158 posts in this topic

No doubt, the best of the year thanks to all the above ! So, I think, WE can figger this one out....:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

 

 

 

This has already been determined to be of geologic origin. :unsure:

See this post, and this post.  

Regards,

I have read this post several times and the evidence although compelling does not change a thing. 

I do believe it started as a naturally occurring phenomenon but with some alterations.

Theory to it's origin is still theory.

When seeing the object completed just strengthens my views.

Altered by hand of man.

Everything presented as evidence by some of the most prominent geo theorists is lacking judgement as to the various patterns. If the patterns were of one consistent nature such as what has been presented it would be more compelling to go with the flow. I really like a mystery.

But I do not believe in Bigfoot either.

When was the last time any of us saw a flying saucer?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been an interesting thread, offering a fine example of the science process.  Personally, I first assumed this object was a human relic, probably recent. That this intricately "designed" pattern could be the work of natural geologic forces seemed highly improbable to me. But now that a fair amount of evidence has been presented I am once again reminded that much of our world seems highly improbable. With a lot of theories and a lot of doubts and a lot of revisions, the process of science does a pretty good job of explaining how the improbable is possible. 

While the description of counter septarian structures seemed like a plausible and even likely explanation of this specimen, I wasn't totally convinced until I saw the photos. I believe the photos in Figure 15  (link ) show the same intricate detail, created by natural forces, as in the original object of this thread. I think all the evidence needed is there in the photos. It looks to me like there is no need for any human "enhancement" to create the original object. To paraphrase a Monkee, I saw the photo, now I'm a believer. Not a trace of doubt in my mind. Even as improbable as it seems.

 

 

 

Seilacher2001fig15 Counter Septarian Structures.JPG

3 people finds this informative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However---back to my original follow up question,

I'm wondering about the possibility of some sort of deposit, worthy of mining in the general area

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29 décembre 2016 at 10:04 AM, bone2stone said:

I have read this post several times and the evidence although compelling does not change a thing. 

I do believe it started as a naturally occurring phenomenon but with some alterations.

Theory to it's origin is still theory.

When seeing the object completed just strengthens my views.

Altered by hand of man.

Everything presented as evidence by some of the most prominent geo theorists is lacking judgement as to the various patterns. If the patterns were of one consistent nature such as what has been presented it would be more compelling to go with the flow. I really like a mystery.

But I do not believe in Bigfoot either.

When was the last time any of us saw a flying saucer?

 

I, last week, i played frisbee with my son.:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How interesting this has become to me that I too did some investigation on the basic reasoning as to how, where, when. My own approach was to apply a formula known as "Fibonacci Principle"to the original specimen and the presented evidence.

The manner in which this lens developed, within a deposit and left no others,  still baffles me personally.

 

Well consensus has it, I can see the geological approach and the obscure albeit weird things nature leaves behind to baffle and amaze us.

Even the simple things, such as sediment, can evolve into some amazing things.

 

This thread should not stop with me. Is there anything in any of our collections that could compare if not defy a logical explanation?

I for one am still looking for answers on my Pseudounicornius. I do have a few examples of some strange "rocks" but did not place them in any location

to make them easily available. No pictures on my PC but I know I do have some.

Eyes in stone, some perfectly laid out rippling in stone, an axe, a skull, just some strange and unusual "rocks".

Is there any way a new "Can't figger this one out thread Part 2" be started without me starting it?

I'll gather my obscurities together and take some pics if anybody else finds some interest in doing so as well.

 

To this I end my input with a "Hope for all to have a Healthy and Happy New Year!!!!!:yay-smiley-1:

 

Jess B.

1 person finds this informative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the most amazing things I have ever seen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool Find!!!:D But It's man-made it looks like it might had been made recently because it is very well carved and it looks like it doesn't have been eroded much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ramon said:

Cool Find!!!:D But It's man-made it looks like it might had been made recently because it is very well carved and it looks like it doesn't have been eroded much.

 

Did you read the entire topic?  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!!! I'm really confused right now:headscratch:It could also be geology. 

11 minutes ago, JohnJ said:

 

Did you read the entire topic?  :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ramon said:

Wow!!! I'm really confused right now:headscratch:It could also be geology. 

 

It confused a lot of Us.

Yes it was determined to be a geologic piece.

 

Tony

1 person finds this informative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!!! It's wonderful what Nature can do! :trilosurprise:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating subject, just goes to show how weird, wonderful & beautiful nature can be. And testimony to the value of a co-operative site such as this.

2 people finds this informative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thats an amazing journey reading those posts!  I was 100% it was some carved object until I saw the side on view and that it was 3d.  Then I thought it may have been a resin or casing process.

 

I have seen those septerian patterns before, in a riverbed near where I lived in the "far north" as a kid.  I always imagined it was the hull of a crashed starship as they were large versions of those "counter septarian" ones.

