It's a a concretion not a geode is which is salient ,mentioned in the link posted after your initial post .uniface wrote:
"Looks like" is no refutiation. Especially in light of the glaring sparkplug-anomalies cited.
A Fortean Discomforture
Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
-
uniface
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
Concretion or geode, it's solid rock. Does mud do that in less than 100 years ?
And we still haven't disposed of the electromagnetic field aspect, ruling out "spark plug."
And we still haven't disposed of the electromagnetic field aspect, ruling out "spark plug."
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
It wasn't a solid rock .uniface wrote:Concretion or geode, it's solid rock. Does mud do that in less than 100 years ?
And we still haven't disposed of the electromagnetic field aspect, ruling out "spark plug."
You refused to tell me the specific source of your fantasy about vitrification .
Why should I provide anything for you ?
What the hell .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculus_%28medicine%29
http://tinyurl.com/jq3vucs
-
uniface
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
One Last Time: Wikipedia is organized fraud.
One way it's done: Leave the data but spin it with smear adjectives:
http://www.darkmatter101.org/site/wp-co ... a_iraq.JPG
Another way: Lie by omission
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/USS_Liberty_Incident
Another way: Just make it up:
Another way: Relegate it to the Memory Hole
http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?ke ... page346376Wikipedia is not a reliable source for academic research.
http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/20 ... nreliable/In State v. Flores, an unpublished decision by the Texas Court of Appeals for the 14th District dated October 23, 2008, the court refused the appellant’s request to take judicial notice of a Wikipedia entry describing the “John Reid interrogation technique.” The court reasoned in footnote 3 that Wikipedia entries are inherently unreliable because they can be written and edited anonymously by anyone
http://teachinghistory.org/digital-clas ... rian/23863Question: How do I get students to realize that Wikipedia should not be used as a credible source (especially as they enter college), even though some of the information is factually accurate?
Answer: Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is quite clear about the uses of Wikipedia. Asked, "Do you think students and researchers should cite Wikipedia? during an interview with Business Week in 2005, he replied, "No, I don't think people should cite it, and I don't think people should cite Britannica, either... People shouldn't be citing encyclopedias in the first place.
One way it's done: Leave the data but spin it with smear adjectives:
http://www.darkmatter101.org/site/wp-co ... a_iraq.JPG
Another way: Lie by omission
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/USS_Liberty_Incident
Another way: Just make it up:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacksThe September 11 attacks (also referred as 9/11) were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group Al-Qaeda on the United States ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_ ... ade_CenterThe Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed on September 11, 2001, as a result of being struck by two jet airliners hijacked by 10 terrorists affiliated with al-Qaeda
Another way: Relegate it to the Memory Hole
Henry Makow wrote:There is no Wikipedia entry for The Devil and the Jews (Yale University Press, 1943) or its author Rabbi Joshua Trachtenberg (1904-1959.) There are no reviews on the Internet. Why?
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
More non wiki nfo on Coso .
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/coso.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/coso.html
-
uniface
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
1) Porcelain will not ruin a diamond-edged rock saw blade.The next day in the gift shop's workroom, Mikesell ruined a nearly new diamond saw blade while cutting what he thought was a geode. Inside the nodule that was cut, Mikesell did not find a cavity as so many geodes have, but a perfectly circular section of very hard, white material that appeared to be porcelain. In the center of the porcelain cylinder, was a 2-millimeter shaft of bright metal. The metal shaft responded to a magnet.
2) Steel will not ruin a diamond-edged rock saw blade.
3) Are sea shells ordinarily found on mountain tops ?The outer layer of the specimen was encrusted with fossil shells and their fragments.
4) If these were recent (as alleged), how did they get there ?
5) About how long does it take for these to fossilize ?
6) They left out Swamp Gas.Virginia Maxey speculated that "one possibility is that it is barely 100 years old - something that lay in a mud bed, then got baked and hardened by the sun in a matter of a few years."
Why not al-Queda ? Works for everything else . . .
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
Of course sea shells are found on mountain tops .
But that does not mean that they are necessarily associated with the artefact .
What you are quoting are the accounts of the finders and the anonymous geologist who never published the findings .
No evidence for any of it .
But the evidence we do have shows that the artefact was a 1920's spark contained within a concretion .
Despite the artefact having been in the possession of one the "discoverers " ,which he valued at $25,000 ( what is the real value of 1920's spark plug in a concretion $30 ?), it's whereabouts are currently unknown .
You believe the finders story , fine .
I have a bit of the true cross for sale if your'e interested .
But that does not mean that they are necessarily associated with the artefact .
What you are quoting are the accounts of the finders and the anonymous geologist who never published the findings .
No evidence for any of it .
But the evidence we do have shows that the artefact was a 1920's spark contained within a concretion .
Despite the artefact having been in the possession of one the "discoverers " ,which he valued at $25,000 ( what is the real value of 1920's spark plug in a concretion $30 ?), it's whereabouts are currently unknown .
You believe the finders story , fine .
