Ancient Footprints in the Sand

I watched a fascinating documentary on just this subject. Also, many plants do better alongside certain other plants (and vice versa). Any decent gardener can attest to that. It's called 'companion gardening'.

I've long believed that a plant's life is just as complex and sentient as an animal's life. We just don't understand it as well.

Tree keeping a rootless tree alive.

I have also considered the idea that rocks are "alive".

I know this sounds outlandish but not quite as strange as an invisible being who helps someone's favorite sports team win a game and who gives them their favorite lottery ticket numbers...

Oh, to be a rock, sitting on a beach for millions of years watching the tide ebb and flow as the wind over time slowly smoothens my surface...

In the Kid's story escape into night, the rocks do have eyes and they're very scary.

Scared me when I was a kid.

I guess some rocks can be toxic. lol

As for the footprints being made by shale...

Shale does not just appear out of nowhere, then leave prints of itself between layers of time than disappear and leave not even a trace of itself within the tiny particles of sand.

footprints made IN shales and siltstones usually represent environments of lacustrine mud flats or delta sediments that have been piled layer upon layer , each well defined layer 'laggerstatte" often contains trace fosils of footprints and casts and molds of gastropods etc.
In the PALUXY Formation of TEXAS (Albian age of the Cretaceous) are many tracks and mud wallows (Ichnofossils) of herds of vegetarian animals of that age (In the Paluxy Shale and Siltstones it was an environment of Delta muds marshes and rivulets that debauched from highlands to the North and were cyclically inundated by tides.

The dino herds<Mostly Creaceous Hadrosaurs and Struthiomines and Galiaforme (Chickne -like dinoaurs weighing a few tons. In among these fossilized tracks were "Tracks" of human-like folks. These were claimed by Creationists to be fact, thus opening another dispute of age/date fossils that were not accepted by cience.
Like the Pitdown man, hose very credibility depended on glues and shellacs.Thats why Piltdown Man, knoown from the erly twentieth century and incorporating many credible scientists as support, wasnt shown to be a fraud (Ultimately) until C14 techniques were validated and chemsitr advanced enough to measure to the ppm level. Anomalous
Xray, C14, and shellac and rabbit glues were found in the fossil and C14 wrapped it up as a fraud (BUT NOT TILL THE 1959s).
The PAUXY shale "human footprints" were really found to be fa kes MIcro optics enabled chemitry to be analyzed by polar microscopy.

Then, two hillwilliams came forward and claimed that they were PAID by a Fundamentalist church that was pushing Creationim, to gouge out some of the hadrosaur prints and then carve toes and foot arches.
The IDers are just like that, they claim valid science then its found out they lied about some basic point of science that took a decade or more to be varified by emergent technology.
SO FAR, there is nothing that was yet found to be even remotely supportive of their worldview.AMAZING eh?

I don't doubt there are a lot of forgeries perpetrated by people claiming to espouse the truth but are instead fabricating and promoting lies.

So, I do understand your hesitancy.

It just seems that these sands footprints are in a substrate that is not shale but a sandy kind of rock.

There does not appear to be shale deposits within the substrate.

I would be suspicious of any findings by "Christian" archaeologists.

This is why National Geographic went to the crapper once it was bought by Fox News. NG posts items that lull the unsuspecting into their propaganda traps.

Noah's Ark Found! and Discovered, Adam's Rib! Jesus' Cave Unearthed!

NG used to be a reputable name...

So I agree with you FM and caution should always be employed when it comes to right wing archaeological "discoveries".

youre right, theres no shale, the layers that contain the footprints are compressed sandy loams (they are still an inurated "soil horizon" Above and below the footprint layers are three or mor indivusl zircon laen ash layers. Thats why the isotope dates are pretty reliable. theres ver little C14 containing layrs and those are mostly left over plant material becaue the platte area that contain footprints are actually remnants of et pockets since it was a rainier time in theglacial stage of the Wisconsin. The real dating ha been performed with Argon/Argon and Potasium/Argon from zircon in the various ash layers that are bneath the footprint layers and above. These are fairly reliable becaue the ash layers are thick and are depoits from small time zones bot bove and below
hen we di some GPS on the sites could tell from the conductivity changes the terminii of both layers.
so the footprint data has some screwy C14, there arent any really reliable dates becaue theres usually a lot of smooshing up of soil layers .

You mean that NG is anothr RUPERT Manga???
Holy **** When did that happen? I wanna wah my bookshelves. We quit getting NG when they posted a seris of articles that were less than believable

Yes, NG is now a shadow of its former self.

mistake i made, the footprint layer is NOT a sandy loam but a gypsum sand with channry layrs(those are all sedimentary). The ash layers are, course, ASH.

Try 450,000 yrs.

Are you really interested in ... Before?

You do understand 'it' is 'hidden' for fear of repetition?

Where would you like to Begin?

Mark.

"Clovis" was fk'd over - Way back.

You guys have been distracted (Intentionally) For so long - It beggars belief.

Here's a starter - Q. What were the pyramids on the Giza Plateau erected for, by whom and when?


In 5yrs time, after multiple rabbitholes - you'll encounter, West, Hancock, Haramein, schoch... Then - you'll have spent enough time researching - That I become interested in directing you furthermore.


Blue-ocean, next summer & a 225% Rise (As of yesterday) In global gas prices - makes this Abruptly Unlikely.

"Gary Schoenung" Go watch his 4X50 mins vids on ytube - or be quiet and watch TV, Fiddle with ya facebook Fam, Or master the art of trough-grazing.

Have a Brilliant Sojourn.

This, at least, is poetic and it stands as such.

Rupert Sheldrake asserts that all, even inanimate objects and planets and suns are conscious. I have never understood his reasoning enough to object to it. Perhaps someone can shed some light on this. I'm not looking for somebody to argue on this proposition, just somebody to explain his reasoning.

I think we would have to be a rock to understand what it is like to be a rock.

Perhaps rocks can utilize atomic structures in a way that we can't. Maybe in a binary way they have intelligence, through magnetism.

Much like a tree can utilize their roots in ways that we don't.

One subtle cellular or even chemical composition can make a huge difference with life forms.

Perhaps rocks all communicate to one another through atomic roots. Roots that they acquired from the big bang.

Maybe they think outside of the box...

It seems at best harmless to speculate.

Giving sentient characteristics to rocks may at least provide a bit of reverence on how we disrupt and disturb their earthly habitat.

Perhaps even the wind is a sentient being...
The sun communicates with the wind through its rays and charged plasma particles that form the aurora borealis. The wind is alive...


Will the wind ever remember
The names it has blown in the past?
And with this crutch, its old age and its wisdom
It whispers, "No, this will be the last"
And the wind cries, "Mary"

Jimi Hendrix

Sheldrake is 'tuned-in'.
I say 'is' intentionally.

Everything is 'Conscious' because it reacts and interacts with everything else.
A star, tree, proton... Etc -Does NOT have a brain to orientate its experience - Nonetheless It/They 'Experience' - Therefor - They are Conscious.

"Awareness" is a completely different ballgame.
Don't confuse the two - as similar.

Have a lovely Thursday

I think, therefore I am?

We have proven that computers can easily out calculate humans by use of a simple algorithm and silicon...

Can rocks become sentient?



Good Thursday to you too Mark.