Baghdad/Parthian Batteries found in 1936.
Not Accounted For or Reasonably Explained
There are many objects that still leave scientists, archaeologists. historians, layman populations and a general public puzzled as to their existence, construction and, as well, the time period they originate from. Some ancient artifacts seem to be either out of place or out of time - seemingly modern objects found in places where ancient civilizations are being studied. Some objects, we know well or are well aware of but their existence defies full explanation (many details about the pyramids are yet unexplained) on how they ended up placed where they've been found or uncovered.
Essentially, the things are considered anomalies because they don't gel with the currently accepted versions of history and archaeology we've come to believe in. With some objects, we may soon have to take a look at the versions of history we've been taught, as we might be in error.
Tools, batteries, chains, time-pieces, etc - of exemplary craftsmanship - even aircraft have been found in various regions of the world but in places where archaeologists were looking at more ancient items or even where nobody was studying ancient artifacts at all. If not found as an object, some items occur so regularly in ancient texts, we have to start assuming that they may have existed even if the item seems a far-fetched notion (Atlantis? Giants?). Most unexplained items that receive any attention at all seem to be from advanced minds (and hands?), but are found among ancient other items that aren't as advanced. Many objects considered anomalous have complex working parts and (so far as we know) cannot just form or occur naturally without the manipulation of matter, tools, etc.
How did a battery (known as The Baghdad Battery, now sitting in Iraq's National Museum) get pieced together with earthenware, an iron rod, copper and asphalt? The earthenware isn't from this century or dated anywhere near our modern time period. The battery parts/objects were found pieced together and scientists disassembled them, dated the objects, etc. They're said to be about 2000 years old - well before our modern age electricity inventions.
(Maybe our dating techniques are wrong? Or maybe it's an ANCIENT battery?). See video above right.
Some say the complex, many-part objects aren't batteries at all. Instead, they're some sort of storage vessels for scrolls. I hope those properly educated in the study of these matters don't accept the current explanations and walk away from studying this object because a battery is a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than a scroll container, don't you think? Source link below.
SOURCE - unmuseum .org
Did you know the Great Pyramid of Giza actually has EIGHT sides/walls, not four? Each of four sides is bi-sected, so really, the Pyramid structure on the outside is made of eight walls. The sides aren't straight - they're concave but these details have largely missed detection until such a time when aerial photo technology became advanced enough to show these details. If mainstream science knew about this hundreds of years ago or even fifty years ago, I sure didn't learn about this when I was in school. The sides/walls of the Great Pyramid aren't the only unexplained aspects about the location/pyramid - the entire pyramid (construction, various "rooms" and chambers within, etc) presents many questions for scientists, archaeologists, historians, etc. The standard, "an ancient civilization built this pyramid" statement has NEVER been enough to explain with any certainty, why, how, by or for whom this structure was built. Scientists seem largely, collectively certain that right now, with all our best technologies, people in our age CANNOT build a similar structure. Source link below.
There are strange objects found at archaeological dig sites, at sites where excavation and new building is planned and executed, stories of "far out" creatures, humanoids, airships in old ancient texts that make us wonder if the ancients were storytelling or recording events. Lost boats, flying craft, lost cities and civilizations and much, much more escape explanation.
Photograph of the Dorchester Pot
Beware of Fringe Theories
To most people who have read more than two of my hub articles, I probably appear to be a fan of pseudo-science and fringe theories. I do love said type of science and theory. I have no great love for some of the assertions of the institution of "hard science," it's true. However, I do try to find out truth from fiction and if I love fringe and pseudo things it's because I'm curious and want to consider even unpopular (even absurd and occasionally ridiculous) points of view before I make decisions. With that said, I do try to avoid falling prey or getting too caught up in fringe theories but every once in a while fact is hard to sort from fiction.
Example: Dorchester Pot (or Dorchester Vase)
This discovery is an object that looks like a vase and is made primarily of metal substances. It was recovered from a necessary and planned rock/ground-breaking explosion in 1852, location - Meeting House Hill in Dorchester, Massachusetts. The details of this find were reported in the popular science publication, Scientific American, June 5, 1852, in an article that said the vase-like object was found in two pieces among a bunch of regular debris and conglomerate (puddingstone) material thrown up from the blast from about 15 feet down below surface level.
Basically, the type of ground materials in that location have been studied and the geological knowns don't match up with the two pieces of vase-like object that were thrown up from the blast. The geological history and make up of the earth materials is known with fair certainty and scientists agree upon what the ground and layers of earth are made up of - the layers and consistency of earth, rock, sand, etc in the area.
Now because the ground/earth materials and several layers below the surface are agreed upon, this vase did not belong there, according to some experts. It couldn't have been left laying around thousands of years ago - to have many layers of rain, earth, rock, etc., come to cover it, bury it and hold it fifteen feet below the surface for several eras worth of time... and ONLY BE a little bit old - so it is entirely possible that the dating methods and historical records of the region around Dorchester, Massachusetts are WRONG!
Obviously this object was a whole lot older than some layers of earth that date back a few hundred years...
Obviously, the Dorchester Pot is an OUT-OF-PLACE-ARTIFACT !!!
We may have to revamp and reconsider how our earth/ground material dating is conducted, our scientific standards regarding how we know a layer of earth is as old as such and such...
The accusation that science is "out" could be the pseudo-science of a bunch of Fringe theorists who are really "out there" and who need to shake their heads... (this isn't a legend we're talking about - it's an object that can be seen, touched and - dated with reasonable accuracy).
Upon closer inspection, the Dorchester Pot doesn't seem an out of place artifact. It seems like - and mainstream scientists have essentially proven this (except to fringe theorists who refuse to listen) - the pot isn't a pot.
