Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: fav "out of place" artifact
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > News, Media & World Events > Conspiracies & Secret Societies
Sunofone
this seems to be one of the most perplexing-
***************************************
3-Billion Year Old Manufactured Spheroids?

At least 200 have been found, and extracted out of deep rock at the Wonderstone Silver Mine in South Africa, averaging 1-4 inches in dia. and composed of a nickel-steel alloy that doesn't occur naturally.

Some have a thin shell about a quarter inch thick, when broken open are filled with a strange spongy material that disintegrates into dust upon contact with air.
.

A complete mystery according to Roelf Marx curator of the South African Klerksdorp Museum, as the one he has on exibit rotates on its own, ,locked in a display case, free of outside vibrations.

The manufactured metallic spheroids have been
mined out of a layer of pyrophyllite rock and
geologically and by the various radio-isotope
dating techniques are shown as being 2.8 - 3 billion years old, long before man, as shown at the bottom of the graph.

Somebody or Something obviously has been around for a long time, before primivive humans.

They also baffled NASA, according to info from the Museum.

http://community-2.webtv.net/WF11/MysterySpheres/
http://community-2.webtv.net/WF11/3BillionYearOld/
user posted image
user posted image
Elfstone810
OMG! Horta eggs!

(Okay, do I get the Trekkie geek award or what? tongue.gif)
Q-La
Historical recording capsules of the previous dominant race, before they set sails for the stars. The atmospheric composition was different then.
vulturetotem
Yes Elf, you definitly get a trekkie award for that one!!

That is a cool find Sunofone! Hows come it aint on the U.M. top stories??

My fav anomoly is the trilobite fossil with a human footprint smashing it.

V.T.
bathory
Doesn't prove/disprove but still an interesting read

QUOTE
Jimison, S. (1982) "Scientists baffled by space spheres." Weekly World News, July 27.


not exactly the best reference out there

"Scientists baffled by space spheres; Batboy on the case"
Magikman
Nothing really mysterious about them at all, they've just been given an air of unrealistic mysteriousness by pseudo-scientists. This was a topic of discussion years ago, click on the link I provide for a credible explanation which refutes the basic claim.

THREAD HERE

MM
Sunofone
good link bathory-i see...natural spheres grooved after being discovered-
Magikman
Moved your post to the correct thread, Sunofone.

Sorry, bathory, didn't notice that your link was the same I used in the earlier thread. blush.gif
Sunofone
this one is interesting as seems credible enough but id like to hear the skeptics version of this artifact
************************************************
user posted image
A similar round, clean, smooth hole without radial cracks was found in the skull of a "Neanderthal" man found in the early 1920's in Rhodesia. The man supposedly died over 40,000 years ago.

The skull is currently at the British Museum. The skull was found more than fifty feet below ground level. In addition to the hole consistent only with that made by a bullet, the other side of the skull was blown out from the inside!
koenig212003

I've never heard anything about this skull and would definitely have to see the other "blown out" side first. However, Neanderthals never lived in Rhodesia, which is South-Central Africa. They only lived in Europe and Western Asia so that immediately puts this on shaky ground. The website from which you've gotten your information is rife with pseudo-science and riddled with inaccuracies. Not to mention clearly biased, they state "We have a biblical viewpoint on the world.." You shouldn't believe everything you read. I've said it before and I'm sure I'll have to say it again and again, you can't rely on information coming from websites because there is simply no way to verify its authenticity and accuracy.
Sunofone
any brits out there that have seen this one in person?
*****************************************************
The London Artifact
user posted image
From the Creation Evidence Museum. Follow the link to learn more. This is a hammer made from an alloy of iron which is very modern in technology, which is encased in "100 million" year old rock (according to geologists) which has formed around it.

You know the drill: fake; lousy geological aging techniques; or lousy evolutionary timeframes? I say perhaps a pre-flood relic given that the technology is modern yet it is encased in rock at least a couple of thousand years old.

"This ancient tool has a simple form, similar to the type of hammer that is still common in Germany today. The handle now is a very hard petrified crystal with an intact structure. It was possible to ascertain that the interior of the handle had partly turned into porous coal.

There is no way to scientifically explain this combination of carbonization and petrification. I have not heard of a similar piece, found anywhere in the world. Two very different processes must have occurred simultaneously or in short succession. Crystal petrifaction requires an ecosphere of running water whereas for the development of porous coal, one could, for example, assume that fire was the necessary agent. Water and fire, it goes without saying, are two very different and mutually exclusive elements.

The analysis of the subsiding of the Flood, to be undertaken at a later point in this book, will explain what now looks like a contradiction. The outer layers of the hammer handle reminded me of the petrified stumps and piles of wood I had seen earlier at the "Petrified Forest National Park" in Arizona, on a visit in 1988.

