North American Metallurgy

[bookofmormontruth]

Just an FYI for those interested, I emailed Dr. Eadie from the University Alberta Canada metallurgy dept. regarding any pre-Columbiam smelting and specifically what is meant by the word "forges", and "native copper" in these quotes;

This was his reply;

In this context native copper means copper found in the form of the

metal which exists in places. They had no smelting. Forging here

means using crude tools (likely stone or possibly bone) to simply beat

the copper into the desired shape. reg eadie, professor of materials

engineering

Thanks for the clarification.

So forging is a form of metalworking? If forging means to "beat" into the desire shape. Then why would Wayman include hammering and folding? Maybe forging needs to be described as hot or cold to differentiate it from hammering and folding.

Did Dr. Eadie mention how they produced "wrought iron" and "low-carbon steel" without smelting?

And any luck finding out about the lead smelting?

[Anijen]

Thanks for the clarification.

So forging is a form of metalworking? If forging means to "beat" into the desire shape. Then why would Wayman include hammering and folding? Maybe forging needs to be described as hot or cold to differentiate it from hammering and folding.

Did Dr. Eadie mention how they produced "wrought iron" and "low-carbon steel" without smelting?

And any luck finding out about the lead smelting?

Not yet on the lead. I originally tried to get a hold of Dr. Mike Wayman but he has retired.

[Sevenbak]

There are so many iron artifacts coming out of the mounds, that modern academia has to assume it's all meteoric. Not all of it is tested, and those that have been don't show a uniform nickel content that would be associated with a small handful of large meteor falls. This means there had to be many many meteors falls that were tracked and recovered by the natives. Then they would have to cold hammer the iron! No sale.

I don't buy all the dismissive science. I believe the Mound Builder culture was part of the Nephite civilization, and they knew how to work all manner of ores. Nephi tells us that: "...iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance." Notice that "precious ores" is separate from the rest.

Who is to say they didn't know about nickel? Ziff? What is that? Why did he call other metals "precious"? Hmmmmm...

I give the ancients much more credit. We may know a lot, but we don't know everything.

Look up Spruce Hill Ohio. This is a very good candidate for a vast smelting complex, multiple sites, glass covered rocks, many smelting sites, etc, including molds and samples that show smelting. It wasn't simple cold hammering that was applied. Even to copper.

Here's another example.

This is from ArcheologyFieldwork.com, titled : Possible Prehistoric Iron Smelting in Ohio

Three readings from the carbon content (presumably charcoal fuel used in the smelting process) taken from separate samplings of the object indicate about a 90% probability of origin somewhere between 209 and 783 AD, the two more closely corresponding readings indicating 209 to 551 AD, altogether corresponding more or less to the Middle Woodland Period.

There is much we don't know. Squires also speaks of tons of iron celts that were found by farmers and melted down for tools. Much of the early history has been lost, but we shouldn't be forced to discount it all. The mounds now are mostly protected, so very little is coming out now.

JMHO

[Sevenbak]

Here's some more references to Spruce Hill, Ohio, the largest stone walled Mound Builder structure, with what has been interpreted by some to include many smelting furnaces in the walls.

Saving Spruce Hill

Midwestern Epigraphic Society

Sacred Places of North America

Also, I can't help but wonder what type of furnace that Alma and Amulek watched the faithful and their records get consumed in. Also, the 3 Nephites were thrown into furnaces three times. Those sites haven't been found yet, either in Meso or N. America.

[bookofmormontruth]

Here's some more references to Spruce Hill, Ohio, the largest stone walled Mound Builder structure, with what has been interpreted by some to include many smelting furnaces in the walls.

Saving Spruce Hill

Midwestern Epigraphic Society

Sacred Places of North America

Also, I can't help but wonder what type of furnace that Alma and Amulek watched the faithful and their records get consumed in. Also, the 3 Nephites were thrown into furnaces three times. Those sites haven't been found yet, either in Meso or N. America.

Very interesting!

Do you think everything will be found to support the Book of Mormon? Just curious.

[Sevenbak]

Very interesting!

Do you think everything will be found to support the Book of Mormon? Just curious.

Not everything. It's been 1600 years.

I don't believe it's in the stars, so to speak, to have complete "proof" of the BoM. It's counter to the divine plan.

[bookofmormontruth]

Not everything. It's been 1600 years.

I don't believe it's in the stars, so to speak, to have complete "proof" of the BoM. It's counter to the divine plan.

Agreed.

I do believe everything will be revealed in good time, whether evil or good.

We are also promised "new scripture" conditioned on our treatment of the Book of Mormon which makes me wonder how those will come about.

[Sevenbak]

Agreed.

I do believe everything will be revealed in good time, whether evil or good.

We are also promised "new scripture" conditioned on our treatment of the Book of Mormon which makes me wonder how those will come about.

I am a believer in the literal curse of the treasures of the Nephites, as spoken of and prophesied by Samuel, Christ and Mormon, that man will not find them. In due time, more things may be brought to light. Many things already have.

[livy111us]

I am interested to hear from Anijen on this subject. I haven't studied this much so cannot comment on it's authenticity, but found this interesting. There were additional furnaces found nearby which there was found swords, knives, ship's nails, and rivets (obviously from European origin).

"All of the North American furnaces discovered thus far follow Medieval European designs. If this iron working technology was premature for the Lost Tribes of the Old Testament, then who else designed furnaces in this style? The closest examples are those discovered at the abandoned Viking settlement of Austmannadal, Greenland, which are virtually identical to those found at Deer Creek. The unusual features of the North American furnaces an underground flue passing through a cobblestone base under the furnace floor strongly suggest the Greenland Norse were the designers. One of the biggest mysteries in European history is the disappearance of hundreds of Greenland Norse, who already established several colonies in North America...The ability to work iron was perhaps the single biggest advancement of Middle Age Europeans, a technological achievement undoubtedly foreign to the Indians of central Ohio."

He also claims that on Spruce Hill there were "nine Scandinavian style stone vaulted burial chambers, or 'passage graves.' Before they were stolen from the site, there were several grave mounds with stone engraved in runic letters from the Norse alphabet [most believe the letters are from a modern prankster]. James Foster observed in 1811 something else: 'At the bottom of the hill on the southwest side are the ruins of a town, or rather a city. The cellars and the stone foundations of the houses still remain. The streets are regular squares..." Sacred Places of North America, Brad Olsen 280)

So it seems that there is some evidence of furnaces being from Europeans. As mentioned, I haven't studied this enough to make any conclusive argument, but thought this might provoke some good discussion.

[Anijen]

I am interested to hear from Anijen on this subject. I haven't studied this much so cannot comment on it's authenticity, but found this interesting. There were additional furnaces found nearby which there was found swords, knives, ship's nails, and rivets (obviously from European origin).

"All of the North American furnaces discovered thus far follow Medieval European designs. If this iron working technology was premature for the Lost Tribes of the Old Testament, then who else designed furnaces in this style? The closest examples are those discovered at the abandoned Viking settlement of Austmannadal, Greenland, which are virtually identical to those found at Deer Creek. The unusual features of the North American furnaces an underground flue passing through a cobblestone base under the furnace floor strongly suggest the Greenland Norse were the designers. One of the biggest mysteries in European history is the disappearance of hundreds of Greenland Norse, who already established several colonies in North America...The ability to work iron was perhaps the single biggest advancement of Middle Age Europeans, a technological achievement undoubtedly foreign to the Indians of central Ohio."

