The Minecraft and stone hand fit reference were obviously meant to be facetious. If that was not how it came across and I need to account for the lowest common denominator, then I offer you my most sincere apologies.
So your supporting argument is that a stone tool cannot be crudely produced so it can not be a tool? Think about your first attempt at anything. Was the product of that effort equal to the same task after gaining years of experience? Are ALL stone tools created equally across all peoples and all timeframes?
Regarding your other view, it does not matter if this stone tool does not meet your knowledge of tool classifications for North American stone tools created in the last 10,000+ years.
Craftmanship and misclassification does not discount evidence of the stones obvious hand shaping.
I sure hope your "NA tool kit" reference is not an attack on my person. I am going to assume it's not, and whish you a good day.
Good day,
Ken...
Ken, there is nothing in the pictures to suggest it has ever been touched by ancient man, a rock an Indian picked up and threw at a bird to kill it for food would be an artifact, but with out proof it was used or touched it can't be called or labeled an artifact. There is over 2100 years of members collecting experience here, members are trying to help you. We often get new collectors who will argue their rocks are artifact because of how they fit their hand or the shape mother nature made them, they are still just rocks or geofacts.
People can either collect rocks that have no signs of ever being touched by man or collect artifacts, those you have shown so far are simply rocks with natural weathering.
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Last edited: