Embedded Artifacts

"Of late, much has been written about anomalous archaeologic finds that call for a reappraisal of our currently accepted time table for the development and spread of human civilization upon this earth. Once again, it seems Charles Fort was also ahead of his time with regards to noticing that such artifacts are worthy of further attention. One of the most compelling and conclusive types of evidence is that of artifacts requiring manufacture by human hands that are found embedded in stone or coal. Such finds are so compelling simply because such artifacts can be fairly conclusively dated simply by looking at the age of the material in which they are found. The only flaw in this is the fact that the means of recovery of the artifacts often allows doubt about whether or not the objects were indeed embedded or were, perhaps, accidentally and unknowingly, introduced during their discovery. Or, it is sometimes suggested that the artifact was introduced in modern times in some way before its discovery. However, these same flaws are shared by the artifacts that are the evidence upon which all of our currently accepted archaeological theories and beliefs are based (dating by strata). One could, perhaps, ask the question of why some data is accepted when it is in line with current dogma and why other anomalous finds are disregarded and damned to oblivion simply because they are anomalous? Following are examples of "Out Of Place Artifacts" (OOPARTS) to be found in the works of Charles Fort.
     "Proc.Soc.of Antiq.of Scotland, 1-1-121: That in a lump of coal, from a mine in Scotland, an iron instrument had been found---'The interest attaching to this singular relic arises from the fact of its having been found in the heart of a piece of coal, seven feet under the surface.' If we accept that this object of iron was of workmanship beyond the means and skill of the primitive men who may have lived in Scotland when coal was forming there---'The instrument was considered to be modern.' That our expression has more realness, or higher approximation to realness, than has the attempt to explain that is made in the Proceedings: That in modern times someone may have bored for coal, and that his drill may have broken off in the coal it had penetrated. Why he should have abandoned such easily accessible coal, I don't know. The important point is that there was no sign of boring (emphasis mine): that this instrument was in a lump of coal that had closed around it so that its presence was not suspected, until the lump of coal was broken. No mention can I find of this damned thing in any other publication." (pages 129-130)
      In Notes and Queries "...there is an account of an ancient copper seal, about the size of a penny, found in chalk, at a depth of from five to six feet, near Bredenstone, England. The design upon it is said to be of a monk kneeling before a virgin and child: a legend upon the margin is said to be :'St.Jordanis Monachi Spaldingie.' I don't know about that. It looks very desirable ---undesirable to us." (page 130) In Scientific American appeared a newspaper story that related that " that about the first of June, 1851, a powerful blast near Dorchester, Mass., cast out from a bed of solid rock a bell-shaped vessel of an unknown metal: floral designs inlaid with silver; 'art of some cunning workman.'" (page 130)
      " A block of metal found in coal, Austria, 1885. It is now in the Salzburg museum. ...It is said that, though of 'true meteoric material,' this object is virtually a steel object. ...It's a cube. There is a deep incision all around it. Of its faces, two that are opposite are rounded. ...Composition---iron, carbon, and a small quantity if nickel. It has the pitted surface that is supposed...to be characteristic of meteorites. ...The scientists who examined it could reach no agreement. They bifurcated: then a compromise was suggested; but the compromise is a product of disregard:

That it was of true meteoric material, and had not been shaped by man;
That it was not of true meteoric material, but telluric iron that had been shaped by man;
That it was true meteoric material that had fallen from the sky, but had been shaped by man, after its fall.

Ancient Advanced Technology

"There have been found a number of ancient artifacts that can only be accurately described as "advanced technology" or as requiring advanced technology to be created. These artifacts are "too-advanced" for the accepted level of sophistication of our ancient ancestors. These objects are an enduring mystery that are not explained by currently accepted theories of our species past. In fact, in many cases they have not been addressed by the experts at all or have only been dismissed without a solid, comprehensive explanation. Following are accounts of some such artifacts that Fort uncovered in his research and included in his works
     In the Annals of Scientific Discovery is an account of how "...at the meeting of the British Association, 1853, Sir David Brewster had announced that he had to bring before the meeting an object 'of so incredible a nature that nothing short of the strongest evidence was necessary to render the statement at all probable'. A crystal lens had been found in the treasure-house at Nineveh. ...This thing is buried alive in the heart of propriety: it is in the British Museum. Carpenter, in The Microscope and Its Revelations, gives two drawings of it. Carpenter argues that it is impossible to accept that optical lenses had ever been made by the ancients...he says that this object must have been an ornament. According to Brewster, it was not an ornament, but "a true optical lens'" (page 134)
     "In the Rept.Smithsonian Inst., 1881-619, there is an account, by Charles C.Jones, of two silver crosses that were found in Georgia. They are skillfully made, highly ornamented crosses, but are not conventional crucifixes: all arms of equal length. Mr.Jones (suggested)...that De Sota had halted at the 'precise' spot where the crosses were found." However, upon one of the crosses is "...an inscription that has no meaning in Spanish or any other known, terrestrial language: 'IYNKICIDU,' according to Mr.Jones. He thinks that this is a name, and that there is an aboriginal ring to it, though I should say, myself, that he was thinking of the far-distant Incas: that the Spanish donor cut on the cross the name of an Indian to whom it was presented. But we look at the inscription ourselves and see that the letters said to be 'C' and 'D' are turned the wrong way, and that the letter said to be 'K' is not only turned the wrong way, but is upside down." (page 147)

Mysterious Constructions

"It is difficult to accept that the remarkable, the very extensive, copper mines in the region of Lake Superior were ever the works of American aborigines. Despite the astonishing extent of these mines, nothing has ever been found to indicate that the region was ever inhabited by permanent dwellers---'...not a vestige of a dwelling, a skeleton, or a bone has been found.' The Indians have no traditions relating to the mines."(pages 147-148)