Hammer found in Cretaceous layer

?? I'm not sure I understand your question. Any sample from a coal mine would logically be collected by a coal miner if by "collected," you mean acquired. If a miner brought me a chunk of coal from his mine with a cup securely embedded in it, you bet, I'd accept it. I would then begin an analysis of it, which I presume Baugh has done. I've seen it on TV and it looks good, but I'm no expert on this stuff, for sure.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

Does anyone else have a problem with this: the surface (10% greater density) is dark and the inside (white is most dense) is white ...It looks like an x-ray with a squiggly line to "look" scientific, imho.also see http://EvC Forum: Hammer found in Cretaceous layer
on the ChlorineThis message has been edited by RAZD, 01-06-2005 23:17 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

what do you think a collapsing coal mine would do to a cup that was left behind?Just a thought.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

lol Yeah, I did notice that density is said to be 10% greater at the surface, except that the author also states the white areas are the most dense. HUH???Maybe the author meant to say the surface is 10% of the density of the interior.The white line definitely looks fishy. I am just in awe at the utter stupidity presented at that site.

"Dr Dino" is out to make a buck, and he finds the gullible YEC crowd is an easy target.That doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out

Well I suspect that it is the lighter areas that are more dense - that is consistent with the yellow-white of the head indicating the highest density and the wood of the handle being darker than most of the rock. Whether the darker surface represents an effect of weathering or is simply an artefact of the method I wouldn't like to say - but I would be surprised if it were anything else.

To be fair and objective, that would depend on the circumstances concerning the collapse, extent of breakup and position of the cup, wouldn't it?

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

Would you agree that it would be possible to re-excavate such a collapse and find the cup "embedded" in coal?I think of the straw punched through the telephone pole by a tornado ...and as long as there are reasonable possibilities I am not going to leap to any one. k? especially one that doesn't involve reasonable explanations.This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-07-2005 11:12 AM

I think it is just a common x-ray, and the dark shell of the hammer is due to corrosion and signal scatter. This would be consistent with the wood being the least dense, the accreted rock next and the wrought iron the densest.I think the claims about density etcetera are bogus. From the google search I did, it is entirely within known historic manufacturing ability, from chlorine content to shape to handle, etc.I think the accretion was caused by chemical reaction with the metal, also a known process.I think that Dr Dino is a scam artist that is taking advantage of gullible people.That's my opinion for what it is worth.

Hi Buzz,Scientists publish everything they discover in their papers and keep nothing secret, but them you doubt. Carl comes up with spectacular claims, many of which even ICR rejects, keeps everything to himself, but him you grant the benefit of the doubt.Religion is a fertile field for charlatans. Crying statues, Jesus images on windows, faith healing, the list just goes on and on. For you, what is it about Carl that distinguishes him from other religious opportunists?For most people, religious or not, finding a miner's cup embedded in coal from a mine where the coal is hacked, blasted, dumped, crushed, etc, is no surprise. And finding a miner's hammer encased in slag in a region of mines is also no surprise.Carl also has a fossilized human finger. It *is* a remarkable coincidence that a naturally formed rock could resemble a human finger, but nothing more. At one point in the tour of Luray Caverns in Virginia you'll see two fossilized fried eggs side-by-side sunny-side up. The resemblance isn't just remarkable, it's amazing, but they're not fossilized eggs, they're just natural formations. They're the base of stalagmites that have broken off. One wonders what would have happened had Carl found them first. Would they be in his museum as evidence that humans lived in the Americas long before previously thought? And would you and Tal be posting pictures of these "eggs" as evidence that no one can effectively rebut since Carl won't let them be examined? It wouldn't surprise me.--Percy

quote:

---

Scientists publish everything they discover in their papers and keep nothing secret, but them you doubt. Carl comes up with spectacular claims, many of which even ICR rejects, keeps everything to himself, but him you grant the benefit of the doubt.

---

Percy, might you consider moving this paragraph over to the "Higher Standards for Creationists" thread?

Is it Hovind or Baugh that has this 'London Artifact?'Anyway, I agree. The hammer itself had a role in forming the concretion.

I don't trust samples taken by anybody. Unless the person taking it is highly skilled and experienced, the sample will be contaminated in some way. I see this all the time.If he indicates that he is willing to have the hammer analyzed then I will either (preferably) have one of his people bring the entire artifact here for analysis or send my top research chemist out there to sample it. Either way I will make sure that at least one of his people is present for every step of the analysis.
It is kind of difficult to bias a properly done chemical analysis but this way, whatever results come out then nobody can acuse anybody of cheating.
I will also make sure that the analyst actually performing the tests will not know which sample is which so that bias in results interpretation cannot enter into it.PY

Hey, I once found a rock that looked exactly like a Yukon Gold Potato!I'm thinking now I should have offered it to Baugh or Hovind... for a price that is. Would that have been highly unethical of me.? This message has been edited by roxrkool, 01-07-2005 12:03 AM

yeah, I have trouble keeping them apart. It is at the museum, so that would be Baugh.