Lets try and avoid the lock?

[Indiana_acklac]

So, guys, I'm a newb. I'll be the first to admit.

That said, I'm a smart newb, I'm an educated newb. I'm a newb that does his homework, and does his homework but well.

My other thread? My apologies for coming off like a cockwallet. Yeah, poor taste on my part. (http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/n...se-just-random-rocks-they-something-more.html)

That said: I've done my research, I've done my homework, and I've gained the respect of highly educated individual's in the process. I've gained that respect by engaging in the following. (Be forewarned: I will thoroughly challenge explanations that lack logic or evidence - or worse: both)

If you are going to state that something is "natural" I expect an explanation as to how nature was able to form it along with a comparison to other like-items.

If an item looks like an axe head, has a (crude) blade like an axe head, has a worn spot in the rear where an axe shaft would rest, and last but not least, has inexplicable diagonal holes on either side, that are pre-bored, and meet at a smaller circumference in the center: How do you argue it's not an axe head? How do you argue it is not man-made?

I don't care (and shouldn't care) how much research you've done. How many artifacts you've collected. We're talking logic here. We are constantly, every day, finding out new information in regards to our ancestors. How some of you have lost sight of that fact is beyond me.

Logically speaking: How is this not an axe head? How was this piece naturally formed?

And before the NA guys chime in with their NA knowledge: What I'm finding, and where I'm finding it, doesn't indicate NA.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[BABALONGOGGLES]

I haven't seen your other post, but was that piece of wood found in close proximity to this "axe-head," (the quotes aren't dismissive, I just can't say that it's absolutely an axe-head at this point) and, are the scratches around the holes (4th picture) new, or did you find it in that state?

 

[Indiana_acklac]

I haven't seen your other post, but was that piece of wood found in close proximity to this "axe-head," (the quotes aren't dismissive, I just can't say that it's absolutely an axe-head at this point) and, are the scratches around the holes new, or did you find it in that state?

Good question.

The piece of wood was found near the item in question. I do not believe the two are related?

But the wood is most likely very old?

Everything pictured is as-found (including the scratches).

 

[GopherDaGold]

They are naturally formed rocks. I will not cater to your demand for an explanation on why they are rocks.
Most of us have seen your ilk before and many have learned to not engage with those who refuse to see the forest for the trees. It does absolutely no good.
I encourage you to keep on keeping on in your search for real, legitimate artifacts. If that should ever happen, I'll be the first to congratulate you.
Until then I will only return to this thread for it's entertainment value; to read only and not respond.
Blue in the face is not a good look for me. It clashes with my rosacia.

 

[Indiana_acklac]

They are naturally formed rocks. I will not cater to your demand for an explanation on why they are rocks.
Most of us have seen your ilk before and many have learned to not engage with those who refuse to see the forest for the trees. It does absolutely no good.
I encourage you to keep on keeping on in your search for real, legitimate artifacts. If that should ever happen, I'll be the first to congratulate you.
Until then I will only return to this thread for it's entertainment value; to read only and not respond.
Blue in the face is not a good look for me. It clashes with my rosacia.

So.

Nature somehow created those holes.

How so?

 

[Indiana_acklac]

And it's no demand: rather a challenge.

 

[DizzyDigger]

And it's no demand: rather a challenge.

Respectfully, for what purpose..to what end?

I don't care (and shouldn't care) how much research you've done. How many artifacts
you've collected. We're talking logic here. We are constantly, every day, finding out new
information in regards to our ancestors. How some of you have lost sight of that fact
is beyond me.

I mean, honestly, if you believe they are what you declare them
to be, then what does it matter what someone else thinks?

There are, indeed, many people here who really know their poop
about rocks. That said, why should they take their time to
type up replies if all you want to do is debate their opinions?

I don't believe they want to debate with you; you asked for their
opinions, and got 'em. As for myself, I don't know diddly about rocks,
but I'd have no worries about accepting the opinions of most of the
rockhounds on the forum.

 

[Indiana_acklac]

Respectfully, for what purpose..to what end?