He also claims that on Spruce Hill there were "nine Scandinavian style stone vaulted burial chambers, or 'passage graves.' Before they were stolen from the site, there were several grave mounds with stone engraved in runic letters from the Norse alphabet [most believe the letters are from a modern prankster]. James Foster observed in 1811 something else: 'At the bottom of the hill on the southwest side are the ruins of a town, or rather a city. The cellars and the stone foundations of the houses still remain. The streets are regular squares..." Sacred Places of North America, Brad Olsen 280)

So it seems that there is some evidence of furnaces being from Europeans. As mentioned, I haven't studied this enough to make any conclusive argument, but thought this might provoke some good discussion.

I do not know much about metallurgy but the people I have emailed are under the opinion the metal is cold hammered. I also know the archeologist I have spoke with at Cahokia and Poverty Point also say the artifacts (metal) also are cold hammered. Natural copper and meteoric iron were both forged by hammering w/out the use of fire. Spruce Hill has had some pranksters in the past make up stuff to boost trade and tourism, I believe one of Sevenbak's own links refers to one of these incidents. I will study it further for more info and will contact any Spruce Hill expert and ask for more info on the matter. The thing I am wondering about is the dating of these hot fires and furnaces. Sevenbak's link speaks about furnaces as if they were there only validated by heresy but are not presently there but by the end of the link they tend to be sure they were furnaces, so I see some inconsistency that I would like to have a different source. I always try to get the expert on a specific site, so once I tack down Spruce Hills and he/she answers my questions, I will have to wait until then.

Anijen

[Anijen]

Okay I was bounced around from one expert (Dr. Larson of Ohio State University to another expert Dr. Carr of Arizona State and finally to Dr. Ruby of the Ohio Historical Society). From my contact list Dr. Ruby and Dr. Carr are experts on Spruce Hill. I asked about population levels and that information is forthcoming also about metallurgy and the stone wall. here is snip of what they have wrote in the past. When I recieve a email on the rest I will also let you know.

The Spruce Hill Works site was described as early as 1811 as a stone-walled fortification ringing the brow of a prominent hill overlooking the Paint Creek valley southwest of Chillicothe. Later investigations at other hilltop enclosures in southern Ohio such as Fort Ancient, Fort Hill, and the Pollack Works have determined that many of these were built during the Hopewell period for ceremonial rather than defensive purposes.

All of the early accounts of the Spruce Hill Works attest to the occurrence of considerable quantities of burned, fused, or glazed sandstones and vitrified soils at several locations along the enclosure wall. The temperatures needed to produce these effects (in excess of 1100° C) have led many to speculate that these may relate to some high temperature technology such as iron ore extraction. There is no evidence that prehistoric Native Americans ever experimented with these technologies. These are 18th and 19th century Euroamerican and they were known to have constructed simple iron furnaces in southern Ohio and elsewhere.

During the present investigations, test excavations at three locations documented vast quantities of these burned materials. In all three cases, the materials are secondary, redeposited contexts. The nature, origin, age, and affiliation of these materials remain uncertain, but could date back to early 18th century.

Edited to add; So yes, the wall dates back and was built by the Hopewell (for ceremonial purposes) and although the wall is Hopewell, the furnace remains such as charred glass etc are not but colonial american times.

[bookofmormontruth]

Okay I was bounced around from one expert (Dr. Larson of Ohio State University to another expert Dr. Carr of Arizona State and finally to Dr. Ruby of the Ohio Historical Society). From my contact list Dr. Ruby and Dr. Carr are experts on Spruce Hill. I asked about population levels and that information is forthcoming also about metallurgy and the stone wall. here is snip of what they have wrote in the past. When I recieve a email on the rest I will also let you know.

Thanks for the info. Anijen!

So basically they don't believe the prehistoric Native Americans experimented with these technologies. Which is expected for that is the general consensus.

What confuses me is that they state the iron furnaces "are" from the 18th and 19th century Euroamericans. Yet, further down they then say in regards to present investigations on the materials, the nature, age and affiliation "remain uncertain", but "could" date back to early 18th century.

Am I reading this wrong? From stating they "are" and then to "could". The last statement makes it seem they are still "uncertain".

[Anijen]

Thanks for the info. Anijen!

