Skip to comments.Man as old as Coal? (Why are the test results dismissed without reason?)
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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
Humans are descended from Rabbits!!!
Rabbits with currency, no less!
Dont laugh. Have you heard how much a good blacksmith can make?
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.
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.
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."
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?
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.
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.
If they find one, the Dems will surely run him for something.