I have a bit of the true cross for sale if your'e interested .
-
uniface
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
You're a joke, T.
The report dashes your position, so question the publisher of it.
If the publisher's solid, question the integrity of the reporter . . .
Rinse and repeat as often as necessary until people tire of reasoning with you and pointing out the significance of what you keep ignoring until you are the last man standing. Then declare victory on that pretext.
No matter what, you can always tag a question onto the end of it as if this somehow invalidates everything preceding it. I.e., the O. J. Simpson Defense.
The report dashes your position, so question the publisher of it.
If the publisher's solid, question the integrity of the reporter . . .
Rinse and repeat as often as necessary until people tire of reasoning with you and pointing out the significance of what you keep ignoring until you are the last man standing. Then declare victory on that pretext.
No matter what, you can always tag a question onto the end of it as if this somehow invalidates everything preceding it. I.e., the O. J. Simpson Defense.
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
All the evidence points to the "artefact" being nothing more than a 1920's spark plug in a concretion , the hick(s) who were trying to sell it for $25,000 were maybe not as daft as those bought the BS .
How much would you have paid for it ?
What do you think it was if not the obvious ?
Still have a problem with sea shells on mountain tops ?
How much would you have paid for it ?
What do you think it was if not the obvious ?
Still have a problem with sea shells on mountain tops ?
-
uniface
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
When they are supposed to have gotten there by some natural process within the last 100 years, yes.
And so does anyone else with a functioning brain.
And so does anyone else with a functioning brain.
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
Anyone with a functioning brain realises that they didn't get there in the past 100 years and there were no sea shells associated with the object .
Brad Steiger highlighted the artefact in “Mysteries of Time and Space” ,have a look at his other titles , http://alynepustanio.com/paranormalbooks.php . He taught creative writing .Contrast that with the those who have written about the artefact ,sceptically , qualified anthropologists , archaeologists and geologists .
The geologist who described the artefact as being encased in a geode and possibly ancient is anonymous ,(s)he has never come forward , and never wrote a report .
This contrasts with a named qualified geologist , Paul Heinrich ,who did write a report on it and pointed out that it wasn’t a geode .
The three shopkeepers /rock hunters , one of whom was later attempting to sell the artefact for $25,000 , claimed that it was an example of ante deluvian technology . The object is now missing . One of finders who was still alive c.1999 would not talk about the object .
This contrasts with Chad Windham, president of Spark Plug Collectors of America who said he was certain that it was a Champion spark plug from the 1920’s . And researchers comparing photographs conclude that it is identical to the 1920’s Champion spark plug .
Not one case of anyone with any expertise in disciplines related to the object , one of which should maybe be grifting , considers the object to be anything other than a spark plug in a concretion .Which contrasts with the those who believe it is ancient technology ,is there anyone who believes that , with any expertise in geology , spark plugs or grifting ?
Brad Steiger highlighted the artefact in “Mysteries of Time and Space” ,have a look at his other titles , http://alynepustanio.com/paranormalbooks.php . He taught creative writing .Contrast that with the those who have written about the artefact ,sceptically , qualified anthropologists , archaeologists and geologists .
The geologist who described the artefact as being encased in a geode and possibly ancient is anonymous ,(s)he has never come forward , and never wrote a report .
This contrasts with a named qualified geologist , Paul Heinrich ,who did write a report on it and pointed out that it wasn’t a geode .
The three shopkeepers /rock hunters , one of whom was later attempting to sell the artefact for $25,000 , claimed that it was an example of ante deluvian technology . The object is now missing . One of finders who was still alive c.1999 would not talk about the object .
This contrasts with Chad Windham, president of Spark Plug Collectors of America who said he was certain that it was a Champion spark plug from the 1920’s . And researchers comparing photographs conclude that it is identical to the 1920’s Champion spark plug .
Not one case of anyone with any expertise in disciplines related to the object , one of which should maybe be grifting , considers the object to be anything other than a spark plug in a concretion .Which contrasts with the those who believe it is ancient technology ,is there anyone who believes that , with any expertise in geology , spark plugs or grifting ?
Re: A Fortean Discomforture
Why no response to the points ?
You never explained your view of the evidence pointing to it being a spark plug , the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the spark plug , the finders , their story ,
the missing geologists and ultimately the missing spark plug etc .
You also never answered " What do you think it was if not the obvious ?"
An example of alien or ante deluvian technology for $25,000 is a snip .
I'm certainly not on my own when it comes to being sceptical about the object .
Nhow it never sold , even the believers wouldn't put their money where their mouth was .
You never explained your view of the evidence pointing to it being a spark plug , the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the spark plug , the finders , their story ,
the missing geologists and ultimately the missing spark plug etc .
You also never answered " What do you think it was if not the obvious ?"
An example of alien or ante deluvian technology for $25,000 is a snip .
I'm certainly not on my own when it comes to being sceptical about the object .
Nhow it never sold , even the believers wouldn't put their money where their mouth was .