It's a CANDLESTICK HOLDER! (or an Indian pipe holder, some say - in any case, not the vase and creative work of an ancient civilization).
The object is much like a common Victorian era candlestick that could be ordered a couple of hundred years ago from a catalogue! (A couple of hundred years ago today - but ONLY about fifteen to twenty years ago from the date this object was found, tossed out and laying among the rubble!).
This object wasn't in the ground for millenia and since forever, proving that all scientific dating methods are wrong... The CANDLESTICK accessory or pipe holder was probably in the ground a short time - a decade or so - and the geographical region has had terrific variance of ground level due to floods in the area and other dramatic weather events. Someone dropped this CANDLESTICK/pipe holder sometime a while back and it got covered over for about a decade and settled further into the muck and debris over a decade of dynamic weather until
BOOM... the explosion unearthed it again.
Not such a mystery but a whole lotta fringe...
June 5, 1852 - Scientific American v. 7, no. 38 page
The Scientific American article provides sensationalism in its report to a very high degree. I almost "came to believe" all over again by reading this article a couple of times. Wow. (If you read the article, you'll understand just WHY I mistrust the institution of science whenever "mainstream" and "popular" science comes up).
Out Of Place Artifacts Are Usually Fringe Theories and Pseudo-Science
And as such, are usually ignored - so I figure it may be a good while until hard science is finished with classifying and explaining everything in the world. A few of us need to look into these "weird" topics, don't we? Just in case hard science never does get round to these things?
By the way, a very undervalued and under-rated Botanist/Geologist/Zoologist named Ivan T. Sanderson actually created CODES for weird stuff in science (between Sanderson, Fort and others, there's a huge list of these). He was a guy who subscribed to many of the ideas Charles Fort put forth (Fort's name - where we get Fortean and Forteana from) in The Book of the Damned (damned=excluded - from science).
Sanderson's CODE for Out of Place Artifacts:
Another example... code for Unidentified Flying Objects=UFO
USO=Unidentified Submerged Objects
UAO=Unidentified Aerial Objects
These codes are well known to those who study Ancient Anomalies. Part of the need for the code is...there are VAST NUMBERS of instances where anomalies crop up in our world, tons of things yet unexplained and not near enough people dedicated to finding out what all the OOPArt, UFO, USO, UAO evidence is really about or what these things are doing in our dirt, waters, skies, etc. Most people are very familiar with UFO but very few people are aware that there are more USOs than we can imagine. USOs get way less attention than UFOs - often USOs are discovered only by those who work/live on or near large bodies of water (and did you know most Forteans who study UFO phenomenon say MOST UFOs sightings are concentrated, not over land, but over water? Often close to where USOs are also found? Check it out...look up the works of Ivan T Sanderson, John Alva Keel, Loren Coleman, Tiffany Thayer, Booth Tarkington, Jerome Clark, more).
Okay, so I'm a little off topic here (went from "ancient" anomalies to general anomalies - whoops - broadened an already too broad topic) but hopefully you'll find time to look up some of the stuff I have mentioned in the OOPArt section here.
Von Daniken's Chariots of the Gods vid special
Pictures and Writing On The Wall
There are a LOT of ancient civilizations that seem to have left messages, artwork and such depicting strange men wearing weird garb. Maybe a lot who have come before us have misinterpreted drawings, figures carved and etched into stones, cave walls, etc., but maybe a lot were pretty good at guessing, too, that some of these etchings are of ancient spacemen, giants, etc. There are even unexplained LARGE SCALE pictures (geo-glyphs) made into the earth that nobody could ever see until reliable airplanes were developed and mountains with the tops shaved off flat, providing a totally flat surface on top. These can only be seen from the air and cover entire fields or large sections of desert, large portions of mountain ranges.
I think the person responsible for really making Ancient Alien theories and topics widespread is a guy named Erich Von Daniken by way of his book, published in 1968, "Chariot of the Gods." Though Von Daniken is respected by those who hold Ancient Alient theories as most plausible (to explain our origins and many OOPArt, unexplained things and paranormal phenomena), scientists (as well as many folklorists, paleographers) say his theories, along with fellow Ancient Astronaut theorist, the late Zechariah Sitchin, don't hold up very well and incorporate a little too much fiction and speculation to hold as high truth. (Sitchin draws upon a number of Von Daniken's details to form theories).
Personally, because I study stories, folklore, legends, fairy tales, etc., I find Sitchin as well as Von Daniken theories interesting but full of holes which are neatly patched up with speculative bits. I appreciate both researchers/authors, however, I don't grasp on to their theories in any great way and prefer to read their works understanding their viewpoints as a sort of brainstorming, thinking out loud - rather than all details being fact, legitimate, proven or acceptable. I think it should be noted that much of Sitchin's material relies on language translations... fans of Sitchin, I believe, forgot to check his credentials in the area of linguistics. He doesn't really have any...
So why do I mention Erich Von Daniken and Zechariah Sitchin in this hub?
It is because both researchers/scholars and authors refer back to many ancient anomalies as proof of ancient astronauts, possibilities that these ancient astronauts were either our creators or, at one long, long ago time, our stewards (many possibilities and speculation beyond creator/steward ideas are put forth by the two mentioned here).
Sitchin believed some ancient drawings clearly depict a person from a long forgotten age in a space suit (and these are our Ancient Anomaly pieces/objects). There are even depictions of a sort of super sized, very large humanoid with a helmet on (according to Sitchin's interpretation of ancient drawings, art, etc), so this must be a non-human that came to either make us slaves or watch over us... See the videos above. This is a huge topic with a lot of side tangents to cover, so I selected some videos to make my work easier :) The videos labeled OOPArt pt1 and pt2 are in short clips so if you take the time to view these, you'll gain a good idea of how great a number of unexplained OOPArts there are that still need to be studied further, figured out.