Chalcedony points

[manoman]

I hope you are able to control your blood pressure as a member here on Arrowheadology! You've certainly jumped into pool, so to speak, with some artifacts and lithics that a large percent of us have not seen before. And you obviously have a surgeons eye, which sees things that mere mortals do not. You've earned the right to be called Doctor and that is a huge nod to your intelligence and integrity. One of the weakness on a lot of posts is that we are looking at digital images that do not show the finer aspects of tool construction, or do not see through the layers of patina, age, stress and erosion that diffinately hinder ones comprehension. Do you have the ability to show us images taken with a microscope? I have a small collection of artifacts that I collected at Lake Manix, in the Mojave Desert of California, that I am hesitant to post. The reason is that they are not readily recognizable as artifacts from images posted to this forum. The detail just doesn't show up. Help us out here....we really want to see what you are seeing. The material/lithics that you have is awe inspiring in just it's abundance, and I am sure a man of your intelligence would not spend a lifetime collecting rocks. But a lot of them "look" like rocks, because a lot of us have not had the chance to see lithics or artifacts like you have collected. I'm on the fence with thread, only because I cannot see what I want to believe is there. Does this help in anyway for you to understand some of the resistance you are receiving here on Arrowheadology? It is true, we have seen some objects posted that would make you cringe with embarassment for the poster. It has happened A LOT. I would love to see you move this thread forward by posting better images that we can look at, and citing other material that helps establish your views. Are you able to do this? Microscopes are not common to the average collector, but in your case, it would really be advantagous to acquire some close-up images to help with the understanding process.

[jcinpc]

Originally Posted by rokdok

I used to perform ventricular resections for sub-aortic stenosis due to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, but i gave it up, bad for my blood-pressure.

whu???? how does that even fit onto a resume?? hahaha ok tell me what that means in country boy talk, seriously

[drdave514]

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is a thickening of the muscle/wall of the heart which can cause subaortic stenosis(not enough room below the aortic valve, leading into the aorta) that won't allow the blood to flow from the left ventricle(one of the 4 chambers of the heart) into the aorta(big hose that carries oxygenated blood to your whole damn body).

Needless to say. It ain't good.

[comanche]

I'M Impressed Doc,,,And you are statring to know Artifacts just as well///c

[rokdok]

Originally Posted by manoman

I hope you are able to control your blood pressure as a member here on Arrowheadology! You've certainly jumped into pool, so to speak, with some artifacts and lithics that a large percent of us have not seen before. And you obviously have a surgeons eye, which sees things that mere mortals do not. You've earned the right to be called Doctor and that is a huge nod to your intelligence and integrity. One of the weakness on a lot of posts is that we are looking at digital images that do not show the finer aspects of tool construction, or do not see through the layers of patina, age, stress and erosion that diffinately hinder ones comprehension. Do you have the ability to show us images taken with a microscope? I have a small collection of artifacts that I collected at Lake Manix, in the Mojave Desert of California, that I am hesitant to post. The reason is that they are not readily recognizable as artifacts from images posted to this forum. The detail just doesn't show up. Help us out here....we really want to see what you are seeing. The material/lithics that you have is awe inspiring in just it's abundance, and I am sure a man of your intelligence would not spend a lifetime collecting rocks. But a lot of them "look" like rocks, because a lot of us have not had the chance to see lithics or artifacts like you have collected. I'm on the fence with thread, only because I cannot see what I want to believe is there. Does this help in anyway for you to understand some of the resistance you are receiving here on Arrowheadology? It is true, we have seen some objects posted that would make you cringe with embarassment for the poster. It has happened A LOT. I would love to see you move this thread forward by posting better images that we can look at, and citing other material that helps establish your views. Are you able to do this? Microscopes are not common to the average collector, but in your case, it would really be advantagous to acquire some close-up images to help with the understanding process.

I have a binocular viewing scope, but unfortunately it is an old one without photo capability.I have on my wish list a Nikon 40x scope that, with attachments magnifies to 160x with photo capability, but unfortunately my wife says we need to send the kids to college.I also have artifacts which conventional archeologists say are not present here, but i have both the cores and tools to at least make the subject debatable.