Free Republic
Browse · Search
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
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last
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."


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]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

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
Topics · Post Article

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