I mean, honestly, if you believe they are what you declare them
to be, then what does it matter what someone else thinks?

There are, indeed, many people here who really know their poop
about rocks. That said, why should they take their time to
type up replies if all you want to do is debate their opinions?

I don't believe they want to debate with you; you asked for their
opinions, and got 'em. As for myself, I don't know diddly about rocks,
but I'd have no worries about accepting the opinions of most of the
rockhounds on the forum.

I don't declare them to be anything. I have no idea.

I walked into an Institution with my arguments. And walked out with thier respect.

That's the way it should be.

We don't know what we don't know about the past! We're learning every day!

Our best bet is to rely on Logic!

 

[Toecutter]

Anything is possible in make believe land..

 

[Indiana_acklac]

Anything is possible in make believe land..

I'm in tears, good lord why can't I find an appropriate emoji!

 

[GopherDaGold]

I'm in tears, good lord why can't I find an appropriate emoji!

You simply have to know what you're looking for. They're out there, hidden amongst the natural emojis.

 

[Indiana_acklac]

You simply have to know what you're looking for. They're out there, hidden amongst the natural emojis.

We know nothing about the past.

Verified speculation is what we rely on.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Rocks posted and the holes in them are natural, openings left behind when minerals dissolve or when dead organisms decay. The material that subsequently fills a mold is a cast over time it falls out and holes are left. .

 

[Indiana_acklac]

Rocks posted and the holes in them are natural, openings left behind when minerals dissolve or when dead organisms decay. The material that subsequently fills a mold is a cast over time it falls out and holes are left. .

But dude, diagonally-bored holes, holes that meet in the center at a smaller circumference?

The odds man, the odds!

(Not to mention all the other indications)

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

It is obvious your going to continue to argue with members who are trying to help you. You told me you have been collecting for 3 weeks and are arguing with members who have decades of experience, there is over a thousand years of experience and knowledge here Instead of arguing, listen and learn.

 

[DizzyDigger]

....... there is over a thousand years of experience and knowledge here
Instead of arguing, listen and learn.

Up here in the Northwest backwoods we call that "Sound Wisdom"..

 

[Georgivs]

Here's an explanation for how holes form in different types of rocks. https://www.thoughtco.com/holes-in-rocks-1440784

Your specimen looks natural to me. Here is why I think that.

1. irregular shape
2. No signs of working (chipping or grinding)
3. If it was being used as a tool those holes would compromise its integrity.
4. The holes have no apparent purpose. (why would someone go to the trouble of putting holes in seemingly random places?)

Just my opinion. I've found tons of "good fake" artifacts. Around where I live there are tons of "net weights" or "anchors" in the rivers, but they are just the result of natural weathering.

 

[Indiana_acklac]

Here's an explanation for how holes form in different types of rocks. https://www.thoughtco.com/holes-in-rocks-1440784

Your specimen looks natural to me. Here is why I think that.

1. irregular shape
2. No signs of working (chipping or grinding)
3. If it was being used as a tool those holes would compromise its integrity.
4. The holes have no apparent purpose. (why would someone go to the trouble of putting holes in seemingly random places?)

Just my opinion. I've found tons of "good fake" artifacts. Around where I live there are tons of "net weights" or "anchors" in the rivers, but they are just the result of natural weathering.

Again, I'll argue the dually-tapered diagonal nature of the holes.

I'll win everytime, lol.

 

[Indiana_acklac]

It is obvious your going to continue to argue with members who are trying to help you. You told me you have been collecting for 3 weeks and are arguing with members who have decades of experience, there is over a thousand years of experience and knowledge here Instead of arguing, listen and learn.

Help should equal "Yes, I've seen this before, please see such and such document and such and such picture"

I don't quite consider "I know what I'm doing, that isn't an artifact" comments to be helpful. I didn't catch that at an Institution, I shouldn't catch it here?

 

[Indiana_acklac]

And before everyone gets all pissy and accuses me of being a troll: What if I actually found something?