large, hafted knocker of sorts

[nunyabiz111]

a little more upstream than the usual into waters relatively unaffected by the spring tillage:

 

[Tony in SC]

Wow that is serious. Maybe we should make knocker a new class?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Sorry, not seeing it at all.

 

[Up-North]

Knockers are even better...lol...

 

[Garscale]

I like big knockers. Big natural knockers are fun but probably not altered by man.

 

[Up-North]

I like big knockers. Big natural knockers are fun but probably not altered by man.

Me as well huge fan of big knockers

 

[MAMucker]

Canoe anchor. Is it pecked out?

 

[nunyabiz111]

https://unbscholar.lib.unb.ca/islandora/object/unbscholar:6904/datastream/PDF/download/citation.pdf

specimen 24; page 170 & more relative examples further down

 

[antmike915]

Looks natural, mother nature made knockers

 

[Charl]

The inside of the notches is not shown. And might not show vestigial pecking if it’s water worn enough. My question is how do we know that this is not a water worn notched weight? How can we be absolutely sure it is not? After all, notched weights came in all sizes. I’ve seen them up to ~80 pounds, probable anchors when that large. But, I see a rock with opposing notches, I check it out. Notched weights are pretty common....

30 pounds:

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

With out some kind of signs of an artifact being worked or used then it is just a guess, a maybe, and our forum is not for "may be " an artifact.

 

[Garscale]

With out some kind of signs of an artifact being worked or used then it is just a guess, a maybe, and our forum is not for "may be " an artifact.

Maybe we need a big knocker forum. No need to specify whether altered by man then..

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

I don't see either a fossil or an artifact. Just weathered rock.

But you sure could knock with it.

 

[Charl]

With out some kind of signs of an artifact being worked or used then it is just a guess, a maybe, and our forum is not for "may be " an artifact.

I usually judge notched weights found on the water by examining the interior of the notches, since that is generally the only place that shows work on a notched weight in the first place. I’ve seen maybe artifacts on here all the time. And sometimes better photos have turned a maybe into an artifact. I only pointed out that the view one needs to judge a notched weight was not included. Not saying it is not “just a rock”, as it’s often put, just pointing out artifact collectors that are used to notched weights look at the interior surface of the notches on water worn examples.

Anyway, I’ve collected fossils a longer time than artifacts. Anyone know why this is considered a fossil?

 

[islamoradamark]

I like seeing big knockers

 

[Garscale]

I usually judge notched weights found on the water by examining the interior of the notches, since that is generally the only place that shows work on a notched weight in the first place. I’ve seen maybe artifacts on here all the time. And sometimes better photos have turned a maybe into an artifact. I only pointed out that the view one needs to judge a notched weight was not included. Not saying it is not “just a rock”, as it’s often put, just pointing out artifact collectors that are used to notched weights look at the interior surface of the notches on water worn examples.

Anyway, I’ve collected fossils a longer time than artifacts. Anyone know why this is considered a fossil?

I get your point. I dig east tx sites in accumulated sand with no natural stone. Literally every stone was brought there by natives. Many are totally unaltered. Maybe it was a cooking stone or the rock Pocahontas threw at a squirrel. I don't know. I do know that if I posted these every day for 5 years folks would really get weary of examining them for a human ding. My point? MOST ARTIFACTS THAT ARE IN ANY WAY COLLECTABLE, ARE OBVIOUS.