How many kinds of fossilized cells of animals have been found?

Whether or not this joker is a genius--and we have no evidence of that here--he is hidebound by religious fervor--and we have abundant evidence of that here--so that any conclusions he reaches are automatically suspect. You're someone unknown to us, and your site is an unknown quantity as well. Why should anyone here take your recommendation for someone who thinks that rocks and minerals are not the same things, and who invokes god whenever the rhetorical going gets rough? He doesn't even present viable logical arguments for his positions, never mind evidence. Maybe you're so highly impressed with him because you, too, invoke god whenever you are faced with a seemingly insurmountable conundrum.

You're reduced to ipse dixit--why is it illogical to assert that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof? That idea was not original with Carl Sagan, by the way.

I smell dirty socks.

I smell incense and the reek of blood sacrifice . . . god made 'em do it . . .

It's not illogical. It's the epitome of reasonable. Otherwise we would have to consider the possibility that New York city was built by a herd of purple chickens.

Not another pixie dipshit....I don't know who taught you pig Latin but they have a lot to answer for....this is typical of those who have no confidence in their education...they state the same things over and over again like a mantra, hoping to impress. A "new paradigm" and a "quantum leap" are examples of the uneducated getting a hold of words and over using them.

I think that the disingenuous nature of all of the bewildered's posts strip him of any credibility. First he shows up and asks a series of "homework style" questions all with question marks. Then, as we peel back the onion, his true nature as a proselytizer became known and hes already made up his mind about the "Fossil nature " of the brains n bones supposedly from the Carboniferous. His belief in Carboniferous human beings is based upon several "fossils" that have been dismissesd by real scientists (some of the surgeons quoted were Creationists who probably thought that a little lie "for Jesus" will be forgiven.)

Even a noted Creation "scientist" has come out disputing these fossils.
I dont think that bewildered is actually bewildered, hes a huxter for Christ and hes peddling his crap to the rubes and to the simple.

Im not even going to the claims that he speaks with angels and they tell him about Darwin.

He's gone way past credibility and well into the incredible.

Reply tuh the lot o' yuh,
Ouch! ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem!
By the way, bewildered is as far away from a Jesus follower as it gets, probably further than you all.
I know this from his other writings and research.
I however, am a follower of Jesus.
Oooo, Owww, take it easy on the old idiot, wees can't help being the stoopid one here!
I started my conversation with you asking for both of us to leave our (God) for me and god of evolution for you, out of this.
I thought maybe you could talk science talk...you know..."talk about science"
Oh well, I should have been more cautious about believing in strict "science"
talk.
I expect that you are smart enough to know some of it, but not smart enough to stay on the subject without ad hominem.
How would anyone ever be able to take you seriously if you can't maintain a focus on a topic without ad hominem?
Just for kicks though, since a lot of real scientists who know this fossil will be seeing this thread, the fossil is real, I don't care what you think of it or say of it, none of you have seen it or held it or studied it.
In reality, if you stop to think of it, who is actually "bewildered" now?
OOps, I hear AD HOMINEM coming, cause yuh really just can't stay on the subject of science...can you?
One last note, I had it in Pittsburg a couple of years ago, and scientists from around the world saw it. Sorry you lost that opportunity.

It appears that you are one of those who consider any criticism or contradiction to be "ad hominem." I suspect that you don't even know what it means. Argumentum ad hominem means to attack the person presenting the idea rather than the idea itself. People here have reapeatedly asked Bewildered to explain what he is saying, to provide evidence for his claims. He doesn't do it. To say that he therefore loses credibility is not a personal attack on him, it is a accurate description of the result of his posts here.

The three people who have been criticizing him here are none of them (us) "Jesus followers." Thanks for the rush to judgment, but we already know from experience that confronted with an inability to articulate support for his arguments, there is a high probability that Bewildered will invoke "god."

By the way, you're the one who introduced the concept of "Jesus" here, not any of us.

EDIT: I see FM did mention Jesus--neither Roswell nor i have done so, though. And, for your information, FM is a geologists who makes his living working with this science.

Really? Can you show us an example?

