Human Fossilization: thousands of years they say

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,019
Reactions
15,691
I am not sure what the exact fossilization time frame is. Correct me if I'm wrong, but something fossilized is normally being associated (by the general public) with a very distant past. Normally we hear this "fossil" word referencing dinosaurs, which automatically makes those creatures (if they ever existed) to be millions of years old. I guess, minimum numbers associated with "fossils / petrifaction" would be in the thousands. Surprisingly, I did not find a definitive answer as far as fossilization time frames go. The subject appears to be pretty sketchy, but in general, as a society, we appear to enjoy far away dates.

I want to share with you something I ran into recently. Judge for yourself how long the organic matter fossilization process takes.

The Petrified Man Unearthed Near Leroy, Illinois.
June 4th 1904.
fossilized_man.jpg

fossilized_man_1.jpg

Source
I probed around the internet, and did not find much pertaining to the poor guy above. This here, is the only article somewhat referencing the issue of this petrified guy, and possibly of some other dude as well. In the "Leroy" case, it appears to be portrayed as some elaborate hoax (rebar inside?), which is common for such occurrences. For Nebraska one, it is claimed that there were some bones found.
  • Not sure how much faith could be put into a 1904 event, which somebody talked about in 1960s, and was recalled in 2004.
  • Judge for yourself basically. This "green on black" piece confused me for some reason.
demoin_courier.jpg


24 years: Flash to Stone
But then, we have older newspaper articles like the one below. Whether it gives this "much faster" human fossilization any additional merit is up to every individual observer. I believe that it does, and articles like this are a tremendous asset in our search for the truth.

petr_1-art.jpg

Source

1800s Books
Additionally we have some curious information published in the 19th century books. Below are just a few examples. Am I the only one thinking that our "petrified butterflies," "petrified hands and feet" could be exactly what they appeared to be?

petrification_1.jpg

1886 Elements of Geology

Petrified Bird's Nest
Instances like this, we will never be told about at school. The reasons could be painstakingly obvious, for our scientists prefer to avoid certain topics.
  • do you not remember that piece of petrified moss Uncle Professor used to show you?
petrification_birds_nest.jpg

petrification_birds_nest_1.jpg

1889 Magazine for Young Folks

Tartarian Connection
In 1897 Mark Twain included an adage comparing truth and fiction in Following the Equator: A Journey Around the World:
  • Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.
  • Truth is stranger than fiction because we don't meet it as often.
petrification_tartary.jpg

1867 All the Year Round

Tartarian Petrification +
Naturally could not help myself, and had to find something else pertaining to them Tartarians getting petrified together with their chariots. How cruel would that be? You hope for a nice day, but somebody with some fasces (speculating here) has a different opinion on the ethics of modern warfare of the time, and voila:
  • sorry, these poor folk did not look like no peaceful shepherds to me
Translation: This rock which has the shapes of people, cattle, camels and other animals and things was once a group of shepherds and their flocks who suddenly petrified in an amazing metamorphosis, without changing their previous appearance. This miracle took place 300 years ago.
kd_separator.jpg

KD: Well, beware of the petrifying wind, I guess, for we truly don’t know who controls it. Oh, and when that next earthquake comes, hope for the best. Don't kick them rocks, my friends... you never know, could be a part of your ancestor...

If you run into any additional articles, or photographs pertaining to the issue, please share with the rest.
 

Red Bird

Well-known member
Messages
399
Reactions
941
I started reading the reference links to the Wikipedia article on The warriors. Many stated that all of them had different faces, etc. down to their shoes and were lifelike down to the fingernails. Some figures were acrobats and others. They were found with real weapons, too. There was definitely some kind of battle that occurred and mainline people have a theory of course including recently that the Chinese could never have done this so must’ve had Hellenistic influence. There’s much more like they don’t want to open the actual emperor’s tomb because things might disintegrate, be destroyed, which doesn’t really make sense.

 

anotherlayer

Well-known member
Messages
659
Reactions
2,252
Another point in favor of the mud fossil guy.
Reminds me of the turning into a pillar of salt during sodom and Gomorrah episode.
Also, were the Chinese warriors always terracotta?

When it comes to these guys, I sometimes think they were carved out of wood. Some of them are so out of proportion, they look like the results of child labor. Either way, I do have my suspicion that these are "fake" or rather, modern and molded.
 

Red Bird

Well-known member
Messages
399
Reactions
941
When it comes to these guys, I sometimes think they were carved out of wood. Some of them are so out of proportion, they look like the results of child labor. Either way, I do have my suspicion that these are "fake" or rather, modern and molded.
Yes, and they say they were originally painted (not sure if all were) and 10 basic head shapes identified. Plus all the hands seem to be in the same position. It is not above being a modern hoax, but I don’t think it looks like child labor and is totally amazing. The burial of the slaves are there too supposedly.
How lifelike should one look when petrified?

24148
When it comes to these guys, I sometimes think they were carved out of wood. Some of them are so out of proportion, they look like the results of child labor. Either way, I do have my suspicion that these are "fake" or rather, modern and molded.
Surface chromium on Terracotta Army bronze weapons is neither an ancient anti-rust treatment nor the reason for their good preservation
These warriors were armed with fully functional weapons made primarily of bronze. From the partial excavation of Pit 1 alone, dozens of spears, lances, swords and hooks have been recovered, in addition to over 80 ferrules that would have been attached to the distal end of shafted weapons, over 260 crossbow triggers and as many as 40,000 arrowheads, typically found in bundles of one hundred that originally were the contents of one warrior’s quiver. In most cases, the organic components of the weapons, such as wooden shafts, quivers, scabbards or crossbow stocks, have largely decayed. However, the preservation of the bronze is remarkably good overall, with many of the weapons displaying shiny, almost pristine surfaces and sharp blades...
Since the first excavation of these bronze weapons in the 1970s, researchers highlighted the arguably exceptional state of preservation of the weapons after over two thousand years buried


Maybe not so out of proportion..

soldiers.JPG


24157


24158
 
Last edited:

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,561
Reactions
4,921
This is absolutely amazing evidence. And unsettling. Two things stood out in these stories: 1) It only took 24 years to totally disintegrate the clothes in a closed coffin which makes the 3000 year old talking pants story obvious BS, and 2) it gave a date of 1634 for some similar event happening in Tartary. From all the other narrowing of timelines we've done on this site, "the catastrophe" seems to be in that mid 1600's range and this article pinpoints a year. This would be a good starting point to search for events connected to that year. Excellent find, KD!
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,019
Reactions
15,691
Pretty scary ain’t it? If this speedy petrification can occur in nature (that is if there is anything natural there at all), than with enough knowledge it can be recreated. And if there is a weapon out there capable of turning flesh into stone (and evidence suggests there could be a weapon like this), than it is pretty disturbing indeed. Being at some controllers’ mercy would suck...
 

Timeshifter

Well-known member
Messages
333
Reactions
1,024
If we can prove that petrification/ fossilisation can be speedy, either instant or relatively few years, then mainstream science will shit itself.

All of those trees, bones etc we are taught (indoctrinated) have to be ancient, could have been made in our lifetime...

That exites me more than it should!
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,019
Reactions
15,691
I think we could have the true fate of those poor Pompeii souls here. Could they had gotten petrified in place? I could never figure out why they did not run away from the volcano ashes falling from the sky. Sure we are being told that the heat was intense, and the ash volume was overwhelming but did it really happen this way?

The narrative tells us:
  • Volcanic ash typically buried inhabitants who did not escape the lethal effects of the earthquake and eruption.
  • Organic remains, including wooden objects and human bodies, were entombed in the ash and decayed away, making natural molds; and excavators used these to make plaster casts, unique and often gruesome figures from the last minutes of the catastrophe.
Now, this plaster cast thing seems to rule out any petrification thing but I was not there to observe any plaster casting to verify that for myself.

Fortunately for us, them archaeologists failed to communicate properly and provided us with the following gem:
6F3C12F5-AEA5-4F43-865D-DCFD7FD98FD5.jpeg

KD: Now I’m wondering if they lied to us about them Pompeii body casts. After all they lied to us about the date.
 

Timeshifter

Well-known member
Messages
333
Reactions
1,024
I think we could have the true fate of those poor Pompeii souls here. Could they had gotten petrified in place? I could never figure out why they did not run away from the volcano ashes falling from the sky. Sure we are being told that the heat was intense, and the ash volume was overwhelming but did it really happen this way?