 

Well done @Doctor Mud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since this thing is complete, I want it in the museums now. This is rare stuff that has baffled us for a lot of time and this is something complete and well preserved enough to be in a museum. That way, the public could have easy access to it, instead of some pictures in some locked-up corner of the internet. Please consider my proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am by no means very well educated on such matters but did anybody else happen to notice that on the side view picture of the broken side.... To me it seems that the patterns tend to carry on through the rock and aren't just on the surface. But if that's the case then I don't see how this could be man made. I do agree though, the patterns sure seem done by man. But there are highly intricate patterns in nature of asymmetrical form. Just a thought from a novice. I would like to see a closer up high res of that side though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Trevor Suazo said:

I am by no means very well educated on such matters but did anybody else happen to notice that on the side view picture of the broken side.... To me it seems that the patterns tend to carry on through the rock and aren't just on the surface. But if that's the case then I don't see how this could be man made. I do agree though, the patterns sure seem done by man. But there are highly intricate patterns in nature of asymmetrical form. Just a thought from a novice. I would like to see a closer up high res of that side though.

It's generally a good idea to read the whole thread before commenting.

 

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Trevor Suazo said:

I am by no means very well educated on such matters but did anybody else happen to notice that on the side view picture of the broken side.... To me it seems that the patterns tend to carry on through the rock and aren't just on the surface. But if that's the case then I don't see how this could be man made. I do agree though, the patterns sure seem done by man. But there are highly intricate patterns in nature of asymmetrical form. Just a thought from a novice. I would like to see a closer up high res of that side though.

 

16 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

It's generally a good idea to read the whole thread before commenting.

 

Don

Lol well bud I just did and it was absolutely fascinating. There are some brilliant minds here. I am actually brand new to this forum tonight due to a possible Dino bone find and thought that I had read the entire thread till after I had posted my comment. Then I happened upon the link to next page. So ;-)-    But an excellent read. It definitely resparked my yearning to go back to school. Oil field is for the young. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You stumbled on one of the most interesting threads in the whole forum.  Virtually everyone thought the specimen was an artifact at first.  It took a lot of detective work to figure out what was really going on.  Everyone learned something from this topic.

 

Oh and welcome to the forum!

 

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou sir. I don't know how I managed to not find this forum sooner. I've been looking for this one for some time. Most often forums centered around such topics are over run by novices such as my self and know it all smart mouthed wanna be scholars with little or no education under there hats. I imagine I'll be sticking around here picking all your brains and soaking up some knowledge. That is If ya don't mind a kid in the corner. I promise to do more with my ears than my mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FossilDAWG said:

You stumbled on one of the most interesting threads in the whole forum.  Virtually everyone thought the specimen was an artifact at first.  It took a lot of detective work to figure out what was really going on.  Everyone learned something from this topic.

 

Oh and welcome to the forum!

 

Don

Yes, sure, we did learn something from this topic.

1 hour ago, Trevor Suazo said:

Thankyou sir. I don't know how I managed to not find this forum sooner. I've been looking for this one for some time. Most often forums centered around such topics are over run by novices such as my self and know it all smart mouthed wanna be scholars with little or no education under there hats. I imagine I'll be sticking around here picking all your brains and soaking up some knowledge. That is If ya don't mind a kid in the corner. I promise to do more with my ears than my mouth.

You're welcome.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4 février 2017 at 11:56 PM, abyssunder said:

"
But then I saw her face, now I'm a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind." - The Monkees - I'm a believer

 

I'm happy you like that song...:) It reminds me the time when the paleontologists discovered ''Lucy''.

"
"Lucy" acquired her name from the song "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" by the Beatles, which was played loudly and repeatedly in the expedition camp all evening after the excavation team's first day of work on the recovery site. After public announcement of the discovery, Lucy captured much public interest, becoming a household name at the time. "  - Wikipedia

It reminds me an anecdote Yves Coppens, one of the scientists that discovered Lucy, told in a radiophonic program he presented.

With another anthropologist, they studied the behaviour of a monkey confronted with a difficulty to catch the food fastened on the roof over its head. The purpose was to see what strategy it would choose.

To not interfere in by their presence, they staid in another room and observed it through a camera. That camera view had a blind spot near the door and, at one time, as they couldn't see the monkey, the anthropologist decided to look through the keyhole to observe it.

 

As Yves Coppens heard him shout loudly, a little anxious, he ran towards him and asked what was going on. His colleague answered him :

-"I put my eye against the keyhole.

- And then, what did you see ?

- The eye of the monkey was looking at me."

1 person finds this informative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Native american carving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MOROPUS said:

Native american carving.

 

It was actually found to be geologic. LINK  ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.