 posted on 01/20/2003 8:23:59 PM PST by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Piltdown_Woman
Wait a tick...don't skull bones form by intramembranous ossification???

Ha! Back in the Coal Age diploic spaces were commonly known as Haversian canals.

40 posted on 01/20/2003 8:29:30 PM PST by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Piltdown_Woman
Wait a tick...don't skull bones form by intramembranous ossification??? That would mean there would be NO evidence of Haversian Canals in fossilized skulls...hmmm.

Not necessarily. If the Earth, Jupiter, and Mars are in a perfect isoceles triangle...then all bets are off. The laws of physics no longer apply. lol:)

41 posted on 01/20/2003 8:36:15 PM PST by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
read later
42 posted on 01/20/2003 9:35:40 PM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Don't see any human skulls there. However, the thing in the picture with the dollar bills is clearly a giant rabbit, of the species Bugsbunnius giganteus, and it's not unlikely it is being pursued by an Elmerfuddius.

Well, you're partly right. Your theory breaks down, however, because you fail to account for the devolutionary effects of the Martian Time-Projector Gun:


43 posted on 01/20/2003 9:49:10 PM PST by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I was about to tell the author to stop polluting FR with this idiocy, but your response is much better.

The young-earth creationists are incompetents who have no clue how to think logically and scientifically.

Don't mix cranks like Conrad up with genuine scientists like William Demnski and Michael Behe, whose "Intelligent Design" movement deserves serious response. This thread, on the other hand, would be a waste of bandwidth except for the fun to be had from its wackiness.

44 posted on 01/21/2003 11:47:52 AM PST by VeritatisSplendor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: gnarledmaw
Been a blacksmith for thirty years, it's had it's good times.

I specialized in decorative wrought work, floral, animal and heavy forging.

Helped found ABANA, helped a lot of young smiths get started.
45 posted on 01/21/2003 6:56:27 PM PST by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson