Top 10 Out-Of-Place Artefacts
- Published October 1, 2007 - 88 Comments
An out-of-place artefact is an object that exists in a place in which it is impossible for it to exist. OOPArts are often of interest to creationists and others who seek evidence that may refute the theory of evolution; they are also used to support religious descriptions of pre-history, ancient astronaut theories, or the notion of vanished civilizations that possessed knowledge or technology more advanced than our own. This is a list of the top 10 out-of-place artefacts.
The Baigong Pipes are a series of pipe-like features found on and near Mount Baigong about 40 km southeast of the city of Delingha, in the Haixi Mongol and Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Qinghai Province, China. The Baigong Pipes are reported to be associated with a “pyramid” about 50 to 60 meters (160 to 200 feet high) built on Mount Baigong. The front of the “pyramid” is reported to contain three caves. The mouths of the two smaller caves have collapsed. Only the largest cave, which is 6 meters (18 feet) high, can be entered. Two Baigong Pipes have been reported from the largest cave. One of these is described as being 40 cm (16 in) in diameter and preserved as a reddish-brown “half-pipe”. Within the same cave, another pipe-like feature of similar diameter was also found. “Dozens” of upright pipe-like features, about 10 to 40 cm (4 to 16 inches) in diameter, were also found protruding from Mount Baigong above the largest cave.
The Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head is a terracotta head, probably originally part of a larger figurine, discovered in 1933 among pre-Columbian grave goods in the Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca zone in the Toluca Valley, approximately 65 kilometers west of Mexico City. Because of the head’s non-Amerind facial features, including a beard, and its unusual style, some believe that it is of Roman origin, and thus evidence of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact. The site where the head was found seems to be a genuine pre-colonial site undisturbed during the colonial period. A thermoluminescence test performed in 1995 by P.Schaaf and G.A.Wagner in the FS Archaeömetrie unit in Heidelberg, Germany, established its age limits between the 9th century B.C. and the middle of the 13th century A.D, confirming that it is a pre-colonial artifact. Bernard Andreae of the German Institute of Archaeology in Rome, Italy, confirmed the style as Roman and proposed the 2nd century A.D as datation, based on the hairstyle and the beard.
The Starchild skull is an abnormal human-like skull which was found in Mexico. Its origin and nature are contested by scientists and paranormal enthusiasts. The starchild skull came into the possession of Lloyd Pye, a writer and lecturer in the field of alternative knowledge, in February 1999. According to Pye, the skull was found around 1930 in a mine tunnel about 100 miles (200 km) southwest of the Mexican city of Chihuahua, Chihuahua, buried alongside a normal human skeleton which was exposed and lying supine on the surface of the tunnel. The skull is abnormal in several aspects. A dentist determined that it was a child’s skull, due to unerupted teeth being impacted in the associated upper right maxilla found with the skull. However, the volume of the interior of the starchild skull is 1600 cubic centimeters, which is 200 cm3 larger than the average adult’s brain, and 400 cm3 larger than an adult of the same approximate size. The orbits are oval and shallow, with the optic nerve canal situated at the bottom of the orbit instead of at the back. There are no frontal sinuses. The back of the skull is flattened, but not by artificial means. The skull consists of calcium hydroxyapatite, the normal material of mammalian bone, but there is an overload of collagen in it, much more than is usual for human bone. Carbon 14 dating was performed twice, the first on the normal human skull at the University of California at Riverside in 1999, and on the Starchild skull in 2004 at Beta Analytic in Miami, the largest radiocarbon dating laboratory in the world. Both independent tests gave a result of 900 years ± 40 years since death. DNA testing at Trace Genetics in 2003 recovered mitochondrial DNA and determined that the child had a human mother, though it was not the child of the skull found with it.
The Aluminum Wedge of Aiud, also known as the Object of Aiud, is a wedge-shaped object found 2 kilometers East of Aiud, Romania, on the banks of the Mures river in 1974. According to an article written by Boczor Iosif, a contributor to Hungarian paranormal magazines, it was found under 35 feet of sand and along side 2 mastodon bones. His article also claims it was found in 1973. For three reasons some claim the wedge is proof that aliens came to visit Earth in the past. An unnamed aeronautical engineer said it resembled the foot of landing gear not unlike the current space vehicles at the time, only smaller. This was corroborated by Florin Gheorghita, a known ufologist in Romania. The fact that it was found in the same layer as mastodon bones, and assuming it was found in original context, would make it at least 11,000 years old. The third reason people believed that this was from an alien ship was because aluminum was not even discovered until 1808 and could not be produced in mass until 1885. Therefore, because it looks like landing gear, it was found with mastodon bones and the oxide dated to at least 300 years old (before aluminum on earth), it was from an alien spaceship. Most scientists believe the wedge was made here on earth and its purpose is just not yet identified. Not much information is to be found on this subject. The lack of data can possibly be explained by the imposed restrictions on archaeology and history by the communist rule of the time. Aluminum requires 1,000 degrees of heat to be produced. The aluminum wedge of Aiud remains a mystery.
The Coso Artifact is a spark plug found encased in a lump of hard clay or rock on February 13, 1961 by Wallace Lane, Virginia Maxey, and Mike Mikesell while they were fossicking for geodes near the town of Olancha, California. Following its collection, Mikesell destroyed a diamond edged blade cutting through the rock containing the artifact and discovered the item. Virginia Maxey, one of the people who discovered it, speculated at different times that this artifact was either 100 or 500,000 years old as noted by Stromberg and Heinrich (2000, 2004). Mrs. Maxey failed to provide either any specific information or verifiable citation about either the dating technique or evidence used in calculating either date. The origin of the artifact has been the cause of much speculation. Pseudoscientific suggestions include: An ancient advanced civilization (such as Atlantis), Prehistoric extraterrestrial visitors to Earth, Human time-travellers from the future leaving or losing the artifact during a visit to the past.
The Kensington runestone is a roughly rectangular slab of greywacke covered in runes on its face and side. Its origin and meaning have been disputed ever since it was found in 1898 near Kensington, Minnesota. It suggests that Scandinavian explorers reached the middle of North America in the 14th century. Its origin is uncertain, and opinions are divided as to its authenticity, with some (including reknowned Minnesota geologist Newton Horace Winchell) suggesting it is an important Medieval artifact, and others (including eminent runologists such as R.I Page and James Knirk) arguing the Runestone is a hoax. In The Kensington Runestone: Approaching a Research Question Holistically (2005) archeologist Alice Beck Kehoe alluded to reports of contact between native American populations and outsiders prior to the time of the runestone, which tend to validate the possibility of a fourteenth century, northern European Scandanavian expedition. The translation of both sides reads:
Face: 8 Geats (South Swedes) and 22 Norwegians on acquisition venture from Vinland far to the west We had traps by 2 shelters one day’s travel to the north from this stone We were fishing one day. After we came home found 10 men red with blood and dead AVM (Ave Maria) Deliver from evils.
Lateral: I have 10 men at the inland sea/lake to look after our ship 14 days travel from this wealth/property Year of our Lord 1362
The Saqqara Bird is a bird-like artifact made of sycamore wood, discovered during the 1891 excavation of the Pa-di-Imen tomb in Saqqara, Egypt. It dates back to at least 200 BC and is now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. It has a wingspan of 7.2 inches and weighs 39.120 grams. The artifact has a beak, no holes for feathers, and one eye, and was painted to resemble a falcon without clear images and carving of feathers on the wings. Perhaps the most intriguing speculation is that the “Bird” may show that an understanding of the principles of aviation existed many centuries before such are generally believed to have first been discovered. The Ancient Egyptians had knowledge to some extent of sail construction. Since the 5.6-inch long object closely resembles a model airplane, it has led one Egyptologist, Khalil Messiha, and others to speculate that the Ancient Egyptians developed the first aircraft. Messiha, who was the first to argue that the model did not represent a bird, wrote in 1983 that it “represents a diminutive of an original monoplane still present in Saqqara.”
The Antikythera Mechanism is believed to be an ancient mechanical calculator (also described as a “mechanical computer”) designed to calculate astronomical positions. It was discovered in the Antikythera wreck off the Greek island of Antikythera, between Kythera and Crete, and has been dated to about 150-100 BC. It is especially notable for being a technological artifact with no known predecessor or successor; other machines using technology of such complexity would not appear until the 18th century. While a century of research is finally answering the question of what the mechanism did, we are actually no nearer to answering the question what it was for.
The Dendera light comprises three stone reliefs (one single and a double representation) in the Hathor temple at the Dendera Temple complex located in Egypt. The images are interpreted by traditional Egyptologists to depicting lotus flowers spawning a snake, representing aspects of Egyptian mythology. Controversy arose when the main object in the images was interpreted by some as electric lamps based on comparison to modern devices. These individuals believe the object may be electric lamps. Engineers have constructed a working model based on the reliefs and some authors (such as Peter Krassa and Reinhard Habeck) have produced a basic theory of the device’s operation.
The Baghdad Battery was discovered in the village of Khuyut Rabbou’a (near Baghdad, Iraq) in 1936. These artifacts came to wider attention in 1938, when Wilhelm König, the German director of the National Museum of Iraq, found the objects in the museum’s collections, and in 1940 (having returned to Berlin due to illness) published a paper speculating that they may have been galvanic cells, perhaps used for electroplating gold onto silver objects. The artifacts consist of ~130mm (~5 inch) tall terracotta jars (with a one and a half inch mouth) containing a copper cylinder made of a rolled-up copper sheet, which houses a single iron rod. At the top, the iron rod is isolated from the copper by asphalt plugs or stoppers, and both rod and cylinder fit snugly inside the opening of the jar which bulges outward towards the middle (reverse hourglass shape). On MythBusters’ 29th episode (which aired on March 23, 2005), the Baghdad battery myth was put to the test. Ten hand-made terracotta jars were fitted to act as batteries. Lemon juice was chosen as the electrolyte to activate the electrochemical reaction between the copper and iron. (Oddly enough, it was discovered that a single lemon produced more voltage than one of the batteries). When all of the batteries were linked together in series, they produced upwards of 4 volts. Then, the major question was, “What were these ancient batteries used for?”
Notable omissions: Piri Reis Map, Ica Stones, Crystal Skulls (unverifiable authenticity)
Sources: Wikipedia
Technorati Tags: history, out of place
























October 1st, 2007 at 11:02 am
so in other words the Starchild skull is not human
October 1st, 2007 at 11:08 am
mix2323: well – the evidence suggests that to be the case. My own sensibilities make me think they must be missing something.
October 1st, 2007 at 11:13 am
or is deformed in some way
October 1st, 2007 at 11:17 am
mix2323: that would make sense to me – though I am surprised it has not been offered as a solution by any of the scientists that have had anything to do with it. It is very weird.
October 1st, 2007 at 11:39 am
Interesting, but as for the Coso Artifact, the Stromberg and Heinrich studies as you mentioned found:
“An investigation carried on by Pierre Stromberg and Paul Heinrich with the help of members of the Spark Plug Collectors of America suggests that the artifact is a 1920s Champion sparkplug and that it was likely used in the area in support of mining operations during that era. Their report, Stromberg and Heinrich (2000, 2004), indicates the spark plug became encased in a concretion composed of iron derived from the rusting spark plug. It is typical of iron and steel artifacts to rapidly form iron oxide concretions around them as they rust in the ground (Cronyn 1990).”
Source: Wikipedia and Bad Archeology (among other places). While the others I’m not sure about, when I saw the coso artifact on the list I’ve read about it before so some red flags went off in my head.
October 1st, 2007 at 11:57 am
mistere: Thanks for that additional info – I have upmodded your comment
October 1st, 2007 at 12:14 pm
artefact or artifact: In British usage, artefact is the main spelling and artifact a minor variant;[61] however, some speakers claim to write artefact to mean “a product of artisanry” but artifact when the meaning is “a flaw in experimental results caused by the experiment itself”[citation needed]. In American English, artifact is the usual spelling, although[citation needed] it is regarded as nonstandard by some U.S. authorities. Canadians prefer artifact and Australians artefact, according to their respective dictionaries.
Wikipedia: American and British spelling differences
so us Americans know whassup…LOL..now will actually read the list etc.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:20 pm
Cyn: I should have looked it up – I was really confused because both spellings were accepted by the operating system’s dictionary! Thanks for clarifying
October 1st, 2007 at 12:23 pm
read. okay…nothing specific just a general observation…something to bear in mind when looking into antiquities is that we are looking back at stuff w/ a modern bias and humans apparently have an inherent need to make order out of chaos or sense of out anything.
just saying…
October 1st, 2007 at 12:27 pm
well i figured it was some English English difference. and i get really confuzzled because i speak Texan English…yet another kind of American English. LOL
October 1st, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Cyn: your first comment is probably very accurate. All we need is for someone to invent a time machine so we can see what things were really like.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:37 pm
i want the time machine and a teleporter! *wah* hell, we haven’t gotten the flying cars yet. *sigh*
although…i have vague memories of a coupla old SciFi stories that might give us pause to go back and muck about. old brain. uh…something about a crushed flower and they came back to a different present….ring any bells? think there was also a movie or made for TV something..w/in last few years.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Cyn: I want a teleporter too. I don’t know what the film is you are talking about – though there is a flower that gets burnt at the start of Batman Begins…
October 1st, 2007 at 1:33 pm
You should read the book on the Starchild skull it is very interesting. No conclusion have been made so far on it. Hopefully if they receive enough funding it would be possible to do a full analysis only in the next 2 years or so.
October 1st, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Cyn, it’s called “A Sound of Thunder,” by Ray Bradbury. This short story is still available in collections such as “The Best Time Travel Stories of the 20th Century,” available at Amazon.
In “A Sound of Thunder”, the crushing of a single butterfly during a time-travel dinosaur hunt causes devastating repercussions forward in time. This is the origin of the phrase “the butterfly effect.”
That story scared the snot out of me. At first I remembered it as an Arthur C. Clarke story, but of course it’s Bradbury. Nobody can scare like Bradbury. It took “Back to the Future” to give me a good feeling about time travel again!
October 1st, 2007 at 3:09 pm
Time travel isnt possible until we invent it… Now i know that sounds dumb, but unless we here in the rpesent develope it, people in the future cant have it. So to think future pioneers coming back and ‘forgetting’ these things is absurd. Chances are all these except maybe the starchild are of human origin.
October 1st, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Adam W.: I agree about the human origins – but I think it does raise the possibility of our predecessors having greater knowledge than we sometimes give them credit for.
October 1st, 2007 at 4:46 pm
thank you Bonnie! re: comment about Bradbury…oh god yes!
Ray Bradbury Theater: Sound of Thunder
First aired 11 August 1989 on TV
that is the one i was thinking about from TV. apparently also a movie in ‘05 that apparently sucked.
October 1st, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Even more interesting:
Look up “Boskopod Skulls”.
And check out the ( larger than today) size of early Cro-magnon skulls.
Penny
October 1st, 2007 at 10:06 pm
Thanks for the explanation of the difference between “artefact” and “artifact” Cyn!
October 1st, 2007 at 10:19 pm
diamond encrusted skull what will future generations think of this?
np..Hannah. *grins*
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:38 am
can this 4 volts of power be used hurt people or animals … ????
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:07 am
subcorpus: according to Top 10 modern methods of execution it takes an initial 2,000 volts to kill a person – so I would say no, 4 volts is not enough to hurt someone. I believe that when it was tested on mythbusters they said that running it through a person gave the feeling of tightness in the chest but nothing else.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:16 am
How come no one has done a facial reconstruction of the starchild? I would really like to know what it looked like while alive. Here’s a website thats gives a little explanation on facial reconstruction for those who have never heard of it http://www.medicine.manchester.ac.uk/artinmed/reconstruction/
New idea for a list– Top Theorized Locations of Atlantis! Every time I watch the history channel, they’re in a different part of the world looking for Atlantis. It cracks me up sometimes because I wonder if the stories Homer wrote about it were just fictional and for entertainment purposes only. Maybe we take Atlantis just a little to seriously?
Great list by the way, I had never even heard of any of these!
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:48 am
In the book they did I think 2 facial reconstructions from 2 different experts. The reconstructions did have an “other world”-ly appearance. There are features in the skull that is totally unique to it. An example of one reconstruction is on the cover of Lloyd Pye’s book.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:53 am
Thanks Andre! I’ll see if i can google any of it.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:53 am
Sandra: I wondered the same thing. And I like the idea of an Atlantis list – I have made a note
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:14 am
Sandra : You should be able to get all you want here : http://www.lloydpye.com/
JFrater : Have you seen this link ?
http://ufo.whipnet.org/creation/ancient.artifacts/
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:35 am
Google Starchild skull, crouzon syndrome, hydrocephaly, and brachycephaly. The starchild skull in shape seems to fall into any of those categories. I don’t know about the chemical composition though. The tests they conducted seemed kinda weird in the results. But that could just simply be another kind of deformity. Lots of UFO links when you look up the starchild. I’m still kind of skeptical on that. I believe in extraterrestrial life, but I don’t think they’d come down and breed with us. Speaking of UFOs, another list idea(i’m just full of ideas aren’t I?) is to do UFOs and the Bible. There are lots of passages that describe things that sound like they could be spaceships. My Dad gave me a book about it once when i got interested in it after he told me his theories about God, Jesus and Mary Magdalene’s relationship, evolution and extraterrestrial life. I’ll see if he dig it up so i can give you a title and author. You’ll find plenty on google though.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:36 am
Andre – no, but I am aware of the extra objects they have. The firtst one occurs naturally, the second have vanished and there is no proof they ever existed, the Ica stones’ marking are not consistent with the age they are purported to be, and the ball stones were made by human hands.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:44 am
Sandra: while I don’t believe it myself, I do find the UFO-human concept interesting. It would make an excellent list. If you can find the book I would love to know its title. As a kid I read all of Erich Von Daniken’s books and was nearly convinced, though I am much more sceptical now.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:58 am
Andre- Thanks for the link, very interesting!
jfrater- Chariot of the Gods by Erich Von Daniken is probably the book I’m thinking of. But I could be wrong since i read it when i was in about 7th grade. But it sounds like the right title. And i remember the pages were almost falling out it was so old. It was probably a first or second edition my Dad had gotten hold of somehow. I remember being taught about the passage out of Ezekiel maybe being a spaceship and the theory of Methuslah being taken up into an alien ship, not into heaven. The funny thing about my Dad and his theories is that he is a very spiritual and God loving/fearing man. He always says he’s waiting for the day he says the wrong thing and God sends a lightning bolt into his butt to keep him in line. I’ll ask him if he can look for the book since I know he still has it.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:51 am
Sandra: I remember that in Chariot of the Gods – it was actually a very enjoyable book, though Erich von Daniken doesn’t have much of a reputation in scientific circles
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:46 am
Sandra : Lloyd has devoted a lot of study to the skull. He has proven it is not a deformation, the large skull deformity that is usually common among humans kills children at a young age (not consistent with the age of the Star child). He would have written the skull of long ago if it was anything as simplistic as that. But read the book – you can then also support the funding for further study.
JFrater : After studying crystal formation and see some of the amazing products of Mother Earth I can guess that it might be true about them, although nothing conclusion has yet been made – even according to this sceptic :
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/spheres.html
PS What about the Crystal Skulls ?
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:58 am
Andre: when I was reading about the crystal skulls, it appears that all of them have some evidence of being worked with modern jewellers tools – that put me off.
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:15 am
JFrater : Oh ok, still a bit of an enigma though – not easy to reproduce… especially the Mitchel Hedges one with the detachable jawbone.
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:32 am
Andre: true – I remember reading about them as a kid and was very interested. I wouldn’t mind seeing one up close.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:09 pm
I’ve always been fascinated by OOPs, and I remember sifting through dozens of decade-old Fortean Times issues my mom collected to find out more on them. The one that fascinates me the most is the object of Aiud because even its origins are shrouded in mystery. Though truth be told, I would love to have a look at that Starchild skull, see what that’s all about (personally I thik it’s a severely disfigured child’s skull.) What I would give to actually be able to see these things… anyway, excellent list, JF. Keep them rolling!
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:13 pm
haha im from chihuahua, chihuahua
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:44 pm
wowzer: thanks – I loved magazines like that when I was young too – the things I read then are translating well to the cyberworld
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:13 am
Here is a recent link on Graham Hancock’s site about the Starchild Skull :
http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/PyeL1.php
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:20 am
Andre: That certainly makes for some very interesting reading. It is very believable – I wonder what the sceptics make of it.
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:32 am
JFrater : Most of the doctors he took the skull to in the book were sceptics. He never tried to sway them to what he thinks the skull actually is. None of the doctors could explain the phenomena around the skull. It should be interesting to see what the specialist genome testing will result to in 2010…
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 am
Andre: I agree – it will be very interesting. Mind you, no matter what is found there will always be sceptics who will disbelieve.
October 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 am
JFrater: Ain’t that the truth… people like to create their own realities even if facts hit them in the face.
October 4th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
POST 16 – ADAM:
You said that time travel isn’t possible until it is invented and thus, people in the future can’t travel and leave artifacts because time travel hasn’t yet been invented. This is a pretty weak argument, because it fails to take into consideration that IF time travel is invented, time travel is accessible to any age. So, basically, time travel is either possible or not, at any time. We don’t have to wait for anything, because if it is possible, it would be happening right now. This brings about the concept of an accessible past (and future) and challenges the human experience of time as occurring in a linear manner. The reality is closer to all time happening all at once, only one moment, an eternal now, that we call the present. It’s the manner in which we experience the present that prevents us (necessarily) from the totality of the moment.
Regardless, even a linear explanation of time would allow for time travel to be possible at any moment, as long as the technology is eventually possible. When you consider the trillions and trillions (and bigger absurd numbers) of years yet to come, and the human fascination with the subject, it’s hard to conceive of a future without time travel, and thus, foolish to consider a present that lacks time travel as well.
Or it just isn’t possible, and never will be.
Whatever.
October 7th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Omg, how could you forget the cristal skulls found in Mexico. These are human size skulls made from volcanic cristals, which iluminated from the exact angle, emits light through the eyes cavity.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
Good site for more info on these OOPs and many more
http://www.world-mysteries.com/
October 28th, 2007 at 12:06 am
aplspud: thanks for the link!
November 22nd, 2007 at 4:53 pm
awesome stuff
December 10th, 2007 at 2:27 am
As far as the batteries… 4 volts, with some time (a day or so is plenty) will electroplate objects, i.e. jewelry items. Some have been found all over the middle east. Usually bracelets and rings have been plated in gold and silver. Just something to throw in, as this is my first post on this site.
January 16th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
http://www.world-mysteries.com/ is a mssively deluded site though. The National Geographic site is a good one to peruse.
January 16th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
btw its
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/index.html
January 18th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Some more interesting ones include a heiroglyphical depiction of a helicopter a spaceship and a submarine from ancient egypt. There are also 3 pyramids in china called the senshi pyramids that are exactly similar to the ones at giza. There are also photos of ufos dating back to the 1880s, a time in which there wasn’t supposed to be anything in the sky! Not to mention hundreds of depictions of ufos in midieval art.
January 18th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
oh yeah there were also clay disks found in a cave near a tribe called the drakon. The disks contain grooves, basically just like a record, but they are thousands of years old.
January 18th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
The aztecs had 100,000 year old golden tablets detailing visitation by extra-terrestrials, that were of course, melted down by cortez and his band of pirate-rapists.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:02 pm
I suspect that the starchild skull is of a hyrdrocephalic child that lived beyond the usual age for untreated children with this condition. That would account for the elongated eye sockets, displaced optical nerves and even for the flattened posterior aspect. The child would probably have never learned to walk and would be bed-ridden. The amount of brain damage would be difficult to calculate as so few have gone untreated and lived long enough to determine this.
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:54 pm
so when you think about it, the saqqara bird is most likely an example of a children’s toy. I think people look into things far too much, it was most likely inspired by a bird but seriously i don’t think they had planes just quite yet.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Well… something to consider about the Egyptians… they NEVER made anything of any appreciable size without making models of the item. And no, this doesn’t mean that virtually every “toy” that they made was actually the model for a larger object. As far as something as out of the ordinary as a glider/plane… I’m betting either the item is lost to antiquity, or is still undiscovered somewhere.
How about the tribe that knows, and has known for centuries, about the dog star? Good trick, as they didn’t exactly have a 12″ telescope laying around to discover it.
The “batteries” that were found have been generally used for electoplating jewelry. Not saying they were pretty incredible for their time… just not quite some Duracells from a passing UFO…
March 5th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
all i have to say is…
wayyyy to spell artifact.
March 12th, 2008 at 2:29 am
The Antikythera mechanism was recently recreated, and is proven to be an astrolabe. Just thought you should know.
April 7th, 2008 at 5:22 am
The butterfly effect could easily be cured, all they would have to do is go back and prevent the invention/use of the time machine. We may have invented it, maybe even many times over, but if there are bad consequences then it would be logical that we would correct the mistake. Having to invent it to have it in the future is a valid point.
April 13th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Too bad that a lot of people do not seem to realize and/or understand that a current lack of rational explanations for some of these findings does not justify the introduction of weird and/or irrational substitute “explanations” in the same way that it is simply a case of intellectual laziness to introduce the concept of a “god” for everything that is currently not understood (on a related note: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam’s_Razor). As a scientist, I’m quite confident that we will find satisfying, rational and provable explanations for all of these things EVENTUALLY; in the meantime, we don’t need any pseudo-scientific, “von Däniken”-esque (read: “crackpot”) theories (http://www.debunker.com/texts/vondanik.html) that are put forward as “Undeniable Truths” by some people, since this doesn’t help in solving these quite fascinating mysteries – because that’s what they truly are – in a rational, systematic, and scientifically justifiable manner.
P.S.
@Trevor: “artefact” / “artifact” are both correct, tool.
April 14th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Yeah, these are incredibly interesting. I hadn’t heard of any of these!
I want to look into the Starchild one a bit more…
April 29th, 2008 at 10:56 am
The starchild is said to have been found with a body not family, right. My thought: The kid would have been a creepy little fella to look at from what we know (not to mention the possiblities of what we dont know-alien) thins makes me think that people reacted negativly judging on human nature and predudice to the abnormal so I figure that the man would be a protector/caregiver to the child. I’d imagine that the two were murderer out of fear.
The ica stones are interesting. one thing that is interseting is that all the hype about them leaves out the graphic gay sex depicted.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
The starchild is easily explainable:
Why is the head so big for a child?
-Hydrocephaly(water on the brain) occurs when the brain’s internal compartments fail to drain cerebro-spinal fluid due to a problem with the connection between internal spaces in the brain(ventricles). Because CSF is essentially blood plasma it can build up quite quickly inside the skull. Because the fluid has nowhere else to go, the head swells to an abnormally large size.
Why is the back of the skull flat?
-Neonates and newborns lack control of their neck muscles and head position. It’s common sense to support a babies head until they are around 4-7 months of age, and even then they are just capable of stabalizing their heads and mivng their neck slightly. CSF is mostly water, which weighs 8lbs/gallon. Add a liter or two extra inside the skull and you’ve increased the weight of the head to that of a grown adult, while the muscles are still not fully developed. The constant gravitational force against the head would keep it immoblie, even for a 2-4 year old if the hydrocephaly was sever enough. Constant pressure would cause the bone slowly flatten out.
Why is the bone structure high in collagen?
-If the buildup of CSF is severe enough, the bone would be constantly stretched as the head grew. Neonates bones are naturally flexible and skull sutures remain unsealed long after birth. Calcification of a childs bones does not fully complete until the late teens or early 20’s. Bone is a living tissue that responds to stresses against it. If the intercranial pressure is strong enough, the skull will compensate and expand in size. If this expansion occurs at a relatively rapid rate, collagen will replace calcification.
This “unexplainable” artifact is a crock. It’s a kid with a deformity, plain and simple. I’d guess the rest of them are highly fallible as well.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I must come back to this list! I can’t believe I missed it!
June 28th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
where will i find the greatest calculating inventions during the ancient times? This is my assignment I can’t find it. Help?
June 28th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
help? thanks
November 8th, 2008 at 5:09 am
I have gone to your site and it is just a place to sell your phony “reports”. Just another scam by another con artist. You should be paying Mr. Frater if you wish to advertise on his site.
November 8th, 2008 at 5:21 am
Thanks James – I have deleted the spam comment.
November 18th, 2008 at 1:57 am
Why does everyone automatically assume that space aliens have visited us? Don’t you think it is possible that these “visitors” are us going back in time? Or, even the possibility that WE have come from another planet that was destroyed by a nuclear bomb or something? We ARE space beings, you know. Just look at what we are all doing now….we are in search of a planet that is able to be lived on. Why do you think that is? Do you suppose “another” nuclear destruction is upon us, and we must find a new planet soon? And, when we do (because we will, as we always have, probably many times), we will probably bring some things with us……matches, lighters, pots, pans, light bulbs, etc…..Then someone a couple of million years later will say some aliens visites us because we found some light bulbs!
November 22nd, 2008 at 2:11 pm
@66: You’re right, Chris, it’s perfectly simple. That kid sure wouldn’t have been much fun for Mom to push out.
November 24th, 2008 at 12:45 am
yeah like all the testing that hey had on the skull didnt rule that out, already..
November 24th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
i’ve always wondered if the many reports that we have had of planes going missing over the bermuda triangle, also military planes that have vanished, but never been reported, due to official secrets act, have been caught up in time’vortexes’ ie sedona style. it seems that by looking at the evidence of OOParts like the saqqara bird as well as the many different depictions on past great civilisations tablets, artwork (ie aztec, ancient babylonian scripts and also ancient chinese stonecraft, the depiction of a lot of their gods do seem to represent our modern day pilots and astronauts.if you look at the depictions of ‘Ganesh’ it does look like a pilot with breathing apparatus ie ganeshes trunk was the breathing hose connected to his oxygen pack. i have been to the museum in Villehermosa in mexico, and there is a silver model of a bicycle, with fully rotating wheels from before aztec times. as we all know, neither mexican or south american past civilisations had or used the wheel.i was very surprised when i saw this (second floor of the museum). however when i asked a curator about it and pointed out the fact, i was simply told that it was a childs toy!!!surely it wouldn’t take a great leap from a toy to become a working tool?Unless such working tools’ were banned by the priests as being tools of the gods?