So basically they don't believe the prehistoric Native Americans experimented with these technologies. Which is expected for that is the general consensus.

What confuses me is that they state the iron furnaces "are" from the 18th and 19th century Euroamericans. Yet, further down they then say in regards to present investigations on the materials, the nature, age and affiliation "remain uncertain", but "could" date back to early 18th century.

Am I reading this wrong? From stating they "are" and then to "could". The last statement makes it seem they are still "uncertain".

I caught that too and was wondering if in one instance they meant the furnaces and the other they were talking about what was melted (eg. glass). My problem is I am emailing these guys they don't know me at all and frankly I am just grateful for a response. I come up with more questions after I hear back from them but as they know I am a student under the Anthropology dept (my major is History) I think they want me to figure somethings out for myself. I have been letting you guys know when I check my email account and they have replied, I will continue to do so. The email indicated that they were positive about this by the three separate analysis that they were redeposited or should I say secondary remains from a 18th C furnace.

[Anijen]

test excavations at three locations documented vast quantities of these burned materials. In all three cases, the materials are secondary, redeposited contexts. The nature, origin, age, and affiliation of these materials remain uncertain, but could date back to early 18th century.

This is why I think they were speaking of the remains (glass & melted stuff) and not the furnaces.

[bookofmormontruth]

This is why I think they were speaking of the remains (glass & melted stuff) and not the furnaces.

Great stuff Anijen. Thanks for being diligent in this.

I know this doesn't relate to "North American Metallurgy", but If you saw Hashbaz's post about how only 1% of the Mayan area has been excavated - makes you appreciate the mesoamerica model a lot more. Exciting to see what can come out of there regardless of models!

[Anijen]

Another note; We need to be careful when analyzing any evidential artifacts with the agenda of connecting them to the Book of Mormon. This is what I believe how Meldrum works; for instance he will say "here is a wall then it must have been a Nephite fortress, here is signs of smelting it proves metalurgy before Columbus and they must have learnt it from the Nephites." As an already believer in the Book of Mormon I don't need to be proven anything. I just want evidence to be what it is and not what it isnt. I do not want to be the guy to say "wa-lah Nephi was here" and then later proved it was a hoax or one element dates to the that time but another part does not and the part that does had nothing to do with the Book of Mormon etc. I think in the long run it does more harm than good.

[Anijen]

Great stuff Anijen. Thanks for being diligent in this.

I know this doesn't relate to "North American Metallurgy", but If you saw Hashbaz's post about how only 1% of the Mayan area has been excavated - makes you appreciate the mesoamerica model a lot more. Exciting to see what can come out of there regardless of models!

Yes Mark sent that too me a long time ago. I have been privileged to get a heads up on his stuff. I for one believe we will be seeing a lot of good stuff from Dr. "Hashbaz" (is the "Dr" too soon, I know its really close?).

Edited to add; Mark (Hashbaz) has been greatly influential to me. He has always helped me for links and books, or for a glyph that I couldn't decipher. He is totally awesome and if I had a hero's list he would definitely be one of the top guys on it.

[AED]

Hello... A few days ago I was going through the log of an archaeology-related website I maintain, and saw that it and other directly related material on the internet had been viewed by quite a few participants in this very interesting forum / discussion thread. I thought I might contribute something to the discussion, for whatever it might be worth to you. Please note that as a not particularly devout Presbyterian I have no agenda to pursue along the line of LDS doctrine - I'm just presenting some possibly relevant information.

I am an avocational archaeologist with some academic training and fieldwork experience, investigating what appears, in the upper artifact strata, to be an Early to Middle Woodland Period (roughly 1000 BC to 400 AD) habitation site on wilderness property that I have the remarkable good fortune to actually own here in Guernsey County, Ohio. This site includes a large linear earthwork of classically Hopewell architecture and astronomical orientation. Incidental to this project, in 2006 I became involved with the Gillilan cache discovered in Pickaway County. About five feet beneath the apparently undisturbed terrain surface, this artifact assemblage included temporally/culturally diagnostic lithic and ceramic material of Late Archaic to Early Woodland age. Along with this material were numerous small iron artifacts, one of which was radiocarbon dated from three samples of its carbon - presumably charcoal - content to very roughly 400 AD. (Please note that carbon dating is actually a dicey business. We're dealing not with certainty here, but with levels of probability.) State archaeologists, who had refused to participate in the material's retrieval, summarily dismissed all this on the grounds that no professionals had previously verified prehistoric Native American iron smelting. (As far as I know, we were the first to submit such material for radiocarbon [AMS] dating, an expensive process that cost us nearly $1000 for the single artifact.)

The Gillilan cache project has remained dormant, and the site has since been destroyed by construction. However, in recent years, particularly the last one, numerous iron artifacts have appeared at my own site, mostly eroding from banks along an old pioneer road that had been constructed upon an ancient "Indian" trail. Two small iron artifacts have also appeared just beneath the surface of the earthwork, well away from the road. (More or less knowing my limitations, as well as proper archaeological procedure, I have not shoveled into this structure, having only taken one core sample that is interesting in itself.)

I have been reluctant to publicly present the iron material from my own site pending finds in more secure context, but have reconsidered this in light of the recent announcement by professional archaeologists at Indiana's Mann site of finding lead and slag likely smelted from galena. In a brief e-mail correspondence with one of the principal investigators, I was told that they find the evidence quite compelling, but are waiting for lab results sometime this summer. Rightly so, of course, but now it seems appropriate to put other and earlier discovered evidence of prehistoric metal smelting on record in whatever its current state may be. You might find these photos of my own artifact material interesting: http://www.daysknob....lagPhotos01.htm

Whatever one's religious beliefs, we should give the achievements of our predecessors on this continent due consideration. In my many conversations with Ohio's professional archaeologists on this controversial topic, I have perceived a thinly veiled preconception that Native Americans lacked the intellectual capacity for high-temperature processing of metal ores and other material. The evidence seems to argue against this.

Thanks for your consideration! I hope you might find this helpful.

Regards, AED

[livy111us]

I assume you found this site either because of a post I made on an archaeological blog which you present your evidence, or through google. Your artifacts weren't taken very well by archaeologists over there and I am skeptical as well. Have you identified any artifacts by having a professional chip away the dirt and rock? I know that there were several who were offering to do that. This would answer a lot of questions. Have you considered letting an archaeologist take this over so this will be taken objectively and serious by the world? I know there are several problems with your methods (as demonstrated by archaeologist on archaeologyfieldwork.com) and until objects are found by professionals in an archaeological dig and studied by non-bias experts, they will continue to reject it (for good reason). If they are authentic Hopewell artifacts, I wish you success.

[bookofmormontruth]

Hello... A few days ago I was going through the log of an archaeology-related website I maintain, and saw that it and other directly related material on the internet had been viewed by quite a few participants in this very interesting forum / discussion thread. I thought I might contribute something to the discussion, for whatever it might be worth to you. Please note that as a not particularly devout Presbyterian I have no agenda to pursue along the line of LDS doctrine - I'm just presenting some possibly relevant information.

I am an avocational archaeologist with some academic training and fieldwork experience, investigating what appears, in the upper artifact strata, to be an Early to Middle Woodland Period (roughly 1000 BC to 400 AD) habitation site on wilderness property that I have the remarkable good fortune to actually own here in Guernsey County, Ohio. This site includes a large linear earthwork of classically Hopewell architecture and astronomical orientation. Incidental to this project, in 2006 I became involved with the Gillilan cache discovered in Pickaway County. About five feet beneath the apparently undisturbed terrain surface, this artifact assemblage included temporally/culturally diagnostic lithic and ceramic material of Late Archaic to Early Woodland age. Along with this material were numerous small iron artifacts, one of which was radiocarbon dated from three samples of its carbon - presumably charcoal - content to very roughly 400 AD. (Please note that carbon dating is actually a dicey business. We're dealing not with certainty here, but with levels of probability.) State archaeologists, who had refused to participate in the material's retrieval, summarily dismissed all this on the grounds that no professionals had previously verified prehistoric Native American iron smelting. (As far as I know, we were the first to submit such material for radiocarbon [AMS] dating, an expensive process that cost us nearly $1000 for the single artifact.)

