Talk:Out-of-place artifact

I removed these items:

• The copper seal in a chalk bed
• The gold thread in stone
• The human skull in tertiary gravel
• The iron instrument in coal
• The letters in stone

If we're going to include these, we need more information, and proper links. User:Ben Standeven as 70.242.141.72 05:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC).

The "Mortar and Pestle" entry is confusing, too. The link to "mortar and pestle" just describes the generic tool, not the OOPart item. The link to "Table Mountain" goes to the wrong mountain (South Africa instead of one of the two California Table Mountains. Could someone please fix this to point to the right mountain and hopefully to some additional information about this 50 million year old tool? Thanks. Phiwum 21:22, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Source

Forbidden Archaeology has been refuted as a work overlooking many crucial pieces of evidence in the dating and interpretation of ancient artifacts. See: [1]. If this is the primary source for this article, the whole thing ought to be questioned, reviewed, and rewritten or deleted if necessary.--Rockero 05:44, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree totally. Lets have some sources. I have yet to see a OOPART which has come through unscathed from serious investigation. --Dumbo1 23:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

While I agree that all of these items have non-paranormal explanations, and that this article should be better written, we mustn't think that just mentioning them validates them as OOPart. If enough people have the mistaken idea that these are inexplicable, then that belief deserves mention. We don't want to lend support to erroneous ideas, but we can't ignore their existence either. ... All of which means, this article should exist and most or all of the current entries should remain, but we need to greatly improve the wording and context. - DavidWBrooks 01:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Map of the Creator?

I appreciate the link to the Pravda article regarding the Map of the Creator. Does anyone know any other sources of information on this thing? The photos in that article aren't particularly illuminating (I can't see any characters, for instance), so it might be nice to see another (more skeptical) article.

Thanks.

Do not trust Pravda too much... --Jollyroger 12:02, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Explained

guys, lot of the Oopart here are well explained on scientific basis or are known hoaxes. (like the iron pillar, the crystal skulls, map of creator...) The article needs some work. If you want, check the it.wiki voice to know which ones are explained and hoe, and wich are not. --Jollyroger 12:02, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't know Italian. I've deleted the map of the creator, since that page has been deleted. Ben Standeven 04:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

are you guys imbecile?

OOParts are EVERYWHERE!!!!

The Great Pyramids, the Tomb of Mary Magdalene, the Tomb of Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, the Olmeca culture in Mexico, world flood stories in OVER 600 different cultures all over the world, the Bible, the Piri Reis map, ancient drills, cranes, towers, the Moais in Rapa Nui, Nessie, the Yeti.. YOU TURN AROUND AND YOU SEE SOMETHING RELATED TO AN OOPART..

Was America discovered by Columbus? Was the first radio invented in the 1800s? Is the dentistry recent? The common answer 2 all those questions is a simple NO.

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Of course, yu assholes believe in all that fossil crap theory and stuff even though is based in just ASSUMPTIONS.

Just follow your ASS way, even though no physical law on Earth supports the Big Bang thing even the Roman Church believes it.