Please help ID these artifacts??

[GypsyLynn]

A friend took me to his creek and has been teaching me to recognize artifacts. Please, anyone can help identify these finds?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Huzzah!]

You're on the right scent. The last nine photos definitely show signs of being worked--but the others are natural.

 

[Older The Better]

The last one certainly looks worked around the edges but it?s a shape I wouldn?t really expect for an artifact, seems bulky for any quick cutter or scraper. Also a bit strange they didn?t try to drive any flakes they just nibbled the edges? still I think that is a lot of removals to be caused by a natural process.

 

[GypsyLynn]

Ok, but I also have these

 

[GypsyLynn]

There's several small pieces also, I'll make a new thread for those

 

[MAMucker]

Fossils, eroded rock, fractured soft river rock, creek wash and creek chattered stone, possible debitage chuncks and a couple possible tools. The big arrowhead shaped rock is not an artifact, but it?s cool.
I agree with Older the Better. The last one could be a Backed Knife. Photos of the opposite side showing edge work will help.
Just my observations.

 

[uniface]

1) The most widely unrecognized artifact class is probably flake cores.

2) If anyone is interested enough to get deeper into it than "Those don't look like anything I recognize as atifacts, so they can only be just rocks," this is an excellent overview:

(Link deleted for rule violation, posting links to another forum.)

(Figure stones are a separate topic).

Executive summary of the official dogma:

1) This cannot be because it cannot be. (If there were people back then, our whole "understanding" of the past would be laughably wrong. And the dogma of "evolution" with it).

2) Repeating this for 100 years has established it as an un-challengeable truth ("Eat poop -- 50 million flies can't be wrong !")

FWIW

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Sorry, I personally can not put any credibility in a website pushing portable art as genuine artifacts.

This is listed as Bear under portable art. ??



Also you can not post links to other artifact forums either, link was deleted.

 

[Garscale]

Most of the the items posed are just rocks however several have some flaking so by definition artifacts. T hff ats the kind of scatter you see indicating a site that m.j ay produced collectable artifacts. Keep looking.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Last pictures, look at the flakes, they look more like chips from tumbling that knapping, look at the color of flakes, they look fresh like they were chipped last week, no patina there, no stains like the rest of the rock.

 

[Relicgrubber]

I'm not seeing any artifacts in any of those pictures imo. The chipping on the edges is just chatter from bouncing around in a creek bottom imo.

Keep looking and never give up!

 

[uniface]

Sorry, I personally can not put any credibility in a website pushing portable art as genuine artifacts.

This is listed as Bear under portable art. ??

Also you can not post links to other artifact forums either, link was deleted.

1) Your portable art belief puts you at odds with mainstream European archaeology. Just so you know.

2) The link you deleted was NOT to another artifact site. It was to an individual blog analyzing the controversy over eoliths. Just so you know.

For anyone interested, google "eoliths" at "blogspot." Since this is not a link, it is not to a collector site, and since you deleted it without due diligence, I expect it will remain accessible. Otherwise you'll be censoring formation that is both relevant and valuable.

 

[Relicgrubber]

"eoliths" at "blogspot." has a forum listed and according to the site they consider them artifacts.

Just so you know...

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

"Eolith" is generally used to describe a non-man-altered object. Natural concussion and environmental wear.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

1) Your portable art belief puts you at odds with mainstream European archaeology. Just so you know.

2) The link you deleted was NOT to another artifact site. It was to an individual blog analyzing the controversy over eoliths. Just so you know.

For anyone interested, google "eoliths" at "blogspot." Since this is not a link, it is not to a collector site, and since you deleted it without due diligence, I expect it will remain accessible. Otherwise you'll be censoring formation that is both relevant and valuable.

By the way, you did not do YOUR "due diligence". Go to the website you posted then main menu there is "eoliths forum" titled "eoliths forum", forum with replies, you can not post a link to any website that has forums that have anything to do with forum topics found here.

You want portable art included in an artifact forum post there, go to European artifact fourm or start your own Indian artifact forum, portable art does not belong here.

Site rules:

You may not.... Post links to competing forums in regards to Treasure Hunting.

 

[islamoradamark]

Welcome to Treasurenet

 

[uniface]

Anyone wishing to read the article I tried to post, PM me for the URL. It is, in my opinion, well worth reading and thinking through. It turns out that what I supplied isn't sufficient to access it.

 

[Buckleberry]

If this is about educating ourselves and opening our eyes then here's some more information that people unfamiliar with this topic should Google:

Pareidolia (/ˌp?riˈdoʊliə/,[SUP][1][/SUP] US also /ˌp?raɪˈ-/[SUP][2][/SUP]) is the tendency for perception to impose a meaningful interpretation on a nebulous stimulus, usually visual, so that one sees an object, pattern or meaning where there is none

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

If this is about educating ourselves and opening our eyes then here's some more information that people unfamiliar with this topic should Google:

Pareidolia (/ˌp?riˈdoʊliə/,[SUP][1][/SUP] US also /ˌp?raɪˈ-/[SUP][2][/SUP]) is the tendency for perception to impose a meaningful interpretation on a nebulous stimulus, usually visual, so that one sees an object, pattern or meaning where there is none

Pareidolia is one of the biggest problems for new artifact hunters.

 

[uniface]

"eoliths" at "blogspot." has a forum listed and according to the site they consider them artifacts.

Just so you know...

The one-size-fits-all format, for convenience, is that of a forum. In practice, however, it is pretty much entirely a blog. Which has nothing to do with treasure hunting.