The Gillilan cache project has remained dormant, and the site has since been destroyed by construction. However, in recent years, particularly the last one, numerous iron artifacts have appeared at my own site, mostly eroding from banks along an old pioneer road that had been constructed upon an ancient "Indian" trail. Two small iron artifacts have also appeared just beneath the surface of the earthwork, well away from the road. (More or less knowing my limitations, as well as proper archaeological procedure, I have not shoveled into this structure, having only taken one core sample that is interesting in itself.)

I have been reluctant to publicly present the iron material from my own site pending finds in more secure context, but have reconsidered this in light of the recent announcement by professional archaeologists at Indiana's Mann site of finding lead and slag likely smelted from galena. In a brief e-mail correspondence with one of the principal investigators, I was told that they find the evidence quite compelling, but are waiting for lab results sometime this summer. Rightly so, of course, but now it seems appropriate to put other and earlier discovered evidence of prehistoric metal smelting on record in whatever its current state may be. You might find these photos of my own artifact material interesting: http://www.daysknob....lagPhotos01.htm

Whatever one's religious beliefs, we should give the achievements of our predecessors on this continent due consideration. In my many conversations with Ohio's professional archaeologists on this controversial topic, I have perceived a thinly veiled preconception that Native Americans lacked the intellectual capacity for high-temperature processing of metal ores and other material. The evidence seems to argue against this.

Thanks for your consideration! I hope you might find this helpful.

Regards, AED

Thanks for sharing your finds and perspective.

This really sums it up for me. The conspiracy to cover up evidence to show that prehistoric Native Americans were intelligently using "advanced" technology is actually true. The results for the lead smelting this summer will change all of that hopefully.

Really sad, but not surprised by it and I know we need to be cautious about any proposed evidence, but we also need to recognize that in our world, there are darker forces in operation.

[Anijen]

Thanks for sharing your finds and perspective.

This really sums it up for me. The conspiracy to cover up evidence to show that prehistoric Native Americans were intelligently using "advanced" technology is actually true. The results for the lead smelting this summer will change all of that hopefully.

Really sad, but not surprised by it and I know we need to be cautious about any proposed evidence, but we also need to recognize that in our world, there are darker forces in operation.

Just like that you accept his post as accurate and truthful and conclude this proves a conspiracy? I thought his post was exciting too but lets not jump on the band wagon so quickly. All I am asking is the use of some critical thinking here. For instance we need to ask these questions and perhaps others;

in the upper artifact strata, to be an Early to Middle Woodland Period (roughly 1000 BC to 400 AD)

Why were these found in the upper strata? If they date to 1000 BC they would not be in an upper strata unless some type of occurrence happened to bring them up, what was that occurrence? was it weather? etc. If they were brought up how reliable does that make the dating if strata levels were mixed?

State archaeologists, who had refused to participate in the material's retrieval, summarily dismissed all this on the grounds that no professionals had previously verified prehistoric Native American iron smelting.

This statement is his perspective and could be true, however it would be nice to get some names of these archaeologists and verify why this was dismissed so quickly, most archaeologists would not dismiss because of that reason alone.

The Gillilan cache project

In a quick google search I see what is probably his site but no professional academic sites which mention his findings (I could be wrong). There is nothing bad or wrong in asking for a second opinion and many things show wisdom in doing so.

perceived a thinly veiled preconception that Native Americans lacked the intellectual capacity for high-temperature processing of metal ores and other material.

