The rock it was in is claimed to be cretaceous rock.
The main point is to show how natural processes of mineralization can do things that you would think would take much longer and that it can do it it places and ways that can be very confusing to archeologists and geologists.
Now think about all the other things that have been buried.
The rock it was in is claimed to be cretaceous rock.
OK but it was not actually cretaceous rock. The claim was false.
The main point is to show how natural processes of mineralization can do things that you would think would take much longer and that it can do it it places and ways that can be very confusing to archeologists and geologists.
This really just points out how these objects are NOT from ancient times pre-flood. If they can become embedded in rock quickly then there is no proof of an OOP artifact.
The rock it was in is claimed to be cretaceous rock.
The main point is to show how natural processes of mineralization can do things that you would think would take much longer and that it can do it it places and ways that can be very confusing to archeologists and geologists.
Now think about all the other things that have been buried.
OK but it was not actually cretaceous rock. The claim was false.
This really just points out how these objects are NOT from ancient times pre-flood. If they can become embedded in rock quickly then there is no proof of an OOP artifact.
We were talking about how an object could get embedded in coal