The narrative tells us:
  • Volcanic ash typically buried inhabitants who did not escape the lethal effects of the earthquake and eruption.
  • Organic remains, including wooden objects and human bodies, were entombed in the ash and decayed away, making natural molds; and excavators used these to make plaster casts, unique and often gruesome figures from the last minutes of the catastrophe.
Now, this plaster cast thing seems to rule out any petrification thing but I was not there to observe any plaster casting to verify that for myself.

Fortunately for us, them archaeologists failed to communicate properly and provided us with the following gem:
KD: Now I’m wondering if they lied to us about them Pompeii body casts. After all they lied to us about the date.
Maybe the volcano ash was the least of their worries at the time? Certainly would make more sense they were flash petrified (literally)
 

dreamtime

Well-known member
Messages
575
Reactions
2,965
I think we could have the true fate of those poor Pompeii souls here. Could they had gotten petrified in place? I could never figure out why they did not run away from the volcano ashes falling from the sky. Sure we are being told that the heat was intense, and the ash volume was overwhelming but did it really happen this way?

The narrative tells us:
  • Volcanic ash typically buried inhabitants who did not escape the lethal effects of the earthquake and eruption.
  • Organic remains, including wooden objects and human bodies, were entombed in the ash and decayed away, making natural molds; and excavators used these to make plaster casts, unique and often gruesome figures from the last minutes of the catastrophe.
Now, this plaster cast thing seems to rule out any petrification thing but I was not there to observe any plaster casting to verify that for myself.

Fortunately for us, them archaeologists failed to communicate properly and provided us with the following gem:
KD: Now I’m wondering if they lied to us about them Pompeii body casts. After all they lied to us about the date.
this is from a german article on it:

In May, archaeologists there had succeeded in reproducing the complete body of a horse with a plastic plaster cast. The cavity left by the animal in the hardened rock was filled with plaster.

Pompeji: Archäologen finden Reste eines kompletten Pferdes - WELT

This whole "we put plaster cast into a hole that we discovered and where we immediately realized it's a hole of something we need to pour plaster in" story I think is bullshit.

It's either:

- It was petrified
- all the figures are a hoax and some kind of art project to begin with (my current belief)
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,019
Reactions
15,691
@dreamtime: entirely possible. I’m not an expert on any of this, meanwhile 19th century pubs question this casting thing. I have not looked hard at it yet.

Interesting that multiple English language articles are worded in a similar way:
And we have a couple interesting dates there. 1631 for Pompeii and 1634 for those fossilized Tartarians.
 

msw141

Member
Messages
12
Reactions
35
I've always searched the term "rapid fossilization" for this. there are some videos on youtube. the topic gets buried because it is a path that leads to questioning gradualism and therefore evolution. Gradualism is the idea that it takes millions or billions of years to explain how a river carved out the grand canyon. but what that does is ignore the evidence put forth by geologists that support catasrophist theories that massive and sudden water flows carved it in a short period of time. I've felt that gradualism is just a cheat for science to explain evolution when the hard evidence isn't there. it's no different than the knock they give creationists for saying "God made it". Another example is "dark matter" which "exists" only because it has to exist otherwise the prevailing theories about physics and gravity are wrong. Dark Matter is simply an as yet undiscovered amount of mass that exists in the universe that makes the calculations work.

you can fossilize something in short amounts of time. they retrieve "fossilized" items from cave mines all the time that were left there only a century or so ago. They've also found soft tissue in T-Rex fossils that shouldn't exist if they are as old as we're told. Evolutionary scientists insist that dinosaurs are ancient because they've "evolved" into modern animals. and you would need a lot of time to support that.

but the fossil record doesn't support that. in fact 95% of all known species of flora and fauna that ever existed died out in 2 specific extinction events in history. mainstream science acknowledges this. and so they've even developed "punctuated equilibrium" which is evolution theory 2.0 that says that in fact species evolve in momentary and rapid transformation. and not slowly. that's to keep up withe mounting (lack of) evidence.

Anyway, back to fossils. The one thing that I think of most when it comes to fossils is how they even exist at all. consider a planet without humans. an animal dies. you think that a million years pass and it slowly gets sediment covering it and it fossilizes? No. It dies, it gets eaten, it rots, it decays. What become fossils are animals that get buried in sediment rapidly, like a mud flow during a flood. Those get buried, the oxygen is cut off and they calcify. But we're talking about lots of floods, or massive floods, all over the world. And now you see the problem. As an evolutionary scientist, you can't admit to global floods. That's too much like Noah. And rapid fossilization of organic life buried in a massive flood that could be fossilized in only thousands of years instead of millions puts us uncomfortably close to the Noah timeline.