(by the way, some of the comments we've been making on this thread are tied into other threads in which Bewildered is entertaining us with a flurry of outlandish statements, so apologies if some of our comments seem a bit out of context)

What other real scientists will be seeing this thread? Do we know them?

It's true we haven't seen/touched/held your fossil, so in light of cyber restrictions you will need do provide very good evidence using other resources in order to validate any scientific claims on your part. Is there anything other than what we've seen so far that we need to consider?

I dont thoiink anyone has denied that the "brain" is real. Youve gotta admit that the followup questions like
1Why are there impressed fingerprints in the silica matrix?
2How and when was the brain harvested from its owner
3Hydrothermal silica replacement of organic tissue is a destructive , very hot proposition. Did someone actually pick up the brain in its hydrothermal state (if you are arguing for a natural deposition of silica) or was this the result of "pickling in a diatomaceous earth solution?

4The probable truth in the "fdossilization" process was the silane/siloxane and hydrogen peroxide solution trick. That can easily be affirmed or refuted by all these scientists who seem to be partying around the brain/

AS several others on those qweb sites have said. Ok so it s a brain, what does that prove anyway?

As far as ad hominems, weve been trying to get to the bottome of a technical issue with bewildered and you and we seem to be stonewalled with how much real data you wish to release besides opinions and portrait photos from a series of websites.

Exactly.

All right guys, my apologies.
I hope you will understand, it IS difficult from this end also.
I have no reason or desire to attack any of you, and just desire that you extend the same courtesy to me.
A lot of answers, I have.
Some answers are impossible to attain.
Some will be attained, but unfortunately, this thread will be a vapor of the past by time we get them.
I, and others, have had many frustrating moments with this fossil.
I have seen some "scientists" resort to insults and cruelty rather than face the remarkable challenges this fossil presents.

Okay, so let's be civil here and agree to stop the " YEC'ers" are wacko, ignorant, stupid, unlearned, hoaxsters.
Folks, now stay with me here...if you want to come back to that later, then so be it.
You put your prejudices aside, I'll put mine aside, and let's just agree for the sake of argument that I am not a sheister, a hoaxster or con artist.

Let's play a game.
Let's "pretend" that I'm honestly on the up and up.
I will go back through the thread and start answering questions, the best I can.
Just because I can't or don't answer a question, will mean either that I just haven't gotten to it yet, or I don't know, or there is research going in that direction that I am not prepared to answer due to constraints you may not be aware of at this time.
I will do the best I can, which at times, you will be frustrated that it is not good enough.
I offer my apologies for that, right now, up front.

Now, the assumption will be, this is real and not artificial.
I know you don't want to accept this, and that's okay.

Now, the project is...let's resolve this as a real fossil.

(1) This thing is way more bizarre than just fingerprints.
If you people will indulge me, I'll tell you many dozens of things
that exceed the boundaries of possible.
I'll answer some things, you answer some things, we'll try to figure it out as a team.
One of those remarkable things is, that there are finger "handling" impressions on it.
Another is that it has "reverse torque," with left hemisphere occipital petalia and right hemisphere frontal petalia. Right hemisphere slightly larger, and right hemisphere central gyrus slightly forward of the left.
I haven't studied this in a while now, but the best I remember, that indicates left handed male.

I'll get to that later. I am starting a research paper on this in a few days. it will be extensive.

Okay, back to answering (1 and 3)
I find this link to possibilities in the answer to those questions:
http://www.ncsec.org/cadre2/team2_2/Lessons/howDoesWoodPetrify.htm

Pickling...now that is a thought...if you consider dissolved sileaceous volcanic ash infiltrating and forming crystals, to be a sort of "pickling"
I believe that website introduces discouragement to the "high heat" argument.
In fact, it seems to me that it encourages right the opposite of your suggestion.
High heat would be a necessity of artificial fossilization, and also, high heat discourages crystallization, predisposing to agatization instead.

(2) Please...get real here. In the entire course of this discussion, not one person will cause me to say this is artificially manufactured.
If you are going nuts trying to figure out how it was "manufactured"
imagine how difficult it will be when you finally realize it is real, and not manufactured or a fake.
If you will ask the question appropriately as in: Are there indicators of excision on the fossil, either biologically or geologically significant?
Yes, I would answer this.