I am in constant contact with many of these archaeologists probably some of the same one he has. I have not seen or sensed any of bias that the Native American capacity was so limited, in fact in each conversation the reason they do not believe so is because there are many many many (you get the point) many site that have been professionally surveyed and in all the digs they have yet to find the remains of a furnace or smelted iron that dates back to that time. In other words it is not prejudice but among the many artifacts found there are no artifacts that show metallurgic proof as far as smelting. One method of determination is by trying to replicate the process cold hammering copper for instance shows remarkable consistencies of what the many artifacts look like including the same indentations, striations from the tool used (stone, bone etc) these will match what we have found compared to even crudely smelted one which do not match. IMO the conspiratorial tone is only there (so far as I can tell) is because the academic findings do not match what some people want them to match. He a farmer and house builder not a archeologist t and to automatically jump to his view going against real archeologist is premature.

[bookofmormontruth]

Just like that you accept his post as accurate and truthful and conclude this proves a conspiracy? I thought his post was exciting too but lets not jump on the band wagon so quickly. All I am asking is the use of some critical thinking here. For instance we need to ask these questions and perhaps others;

What bandwagon? Most people are on the bandwagon to reject any evidence to support North American Metallurgy for that is the general and established consensus. To be on the other side of view, is no bandwagon.

We all tick and go about our lives in different ways.

In our LDS culture, we believe things that are absolutely preposterous to the world, yet we know inside and feel something unexplainable that confirms our personal beliefs.

So it shouldn't be a surprise that some of us in that same LDS culture have those same feelings and personal beliefs in regards to other worldly subjects for the LDS Church doesn't have a monopoly on truth. So I don't need a "stamp" of verification from some prestigious archeologist to let me know what I already know inside.

If the "stamp of approval" verifies the ancient lead smelting this summer. Great! I already knew it.

[Anijen]

What bandwagon? Most people are on the bandwagon to reject any evidence to support North American Metallurgy for that is the general and established consensus. To be on the other side of view, is no bandwagon.

We all tick and go about our lives in different ways.

In our LDS culture, we believe things that are absolutely preposterous to the world, yet we know inside and feel something unexplainable that confirms our personal beliefs.

So it shouldn't be a surprise that some of us in that same LDS culture have those same feelings and personal beliefs in regards to other worldly subjects for the LDS Church doesn't have a monopoly on truth. So I don't need a "stamp" of verification from some prestigious archeologist to let me know what I already know inside.

If the "stamp of approval" verifies the ancient lead smelting this summer. Great! I already knew it.

I was talking about the conspiratorial band wagon. You wrote;

This really sums it up for me. The conspiracy to cover up evidence

Besides we both share the same beliefs. I was just asking for patience before we claim a connection from one claim (smelting) to another (Book of Mormon). A little time to check facts and discover for ourselves if what he has shown is all accurate it hurts no one to do some verification.

[AED]

Hi again...

Thanks to all for the replies. I'll have to respond to some of the individual comments later since I'll be quite busy and/or away until after the weekend. For now, just a couple remarks:

At this point I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything in this forum, just giving you something to think about. In the poll I voted for "possibly" because certainty is elusive - as I said earlier, we're dealing more with levels of probability here. Officially my idea of prehistoric Native American metal smelting is still a hypothesis, albeit a robust one in my opinion. To be honest, right now I'd bet a few $ on it. Make of this what you will...

Incidentally, those verified Hopewell iron artifacts such as breastplates - are they really of meteoric iron, or just assumed to be? Has any compositional analysis been performed on these? If so, is nickel present? From a University of New Mexico web page: "The major difference between iron produced by human activity and meteoritic iron is the presence of the element nickel. Iron metal in all meteorites contains at least some nickel whereas man-made metal objects generally do not".

Have a good Easter weekend!

Later... AED

[shrff]

Timothy Leary is interested in the Book of Mormon? Cool!

HA! I make this typo too often. LSD is the initials for the company I work for. I'll refrain from any High Priest references.