✅ SOLVED Random patterns on an old rock or markings?

[deldave]

This size rock is way out of place in our farm fields here in Delaware. It was covered with mud when I picked it up but I was curious so I brought it home. I have never seen this many marks on a field stone before and it fits my hand very well. As a novice I would appreciate all thoughts or opinion. Thanks ,deldave

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Charl]

deldave, despite some of the needless detours that have occurred in your thread, it's a good bet that most of the folks who recognize your rock shows plow scars are folks who have lots of experience hunting for artifacts in cultivated fields. I know that's why I went with plow scars, and others have opined out of an abundance of such experience as well. Not sure why you described the rock as way out of place in your farm fields, unless perhaps you farm relatively rock free soil? At any rate, disregarding the one poster who seems to be confused, the consensus expressed is your best bet.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Greg Lafla]

If I knew as much arrowheads as you I'd jab one through my eyeball

 

[quito]

Good news,
You do,
We don’t know much

Proceed!

 

[quito]

Sorry duplicate

 

[Greg Lafla]

The only way the fervent denials and lack of any intrigue or inquiry by supposed men of science makes any sense is in this context. Some highly intelligent and forward thinking individuals realized that if stuff like I have posted is deemed artifact, the market is instantly flooded and devalues the entire INDUSTRY. And just like on here when grim voices his opinion it is so, and you better have real"stones" to dissent.

 

[Greg Lafla]

I sent some pics to a local professor, and he said though he saw vague form I lacked a cultural reference and the burden of proof was on the proposer. That is a paraphrase but the real response. I wrote back my cultural reference was neanderthal and I was ready to propose. How do you think that went?

 

[Greg Lafla]

Grim only used your name in example of someone respected, no personal attacks intended or offense taken even if intended

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Okay, calling a member a troll or implying a member is a troll or trolling violates our rules, please post by our rules.

 

[unclemac]

Okay, calling a member a troll or implying a member is a troll or trolling violates our rules, please post by our rules.

yeah but...neanderthal?...really

 

[Greg Lafla]

yeah but...neanderthal?...really

If you did some simple reading and research on the subject you can see the major shifts happening in the understanding of how advanced ancient humans were and that there is a claimed neanderthal kill site dated to 130,000 BP in San Diego. No human bones found just sign of activity upon and strange rocks near mammoth bones

 

[unclemac]

no...no aliens or bigfoot (feets?) either...no loch ness monster and Jesus did not ride a dinosaur. anyone can claim anything, just because you read it on the internet doesn't make it true.

 

[Greg Lafla]

Yeah made all that up got me

 

[Charl]

If you did some simple reading and research on the subject you can see the major shifts happening in the understanding of how advanced ancient humans were and that there is a claimed neanderthal kill site dated to 130,000 BP in San Diego. No human bones found just sign of activity upon and strange rocks near mammoth bones

I have met and personally know the lead authors of the Cerutti Mastadon site. You are mistaking the findings entirely. What is possible is the following: if the site does reflect human activity, there were no less then 5 distinct species of the genus Homo in existence 130,000 years ago. Therefore, we cannot be certain which species of human was present at that site, if indeed the site does in fact demonstrate the presence of human beings. It could be Homo sapiens, or it could be Neanderthals, or Denisovans, etc. It was an exciting find, but more sites of the same age, with actual identifiable stone tools, something not present at the Cerutti site, would need to be found to advance the case that humans were present in the Americas that long ago. You are mistaken in saying the site is claimed to be Neanderthal. No such claim was ever made by the authors of that study. Try getting your facts straight.....

 

[Greg Lafla]

Certainly understand I am using Neanderthal in a generic sense as everyone knows the term. Obviously not conclusive but a crack in the door.

 

[Greg Lafla]

I wish their pic had scale

 

[Charl]

Certainly understand I am using Neanderthal in a generic sense as everyone knows the term. Obviously not conclusive but a crack in the door.

And I stand by the correction I made to your statement. That said, they convinced me they had something, and something really exciting, in that site. I was impressed by the evidence they presented. Old World archaeologists are more amenable to their conclusions then New World archaeologists. That is to be expected, if only because we have only recently toppled the Clovis First paradigm. Yes, it is a crack in the door, and I hope I live long enough to see far more compelling sites of that age discovered. The authors of that study are making every effort in that direction. Time will eventually tell, hopefully, the story of the peopling of the Americas....

 

[Charl]

View attachment 1600069
View attachment 1600075

I wish their pic had scale

You can find and read the original paper here. But, in the meantime, we don't want to highjack this thread, so should keep in mind that none of this is on topic to the gentleman who started the thread.....

https://www.nature.com/articles/nat...tracking_referrer=news.nationalgeographic.com

 

[Stringtyer]

Back to the original question ... it looks like a common field stone that has been abused by plows and disc harrows for many seasons. It is interesting that you said the stone is not common to your general area. That may be a good piece of information if you want to keep researching the piece. Do you know what the stone is (sandstone, granite, schist, etc.) and whether it is common to areas near you? Your county may have a soil map available that will show where common minerals may be likely.

Just for fun, you could look carefully at the cut marks to see if there is any metal deposition such as might be left from struck by farming implements. You should be able to that very well with a simple magnifier and good lighting. I spent a few years as a failure analyst working in a metallurgy lab so I have a tendency to look at things too closely but I enjoy doing it.

Of course, if you look closely at the pattern, it looks like an airport diagram. Maybe you have found an ancient alien aviation map. You might want to look on Google Earth to see if there are any matching patterns on the ground in your area.

Or just stick with the distressed rock theory.

 

[Greg Lafla]

Thanks for the info often thought the same about making it to see it happen, it's the only explanation that checks enough boxes for me

 

[Tnmountains]

If I knew as much arrowheads as you I'd jab one through my eyeball

Take 6 months off and study artifacts before you come back here and make extraordinary claims and hijack threads with untruths.