I think Cataclysm science has it right. And they get hurt because of the battle that evolutionary science has in not conceding ground to creationists.

I believe the world has gone through cycles of cataclysm and rebirth. This is just the latest age. Genesis is not about the birth of the universe, just the story of this cycle between cataclysms. I bet there are fossils of humans from that time before. And they're probably being hidden away whenever they appear. Too many stories about giants being found in the 1800s. The US was covered in civilizations that were eroded to the mounds that they appeared to us as. but we built over them all, hardly any of it exists anymore.

sorry, if mostly off topic.
 
Last edited:

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
362
Reactions
1,282
Indian tribes have a mythical tradition of trees and animals being turned into stone by electrical forces. Electric Fossils - American Indian myths which speak of electrical disaster and fossilization Also note the reference to the "muddy world" that existed prior to this current one.
“As in the Zuni myth, the earlier, wet and muddy worlds were dominated by monsters, which were created before human beings and preyed on them. Some monsters even pursued people into successive worlds. But the Sun gave special lightning bolts to the twin sons of Changing Woman, so that they could overcome the monsters.”
And then we have these ammonites. The fossilization of so many individuals all at once is difficult to explain by the standard theories, IMO. Even if they were suddenly buried in an underwater mudslide, ocean currents might simply move the mud around, exposing the dead creatures to scavengers long before they reached the fossilization stage. These ones seem to have been fossilized instantaneously, perfectly preserving their internal organs and everything. I don't see how that can be accomplished over millions of years.

Whatever is going on, it's clear that there are multiple reasons why and how something can become fossilized or petrified, and a single theory doesn't account for all of them.

This whole "we put plaster cast into a hole that we discovered and where we immediately realized it's a hole of something we need to pour plaster in" story I think is bullshit.
You know, I always did wonder about that. You're excavating the ruins of an ancient city, your shovel or pick-ax falls through into an empty space...and then what? Well, I guess you take a look inside, realize that it's human-shaped and that you just stuck your head inside the cavity of a human body, and figure you could pour plaster into it to see what the person looked like. I mean, that's how I imagine it happened, and since we aren't actually told how it happened, my imagination is all I have to go by. But then there is this:

Pompeii Victims' Bodies Revealed in Scans: Photos

pompeii child.jpg

Wait, I thought that all they found were the empty cavities of bodies that had decayed! So it wasn't that at all, they were actually petrified. I mean, how else would there be bones still inside? If the bodies had decayed, leaving only a hollow space around them, then the bones would have been lying in a pile at the bottom of each cavity. Or some were petrified and some were not? Questions, questions, and more questions. I wish they'd all get together, decide on a story, and stick to it.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,019
Reactions
15,691
They did get together and decided on a story. And the story they decided on has very little to do with our real past. At least it appears that way to me.

It seems that they are lying about the date of the city of Pompeii annihilation, and about how its people really died. In other words some past TPTB substituted the mechanism of death.

What did they need it for?
 

msw141

Member
Messages
12
Reactions
35
I think volcano is still plausible, but I think there's something about the entire Mediterranean that gets glossed over in academics. That is that there's so much underwater today. Look at proximity of Pompeii to the coast. Flood could be involved, that receded and left the sediments over the city. I wish I could find it, but I just saw a map a couple of months ago that pinned the locations of all the verified ruin structures that have been detected off the coast of Spain. For all the talk about climate change, I never hear anyone talking about how in a few thousand years time something drastically changed in that region as now many cities are underwater and the coastline is much further in than it was in the near past. Alexandria in Egypt being one. A number of Roman villas too. The Sahara is full of freshwater fossils from lakes that existed who knows how long ago, but probably not nearly as long ago as we're being told--but then I never recall hearing discussions about these lakes at all outside of fringe historians. There's also a massive network of caves that I think need to be figured out and it seems far too complex to just be shepherds seeking shelter. Some serious shit was going down back in the day.

Screen Shot 2019-06-22 at 12.50.15 PM.png
 

Top