November 24th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
By the way “NotRequired” Von Daniken is a fool whose lifes work was nothing more than an economic enterprise. however by simply lumping all alternative theorists as ‘crackpots’ is, i think an affront to those who have dedicated their lives to the research of ancient civilisations. you have to remember that darwin was seen as a crackpot when he produced his origin of species. A lot of what we now see as science fact was ‘crackpot’ theory in the 19th century. Established science is a developing science. To honestly think we are the only advanced civilisation in the “Whole” is very narrow minded thinking. Mars has been proven to have water erosion.. i suppose that is just an anomaly though??how about saturns moon Iapetus. are you able to give a satisfactory conclusion as to the 60,000 feet high and 750 miles long ridge that is seen on it (which is totally straight. no deviation in the direction whatsoever)
As to the ‘Starchild theory’ i do think that is an unfortunate child with a rare genetic/disease.(tho’ i am still trying to find modern day photos/ case histories to support this).
any feedback is welcome, so please don’t hold back on comments, be they supporting or anti- we can maybe start an ‘evidence vault’ to support both sides?
January 11th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Tony and Adam,
Alright, I’ll settle this once and for all, and with as few chances at paradox as possible, I’ll stick to non specifics which you will catch. This fall, when you are out with your friends at that local establishment, you’ll recall a round of drinks bought for your table. Hopefully, when you look my way and see me nod and raise my glass, you’ll recall this message. Cheers!
January 12th, 2009 at 3:28 am
I suspect that what we are seeing in all of this is profound evidence that we don’t know everything. Also, a lot of what we “think” we know is misinterpretation of the evidence or skewed beliefs due to cultural and socialogical conditioning.
In one of his essays, Richard Bach stated that the ancient Egyptians could fly. Obviously, they did not, but Bach points out that they had all the elements necessary to build gliders, bamboo, paprus, and the means of binging them into a glider. Plus, the thermals and wind conditons of the Nile calley would have made extensive glider flights possible.
But the ancient Egyptians were ignorant of the laws of aerodynamics and so never flew.
It is likely that we are also ignorant of some basic physical laws that might enable us to also do things that now we might regard as magic, as the ancient Egyptians would have regarded flight.
The English physicist, Steven Hawking, has postulated that what we regard as immutable physical constants might only be local phenomena. That, as the solar system moves into another area of the universe, any of these might change or other laws might come into play. So, nothing is impossible.
March 29th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Very interesting though very debatable. An oopen mind must be kept on decided the true origins to these objects. I have read extensively on these subjects and concluded that further research needs to be done in order to comfirm or deny that these artifacts are real or hoax. What is acceptable though is that all these artifacts were found out of place. It is also funny that many people like to read and talk about these artifacts but no one decides to group up and research to put these artifacts into proven records.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:30 pm
If certain acient artifavts like these are found one place but originaly from another, could either meen they were stolen after ther were created, or traded through out many places. But the thing that could change our history books, is how many times they were stolen or traded. Mostly because after years of being stolen or traded no one really knows were the where truly from. Or they could have been moved when a tragic storm came to their people.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Hello, i guess this is as good of a place as any to post and let you know. I went to subscribe to your RSS feed, and when i clicked it i got an error that said “Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_CONSTANT_ENCAPSED_STRING” followed by other gibberish that scrolled off the screen. I had to force the page to stop loading because it locked up my browser. Cheers.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Hello your findings are very interesting, I also find your last name interesting my grandfather was in world war II and changed our name from Boczor to Bozer his name was James William Bozer, he had 8 sisters I never met, they are all hungarian and so are we. We live in the united states and my grandfather passed before I could ask him. Any connection you know of???
September 17th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
good readings here really enjoyed your website
*thumbs up*
September 23rd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Hello, really great post i appreciate you work!
October 6th, 2009 at 9:03 am
I like beauty especially with flowers. I was searching this theme on the Internet for a long time, finally I found and must say is awesome post. I have bookmarked this page for later use. Thanks. Florist Edmonton
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:51 am
The artefacts should be artifacts
November 10th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Hey… This is the second time I have visited your blog and I really enjoy your work. Please keep us updated! Thanks!