Topic: i found a 4-5000 year old bayonet!!

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL started this discussion 9 years ago #63,331

just got a confirmation email from the guy who knows about this stuff that it does look like a laurentian archaic ground slate projectile point :o
so it's contemporaneous with the oldest thing we've found at this site! (another one of those, interestingly)

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 16 minutes later[^] [v] #792,518

cool congrats!!

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 13 minutes later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,519

@OP
nothing of that sort was ever referred to as a bayonet..

Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 12 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,520

No pictures?

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,521

Steal it and sell it.

Meta joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,522

Modern steel bayonets are better. Thanks.

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,523

@792,520 (D)
i unfortunately forgot to take pics today cause i was excited
it'll undoubtedly be up for display in a day or two so i can take pics then :>

@792,519 (C)
what the fuck do you think you know about this

> >On vient de trouver cette pointe. Ça me ressemble à la pointe que SACL a désigné comme être de l'Archaic Laurentienne, mais je n'ai qu'un photo pas super bon. C'est de la pierre polie gris/vert.
> Yes, it does look like a Laurentian Archaic ground slate projectile point. Nice find!

brie !kiTty82duI joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 9 minutes later, 58 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,525

Is it the oldest thing you have found so far?

Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 27 seconds later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #792,526

on a mission to a Greenlandic glacier, I perchance discovered a robot completely composed of ice

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #792,530

@792,525 (brie !kiTty82duI)
> so it's contemporaneous with the oldest thing we've found at this site! (another one of those, interestingly)

Syntax joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #792,531

Sword?
http://my.kwic.com/~pagodavista/schoolhouse/rec/archaic.htm

So I hit images to find something more like Large and

Looking 4ward to the photos

brie !kiTty82duI replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #792,532

@792,530 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
I can read. I was wondering about your own personal finds, though, not the entire group's.

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #792,533

@792,523 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
I have a cousin who has hunted artifacts for years..
American Indian stuff...civil war stuff...etc..

he found some kind of spanish sword from the seventeen hundreds...that was his best find..

I was just saying...there is proper terminology as to what to refer to pieces as...and its tacky to call it something its not..

that being said...cool find..

Syntax replied with this 9 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #792,535

@previous (C)
bayonet as a word is not very old - 1600's but large longer stone points go back 500,000 years based on a quick look at web
Me thinks if that longer stone blade is attached to a stick then what it is called is a moot point if that point ends up in you

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 18 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,536

@previous (Syntax)
yeah...good point..

my cuz found a 'pipe' years ago...fashioned out of petrified bat guano...this post reminded me about that...he sold that thing for nearly enough to buy a slightly used ford or chevy..

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 4 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,556

@792,532 (brie !kiTty82duI)
o i c, my bad
yeah it's totally the oldest thing i personally have found afaik! i found some prehistoric pottery though, dunno how old that is. teeth n bones but i've no idea how old they are. we took a buttload of charcoal samples so we can date things hopefully :>

@792,531 (Syntax)
not sword, they're quite small. it's like a point, but too narrow to be on an arrow imo.
https://museum.novascotia.ca/collections/gallery/objects/slate-bayonet is a better one - this is from nova scotia but says it was likely used for ceremonial purposes?

@792,533 (C)
ugh words aren't limited to their modern definition when you are talking about things this dang old dude. bayonet is an accepted term. just... google "slate bayonet" jeez.

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,558

@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
I think I have to admit I was being idiotic..

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 9 hours later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,657

Front

Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 12 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,659

@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
P cool yo
For a second i thought that was my hand

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,660

Back

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,661

@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Your fingers are like little twigs..

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,662

@792,659 (J)
are you also cursed with the tiniest hands known to man?

Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,663

@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)

I like your hands

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,664

@792,657 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
well...now Im going back to my objection of the word bayonet being used..

Ive seen fingernail files bigger than that...Im not trying to fuss..

Ive seen boxes of 'arrowheads' as big as that...seriously..
and Im not at all trying to say its not a sweet find though..

