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.
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.
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
  
 
 
|
