Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 42 of 42
Like Tree77Likes

Thread: "Tools"

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #31
    Apr 2008
    Southern Ohio
    5135 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Banner Finds (4)
    I see the faces, I just know they aren't man made.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    "Welcome back my friends, to the show that never ends."

  2. #32
    Oct 2011
    230 times
    Relic Hunting
    So why was a member banned for his comments on this thread? The only one that appears political or disparaging is the one about letting someone drown and commies.
    I'm confused, only certain people or types of people are allowed to make comment or have opinions?

    The point of the original post was presented to create comment and argument about something we can't readily prove but presented as fact nonetheless. Then it just went off the tracks and became an, I found it/ can pick it up/ fits in my hand/ found on a known site with lots of other artifacts/ look at the marvelous work put into this face/bison/bird/squirrel/cloud on this rock. All responses were respectable, reasonable and yet somebody gets banned?
    Last edited by justonemore; Mar 14, 2019 at 05:35 PM.

  3. #33
    Sep 2010
    305 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Fred250 View Post
    How many people with the same “sickness” does it take before you start to have doubt.. Only been here a short time compared to most and I’ve seen plenty. In America we don’t let the individual drown to save the masses, that’s a commie thing. The old ways aren’t going to work in the Information Age.
    What a bunch of garbage.

  4. #34
    Jan 2011
    674 times
    I remember when I started collecting many years ago I would show our friends a piece and they knew it wasn't an artifact they would respond by saying, "it can be anything you want it to be" which was a very polite way of saying that it was a "leave a right" so I would toss it. There are folks on here that really know their stuff and I respect their opinions greatly.

  5. #35
    Apr 2009
    Fisher F70
    1300 times
    Uniface states;
    "The point isn't that there were the Neanderthals here who made these; it's that the things they left for us to find were, and no doubt about it, tools. That being the case, the argument that similarly unsophisticated items found here could not have been tools collapses. ."

    In my view, Toby Morrow stated it well in the publication "Stone tools of Minnesota". This publication focuses on stone tools almost exclusively, but also discusses chipped tools.

    Toby writes:
    Among the most common “artifacts” shown to archaeologists are oddly shaped rocks that are most remarkable to their owners because they “fit perfectly in your hand.” Typically, these rocks have no obvious modification from flaking, pecking, or grinding, they show no wear resulting from use, and, even more condemningly, they usually seem to have little or no actual functional capacity–just what was it that people were supposed to be doing with this so-elegantly-designed tool? The reader may recall reading earlier in this book that many stone tools were set in handles, meaning fitting in one’s hand is a weak argument for a rock being a tool.

    To summarize, the human hand is such a remarkably flexible and adaptive structure that it is probably more difficult to find a cobble that will not fit in the hand.

    Thats my emphasis on the last sentence.

    Clearly by the discussions here, virtually everyone has an opinion on stones where no apparent alteration has been done by early man, yet some claim them to be tools.

  6. #36
    Jun 2009
    Central Pennsylvania
    73 times
    Notice something, Dog. She (wisely) avoids the question of whether or not they could have been tools. What she focuses on is the absence of diagnostic evidence that they were. This is par for the course in a culture that assumes that any question of that sort can be settled by playing "Prove it."

    What's overlooked in that is that there were probably hundreds of specific jobs people with that technology had to do that we honestly don't have much of a clue about. You can see the same problem with 18th & 19th century farm tools offered by antique stores in New England. It takes a real old tools expert to identify some of these. Once that's done, it's obvious. But before that, they leave people scratching their heads. And those are purposely shaped metal (mostly iron) implements. Back that up hundreds of years further to include stones pretty obviously carried in from somewhere else because they were ideal shapes and sizes (sometimes materials) for some task or other we can't imagine and you have a handle on the real issue. Which isn't "prove it" but "what did they have in mind for this when they picked it up and carried it back to where they were living ?"

    Even with knapped chert tools, if I recall, Jacques Bordes identified something like 63 specific tool forms made in the Mousterian era. There are trays in museums full of all of these, each type as similar to each other as hafted points are to us. Yet people in this country, unfamiliar with them, deny that they even could have been tools at all, and get upset of you disagree with them. What they're really doing is operating on the assumption that "The truth is whatever I happen to be thinking at the moment." They even argue themselves into being firmly convinced that, if there were anything more to know about it, they'd know it already. And since they don't, they know everything there is.

    But there's always something more to know. That's why convictions change.

    I think a good counter-question to the "prove it" mentality that dismisses finds that are just stones would be, "OK. So why did they carry this x miles from where it occurs naturally all the way back to where they were living" ?

    And when the answer to that is "We don't really know," the follow up would be, "Why not just leave it at that, then" ?