Meta replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,665

@previous (C)
boxes of them

Killer Lettuce? !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 13 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,666

@792,660 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
I have no real opinion on your hands. Nice bayonet, though.

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,667

@792,662 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
theres nothing wrong with your hands...they look nice...you could probable be a hand model..

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 55 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,669

@792,664 (C)
you still don't understand that the word bayonette in this context does not have the same meaning it does in modern times thanks
also that may be a french term but seeing it online i think not

@792,666 (Killer Lettuce? !!iNo3FkiZx)
thanks! it's v cool

Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 24 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,670

@792,667 (C)
is this a setup for a handjob joke?

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,671

@792,665 (Meta)
Yes...my cousin and his friend both have boxes of indian artifacts in their basements...arrowheads...spearheads...birdstones...stone jewery...and more..
theyve been hunting for decades..

Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,672

@792,659 (J)
> For a second i thought that was my hand

I knew Trump posted here. I was just waiting for him to slip up.

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,674

@792,669 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
ok...ok..

finding stuff like that is a reak kick...there are some river banks where I am and some spots near the lake that you can just just walk along and spot a tiny bit of black flint and pry it up and it will be a cool arrowhead..

but that stuff is a lot newer than what you got there..

(Edited 34 seconds later.)

Anonymous C double-posted this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,675

@792,670 (M)
Id settle for a handshake..

Anonymous J replied with this 9 years ago, 41 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,688

@792,662 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Well theyre just thin fingers like urs :)

Anonymous J double-posted this 9 years ago, 31 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,689

@792,672 (N)
noo

Syntax replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,711

@792,657 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
That as a shape is unique indeed so no wonder you ended up with a word to describe it that wood be unique -
Google Ancient Tools and one finds what one expects to see. Nothing quite like what you have in your hand. A few come close

Photo is the infamous group known as Neanderthals and from images on Google those shapes are generally Unique.

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #792,725

@792,674 (C)
ugh the problem with that is that every item you find is entirely out of context. without context it's almost meaningless tbh

@previous (Syntax)
nah they are not quite that "unique"
pic is what one looks like whole. also neanderthals never lived in the americas... more importantly, neanderthals became extinct much more than 5000 years ago

(Edited 1 minute later.)

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) double-posted this 9 years ago, 1 day later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,321

UH SO MY FIND MIGHT GET THE SITE DESIGNATED A FUCKING NATIONAL HERITAGE SITE

Anonymous C replied with this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,322

@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
thats not bad...for canada..

Anonymous C double-posted this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,324

@792,725 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)

> ugh the problem with that is that every item you find is entirely out of context. without context it's almost meaningless tbh
>
>
> nah they are not quite that "unique"
> pic is what one looks like whole. also neanderthals never lived in the americas... more importantly, neanderthals became extinct much more than 5000 years ago

uhhhhhh..

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/science/prehistoric-humans-north-america-california-nature-study.html

Syntax replied with this 9 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,328

@previous (C)
I myself have resisted posting about that single event. Its rare I eat bone marrow on toast yet to think Neanderthals might have opened a bottle of fyne wine and sat on rocks with toast + bone marrow and just outside my 15 myle travel zone south of me.

chili dog !!81dzJNNYL (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,333

@793,324 (C)
Literally the second paragraph of that says it is a disputed claim

Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,334

@793,321 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Is that different than a regular National heritage site?

Syntax replied with this 9 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,337

@793,333 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
To be totally fair about this one should look at the actual published article - The Journal of Nature is as good as it gets for pure science with rare problems

So look at this
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v544/n7651/full/nature22065.html

The earliest dispersal of humans into North America is a contentious subject,

Goes on to say

These findings confirm the presence of an unidentified species of Homo at the CM site during the last interglacial period

The problem appears to be the word Confirm

All that said - Lots of current new findings all over Planet Earth on revisions of where older humans have situated selves. I ate far to much breakfast after Surfing my Ocean a Blue and now am somewhat sorry

Anonymous B replied with this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,338

@793,334 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)

> Is that different than a regular National heritage site?

har har

Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,388

@792,725 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)

Anonymous P double-posted this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #793,390

@792,725 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)

Minichan