What the Heck?! Thread (Closed)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Quickie

Colonel
Yes. That is why I said in post #1161 “…….finding an artifact that “could be” 140 million years old does raise some interesting questions regarding man’s existence.”

Also the process of petrification is dependent on the soil conditions (i.e. the amount of minerals) and the moisture. The average time is around 100 million years. Carbon dating has its faults and can be inaccurate. However the “handle” did begin to covert to coal.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


I’m not saying this is 140 million years old (that is just the age assigned by the carbon dating). It could be 1,400 years old, 14,000 years old of 140,000 years old. What is interesting is the metallurgical content of the hammer also raises questions as to the technology of the maker.

There is just a lot of circumstantial dates given by testing and metallurgical composition that raise many questions as to is origin and involvement in the history of man.

The wood of the handle looks like it was only beginning to turn to coal. Fossilized wood can be much much older (100 millions of years) than the most ancient coal (10,000 years?) one can find.
 

delft

Brigadier
BhdYPdL.png

Whenever you hear Standard and Poor's predictions think of this credit worthiness map.

Back to bottling my Grenache
Morocco is part of Europe? And Crimea is partly(!) part of Ukraine?
 

delft

Brigadier
The wood of the handle looks like it was only beginning to turn to coal. Fossilized wood can be much much older (100 millions of years) than the most ancient coal (10,000 years?) one can find.
The oldest coal is more than 500 million years old. The coal wiki says:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Coal is known from
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
strata, which predate land plants — this coal is presumed to have originated from residues of algae.
With references.
 

Quickie

Colonel
The oldest coal is more than 500 million years old. The coal wiki says:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


With references.

Anthracite coal is more like fossilized coal, and looks like a shiny black rock. The hammer handle is closer to the more common "wood like" coal or charcoal we often see. Btw, the limit of carbon dating is only about (if I remember correctly) 40,000 years.
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Anthracite coal is more like fossilized coal, and looks like a shiny black rock. The hammer handle is closer to the more common "wood like" coal or charcoal we often see. Btw, the limit of carbon dating is only about (if I remember correctly) 40,000 years.

The main problem I see is how to accurately date the artifact. Once that is established then one can at least begin to theorize
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top