(4) Farmerman, Part of this is completely true. EXACTLY!!!
The "partying around the brain" part...yes...Suzanne had just confirmed it's validity, and there was extreme excitement.
confirmed or refuted by those scientists...Exactly! Thank you very much!
As to, OK so it is a brain, what does that prove anyway?
You've gotta be kidding me???
Please indulge me for a moment, but there are major significant issues besides young earth or old earth here.
true, old earth is important to you, young earth is important to me, for our respective reasons.
This thing is way bigger than any of our individual biases.
this is true science at it's very finest.
I know you want to attach age and history to everything, but there is also operational science.
You know...the part that says, "how does this thing really tick?"
Now, THAT part is fantastic to me...the "pure science, unbiased and unprejudiced"

Just for the sake of argument, if you can't forsake bias for awhile here, I'll try to swing back and forth, both ways.
Here, try this...
evolution, 360 million years ago, asteroids hit the earth, causing massive regional flooding.
In what we know as North America, there was massive tectonic plate distortion and shifting.
great artesian wells sprang forth their massive reservoirs of sileceaous waters.
Tremendous amounts of volcanoes in the ""Ring of Fire" spewed hundreds of billions of tons of mostly siliconized ash into the atmosphere, thus, among other things, killing virtually all life in this region.
This has repeated itself, of course, with millions of years apart, and different great regions. Thus we prove that virtually all the dinosaurs ( did/ didn't) die at the same time.
There was great violence among the ape people during this time.
one example is the petrified human brain.
One of the "people" whacked another up side the head, ripped the top of the skull off, and took the brain out.
this "person" then set the brain down, for some unknown cultural reason, and started to ingest the yummy arms and legs of the victim "person."
All of a sudden, IT HAPPENED"
The asteroid shower of the million years!
The brain became encased in volcanic ash, forming substantial hardening around it. this formed an artificial cranium.
Then the flood waters came.
They were also extremely saturated with silicon dioxide.
The rest is, well...history!

Young earth version is pretty much the same, except much more recent and a global flood instead of regional.
Even the whacking up side the head part is probably pretty reasonable.
In this version, it was evil and viciousness that brought judgement on the earth by God.

Also, when I started reading the thread, the discussion was about cellular fossilization. You seemed interested. Okay, for whatever it is worth, if you want to talk about something you are having difficulty reasoning out, ok, fine, I'll talk as long as you leave ridicule and mockery out.
if you don't want to talk, fine, I'll go away.
You leave with no science, only your confusion, "hard headedness" and pre conceived ideas.
What do we do here folks? it's your call.

Ok, let's start here. How does this explain the finger impressions left on this brain while in a "plastic" state?

Please note that the University of Alberta has recently developed a new technique to directly date the fossil brain you own. The method is called Uranium-lead radiometric dating method, which is an old method. New technique of this method can now be used DIRECTLY on fossils that has been moved away from stratum.
Details at http://groups.google.com/group/sci.bio.paleontology/browse_thread/thread/ff0edd6a858072b3?hl=zh-TW

You seem to be awfully focused on "ridicule and mockery," when no one has ridiculed you or mocked you. That's what i've heard described all my life as walking around with a chip on one's shoulder. Don't holler until you're hurt.

Just because people don't want to buy a bullshit story is not evidence that you have been ridiculed. However, i do suspect that you may be accustomed to dealing in self-fulfilling prophecy, and that you know that if you persist long enough, you'll be the target of ridicule--which would neatly serve someone whose interest were propaganda rather than truth. Would that describe you?

"1The Pa STate Geological SUrvey was familiar with the guy (Conrad) and dismissed the long bone specimens because they were fossil plant material and they were NOT in situ. They were found in a coal dump that contained rubble and totally disarticlulated rock material."
The Carboniferous femur fossil is not fossil plant material. This article shows the fact clearly: Edit [Moderator]: Link removed
The femur fossil, like a few other fossils of Mr. Conrad, was found articulated to a large shale between the coal veins. Tens of thousands of residents in Mahanoy City know those large shales originated from the coal veins there. Only you questioned their origin. It was found in situ.

So, essentially, this has devolved into a "yes it is--no it ain't" exchange--charming!