The exhibits there, pieces of the cut up piles of wood, had completely petrified and displayed a homogenous crystal structure. I do not know of one piece discovered in that park to contain a coal interior comparable to that of the fossil hammer. The age of the trees there is officially estimated at between 100 and 200 million years.

Wood petrifies when it is buried in silt deposited by flooding rivers or seas and silicates, such as are found in volcanic ash, dissolve and impregnate it. These substances replace the hydrogen and oxygen portions in the wood and begin the petrifaction process by silicification. This may produce very solid opal or quartz minerals. The final product is approximately 5 times as heavy as common pine wood.

This short description of the hammer handle should make it obvious that the fossil hammer must be authentic and very ancient. In spite of all our modern technical abilities, it has never been possible to produce petrified wood with porous coal inside.

It therefore is out of the question that such a hammer could be a hoax. I must clearly emphasize this point, as most artifacts which contradict the accepted view of the world we are accustomed to, are accused of being forgeries. Our traditional

schools of thought, however, are at a loss to explain this hammer.

Petrified wood, and therefore this ancient tool, is supposed to be at least 140 million years old. Official scientific authorities, however, say that humans capable of manufacturing high quality tools have only existed for a few recent millenia. Something concerning these datings and the enormous time intervals of the geological era must be erroneous.

Is humanity really many millions of years old or is it a young species? Did the processes of rock formation take place more recently than is believed?

Examination of the hammer.

Before I look into these questions, I would like to give a more detailed description of the hammerhead's characteristics in order to make the full extent of the mystery clear.

Detailed research was carried out independently of one another by two different institutes. John Mackay, Director of Australia's "Creation Science Foundation", analyzed the hammer thoroughly during his visit to the United States.

A number of Australian metallurgists, as well as those working at the respected metallurgic Institute "Batelle Memorial Laboratory" in Columbus, Ohio (USA), took part in these analyses.

Sophisticated electron microscopes served to examine the structure and composition of the steel the hammerhead was made of.

The results of the examinations were as mysterious as they were bewildering. The hammerhead, chemically speaking, consisted of 96.6 % iron, 2.6 % chlorine, and 0.74 sulphur. Incredibly, this material is almost entirely solid iron!

Other additives or impurities were not detectable. Non-destructive testing methods of steel quality comprise x-ray examination, magnetic testing as well as ultrasonic detection. X-rays showed no evidence of inclusions or irregularities in the hammerhead steel. This means, it was tempered and hardened in some way.

In general, chemically genuine and unworked steel is rather soft. The even structure determined, however, suggests that this hard steel that was manufactured by some sophisticated technology. The results of the examination are as sensational as they are unbelievable. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of steel manufacturing knows that every modern steel-making process, inevitably leads to carbon or silicon impurities! I emphasize the word inevitably. Steel production without these impurities is simply unthinkable!
user posted image
No other known ingredients used for refinement such as copper, titanium, manganese, cobalt, or molybdenum, vanadium, wolfram or nickel could be traced. We employ these and other elements in steel manufacturing to achieve different properties needed for different fields of application.

The high quantity of the chlorine in the fossil hammerhead is remarkable, as well. Chlorine plays no part in modern steel manufacturing. It is not used at all today, so it is impossible to produce the high steel quality of the type found here by today's manufacturing methods.

This leads us to the question; who manufactured this hammer and when? Based on the standpoint of accepted research and science, it is impossible for this hammer to exist, much less to have ever been manufactured. For the reasons given, it is thus out of the question that we are dealing with a "hoax" hammerhead.

Much the same has been shown concerning the hammer handle. Two forgery-proof materials for which we have no scientific explanation, combined in one tool.

This is extraordinary evidence of a very different history of earth and humankind! If our school teachings are correct, there is no other conclusion than that an alien visiting earth must have lost the hammer.
bathory
Heres a nice article regarding the hammer:)
Sunofone
QUOTE(bathory @ Feb 25 2005, 06:09 AM)
Heres a nice article regarding the hammer:)
[right][snapback]501138[/snapback][/right]

good link but it seems slightly inconclusive although it does raise some good questions-id like to see if there is an updated analysis-could it be evidence of an ancient recipe for concrete?
Stellar
QUOTE
could it be evidence of an ancient recipe for concrete?


Actually, I heard long long ago, that concrete was actually invented way before it is acknowledged. I dont remember if it was in Egypt or Greece or where but I remember hearing about it when I was young. I'll check for it later.
Hotoke
From the Creation Evidence Museum rolleyes.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.