The Archyfantasies channel on Youtube does a really good job to dubunk a lot of the Ooparts that keep floating around. I was going to do a blog post "to keep it real" and point out the alternative (and more likely) explanations for many of the ooparts (out of place artifacts) that we see coming up on pseudo-archeological websites and programs, but I found that this nice lady had done a lot of the work for me. First, here is the website from where she draws the subjects of her criticism, at least for the first few videos.
Top 10 Most Puzzling Ooparts
Here are the episodes of her debunking channel, with my notes below.
Top 10 Not-So-Puzzling Artifacts- Grooved Spheres
1. They are by no means perfectly spherical
2. They are hematite, not a man-made alloy, and by no means stronger than steel. Steel varies considerably in hardness, and hence the argument is proven to be an unscientific comparison aimed at laymen.
3. The claimed "vibrating qualities" of the spheres stem from a misquote, and no actual experiments have been done that prove these qualities. The spheres moved in a closed environment for the researcher because blasting was going on at a quarry in the area, and he was in fact commenting on this. The quote was removed from context to bolster pseudo-scientific theories.
4. Explains the geological process by which the grooves are formed. Happens all over the world in the southern hemisphere.
This artifact has been debunked since 1996 put still persists on the internet.
Inca Stones : Volcanic stones with petina on them, scraped away to reveal images.
Bought most of them from villagers, who made them to make money. People have confessed to making frauds. Brontosaurs were debunked, and yet they show up on Inca stones, sometimes with predator teeth and fins. Chines style dragon depicted, etc. Petina on the stones has been proven to contain motor oil or to have been made with dung. Scrapings are extremely fresh and sharp and had to have been made relatively recently. More...
None of the people or organizations that appear in the story have records- essentially, they did not exist. Only one very poor pictures exists of the stones, and it looks just like a known asian artifact, the "bi discs," which is not an oopart. Forgotten language with no ties to other languages but text was supposedly translated? No local stories about the caves. All we have is a suspicious sounding story, no records or evidence.
It looks like the channel will be going down the lists debunking the top 10 and has other interesting podcasts talking about various Ooparts and misconceptions.
It's very interesting to me that her videos have less hits than many of even the most poorly researched pseudo-scientific videos. Debunking hoaxes and mis-identified ooparts just isn't popular because Americans especially want to believe in aliens, Atlantis, and/or a Creation history that adheres to modern religious interpretations of the Bible (as opposed to the Bible itself).
The blogger hasn't gotten to the footprints of humans with dinosaurs yet, but I'll go ahead and point out that many researchers don't think the "dinosaur footprints" look like dinosaurs, and even if they are actual animal footprints, that giant birds and lizards lived alongside man in many places during the Pleistocene.
Here is another website that debunks the footprints and many of the other popular Ooparts:
I've been looking for an explanation for the "genetic Disc" that is made of Lydite.
Alien theorists claim that we can't carve lydite (or basanite stone) even today. However, the actuality is that granite and basanite stone have actually been carved since at least 3000 BC, and there are techniques for turning stone temporarily soft for molding with the use of vinegar and also various plant materials. It is a known fact that hunter gatherers used such a substance to "mold" ivory long before the Neolithic, or even Msolithic eras. The other part that supposedly makes this an oopart is that images on the disc depict the male human sperm, which it definitely seems to do. However, there are many examples of lenses that date before the common era and it is not inconceivable that a primitive microscope could have been invented in ancient times and then fallen into disuse after succeeding cultures took over. Also, it's been proven that some women see more colors of the spectrum than most humans do, and that Neanderthals could both see better than humans (at least in the dark) and had more of their brains devoted to processing vision. It is not surprising that certain races (or hybrid races) of Hss might have needed less amplification (or lithic aid) than moderns to see things on a microscopic level. It's a remarkable object, and if not a fake it may prove the existence of an "advanced" culture, but the Romans were an advanced culture. So were the Aurignacions of 30 thousand years ago. It doesn't follow that this culture need be as "advanced" as modern culture in similar ways, or that the said technology need come from the stars.
Here is an interesting discussion on the subject:
Discussing the Genetic Disc
Joe Lyon Layden is a prehistoric fiction author and primitive musician. To receive a free copy of this entire novella "The Man from Parkho Khatune Bears Favor," as well as three free songs and monthly updates, freebies, and discounts on Joe's ongoing work, please sign up for the newsletter below.