  7. #37

    Jun 2014
    1846 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    This ongoing discussion on rocks is why I try to post tools with obvious wear and shape . I have found thousands of stones on camps that were carried in I could build A house with them . But when I examine the artifact if it doesn't have the shape and wear that I recognize as an artifact I leave it . Here's a example of a hammer stone that has finger grooves pecked and ground into the tool .
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	P9081229.JPG 
Views:	17 
Size:	527.7 KB 
ID:	1691153   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	P9081225.JPG 
Views:	12 
Size:	529.2 KB 
ID:	1691152   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	P9081227.JPG 
Views:	9 
Size:	583.3 KB 
ID:	1691151  
    arrow86, Jeff H and Jon Stewart like this.

  8. #38
    Mar 2019
    west virginia
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Quote Originally Posted by The Grim Reaper View Post
    These are all Uniface Tools from one site. These are everywhere if you take the time to pick them up and keep them. I actually find these Tools in piles of Flint other hunters throw down.

    All of these have an edge worked on them somewhere and some of them have very fine flaking along the edges.

    Also, for those that see faces you'll have a couple surprises in there. lol
    i see some prismatic blades in there, do you think they are hopewell or paleo?... i'm envious of ohio flints, most from my area is quartzite and kanawha black... i have a few quartzite prismatics... is the last pic a paleo end scraper with graver?
    Last edited by Timberwolf81470; Mar 16, 2019 at 09:02 AM.

  9. #39

    Jun 2018
    107 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Uniface, I apologize for ruining your thread, I can’t help myself sometimes. Please continue to share your knowledge and I will stay out of your posts.

  10. #40
    Jun 2009
    Central Pennsylvania
    73 times
    You didn't wreck anything, Fred.

    Full speed ahead !

  11. #41

    Jun 2018
    107 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Thanks, been feeling bad about it, stayed away as long as I could stand to settle down. I am hooked on this stuff bad though.

  12. #42
    Jun 2009
    Central Pennsylvania
    73 times
    No patient would ever accept any such thing, but nowadays many will settle for the opinion of anyone except people actually trained for decades in just the subject they are interested in. Perish the thought, lol. Add to that a transition to a so-called Post Truth landscape, and they'll be no point in learning anything at all. Whatever you want to believe will be true to you, and if people with greater knowledge disagree, well they can always pound salt, lol.
    Without wishing to imply even remote disrespect for you or for your considerable body of knowledge, when I read this, the first thing that comes to mind is, "He doesn't seem to realize that this particular shoe is firmly on the other foot."

    In Science, new evidence compels revising previous beliefs. In the fraud that passes for it, people start with beliefs and cherry pick data to support them (or appear to), leaving out anything contradictory or "debunking" it on some pretext.

    This is the reason why informed, intelligent people have come to distrust the pronouncements of the "experts" who, in case after case, are found to be funded by, and answerable to, vested interests. The list is a long one, beginning with economics and extending to the efficacy and safety of vaccines, "global warming," food additive safety (etc.) and finishing up with archaeology north of the Rio Grande since its beginning.

    Like any other cult of belief, it imposes orthodoxy on everyone whose income and futures it controls. One case in point was the rabid certainty of all right-thinking American archaeologists that no acceptable evidence existed that disproved the contention that Clovis was "first." This continued, getting more and more shrill, until the Paleoamerican Odyssey conference in 2013 -- after which the official version suddenly became that evidence that Clovis was NOT first had been obvious for twenty years.

    A few links for anyone interested in currently "debunked" (heretical) archaeological discoveries,

    Lake Manix Acheulean tools | Patagonian monsters

    Calico Early Man Site

    And for the grand prize, look up Hueyatlaco, which even wikipedia is compelled to admit is a slam dunk.

    Bear in mind that all of these have been dismissed as "just rocks," "geofacts," products of natural, non-human processes &c. Not very convincingly IMO, but to each his own, I guess.
    Fred250 likes this.


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Remove Ads

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: Mar 26, 2015, 10:27 PM
  2. Cant access "NOTIFICATIONS" or "THREAD TOOLS"
    By Rick (Nova Scotia) in forum HELP!
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 04, 2012, 04:03 PM
  3. Slim pickins today...silver "Roosie", "Buff", "wheaties" and "Yikes"!
    By lorraine in forum Beach and Shallow Water
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Mar 15, 2011, 03:50 PM
  4. Handmade "tools" from early mining camp
    By silverswede in forum What Is It?
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Apr 04, 2010, 10:00 AM
  5. Recs on tools for digging in "black gumbo"?
    By bellapoison in forum Texas
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 04, 2009, 07:45 PM

Tags for this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0