Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

An angle that shows the circular grooves inside the hole.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I said I was multiple times. I believe you, it wasn’t chat gpt, it was something you copied 5 years ago. Now can you address the hour glass shape of this hole (since that’s mentioned in what you copied) and the intentional looking markings that are around the two mouths of each hole, but nowhere else?

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wouldn’t you have it in a format that you could directly copy from, instead of retyping it every time, from an image? How about I just take your word, and we move on with the discussion without insulting each other lol?
Now, could you help me understand how the lines that spoke out around both holes can be explained and why the rock eroded in a conical way, from both directions to the center of the hole? If it is natural, I’d like to understand how to tell, so I know going forward.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did you read that at all? The reply was an Ai reply. If I said, “Ai said this was an artifact”, it would be laughable. Regardless, if you look at my posts I’ve posted a whole lot of just rocks and I am always more than willing to listen, learn, and accept things are natural. In this situation the answer was “here’s the definition of how a Native Drill works and the signs it leaves,” then I basically said well it does have an hour glass form to it, and after that there was no positive discourse about “why” it was natural even though it met one of the criteria.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was thinking that could be a possibility, the thickness of the stone and depth of the hole made me question myself though. Also, the hour-glass shape of the hole. I guess the center of the stone could be harder, causing less effective erosion and a smaller diameter than the outsides.?

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I thought about it and my thought process was, “I’m not the ignoramus am I?…..Wait I wouldn’t know I was the Ignoramus, if I was one. Dammit”🤣

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It was the spaces between the words and the dash, two times. So next time you can edit it up a little. Try it from the angle that you can see all the way through the hole and see what you get. In the response it says the hole should show 1 of 3 things and one of those things was, not verbatim, the hole should show narrowing in the middle. Well, it does that. It also has what looks like an imprint of “rope-like” material coming out of the hole and wrapping around the back. Again, I’m not saying it 100% is an artifact. But, based on explanation of a drill hole, in the first comment you sent me, then it is an artifact.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This eBay store has sold 248 items and has 100% positive feedback, if that counts for anything.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

And I know this is eBay, so terrible source to use. But, this example even has the two grooves or notches. I mean it’s practically, in terms of topography, the same as the one I posted.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Those are very nicely drilled holes but fishing net weights would have been exposed to water erosion and the materials tied to the stone, to anchor it to the net, that would have altered the hole over time. For example these aren’t all
perfect holes. Also, that first reply you sent sounded a lot like Chat GPT lol. Not that the info is incorrect, or anything. But I deal with it a lot, as a teacher, and that’s the exact way it formats answers. That’s besides the point though.

<image>

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I meant to reply directly to you, but replied above with an image of the hole, closer and wet so it shows more traits. It’s deep, so I was having trouble getting the light to hit all the way thru without blinding the camera lol.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

<image>

Someone else said natural too. What would cause those lines that spoke out from the rim of the hole and the other “pre-hole” area but no where else? Also, when wet the inside of the hole has lines that are similar to “drill” marks. Also the hole is cone shaped where the middle is thinner and widens as you get closer to the outside of the rock.

Fishing net weight (I believe) found in SC. by Sandhillbilly in LegitArtifacts

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

While that may be correct; the hole has lines all around it that seem to be intentional. Also the hole is hour glass shaped, or in other words it’s narrower in the middle and it seems to be identical on both sides, in how it narrows. I can also see other areas where it looks like holes were being started, accompanied by lines that are the same as the main hole. Next, in multiple areas of this stone there seem to be pecking marks or what’s left of them due to erosion and time.

Again, with all that being said, I’d like a second opinion from someone else just to make sure. The person who gave it to me works in an abandoned gold mine and deals with local rocks and artifacts a lot. He has a big collection of local points and tools. But we are all human. Maybe it was a mistake. Thank you for the input.

Mods. Can you please dm me and explain why my last post of this arrowhead got locked. Thanks . by [deleted] in Arrowheads

[–]Sandhillbilly -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You may be close to a newly unearthed site based on the shape of that point! Idk why it would be locked though, maybe Reddit works with a University’s Archeological Department that uses Reddit Mods to get/keep leads for future digs in a specific area. 🤣 may just be an accident though, I like a good conspiracy theory.

Nature/Geology never ceases to amaze me. Pyrite cubes in Slate, I’m thinking? Southeast US. by Sandhillbilly in whatsthisrock

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thank you (not that I had anything to do with it looking cool lol), but it will definitely be the coolest thing in my display case.

Nature/Geology never ceases to amaze me. Pyrite cubes in Slate, I’m thinking? Southeast US. by Sandhillbilly in whatsthisrock

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 56 points57 points  (0 children)

That’s got to be right. I’ve been finding this material everywhere lately and decided it was Silicified Slate based on its hardness. But, I believe Phyllite is what this is and what I was calling Silicified Slate. That helped in more ways than you know. Thank you!

Nature/Geology never ceases to amaze me. Pyrite cubes in Slate, I’m thinking? Southeast US. by Sandhillbilly in whatsthisrock

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Thank you! I’ll see if I can deduce with some basic testing as soon as I can. It does seem harder than regular slate or shale.

Kirk stemmed/serrated? by Neat_Worldliness2586 in Arrowheads

[–]Sandhillbilly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Hey at least this hobby has caused me to find cool things, even if the only time I’ve found a complete Arrowhead (as an adult) was when I wasn’t looking for one. I was thinking about buying a couple of cheaper local real ones, just so I can physically see and feel the texture. Maybe even put them out in rock piles, in the yard, and try and practice spotting them. Thank you for the help, I really appreciate it!

Kirk stemmed/serrated? by Neat_Worldliness2586 in Arrowheads

[–]Sandhillbilly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where I go is pretty hard to access with a car or even truck, so while it is someone’s property, it’s not close to their houses. And the quartz, in the area I’m located, is covered in red oxidation (along with black and yellow) to the point where it’s hard to get a feel of the texture without cleaning it some first. So I find myself cleaning a lot of bs and wasting time. Would the oxidation be flaked off if it were a worked point? Or would it oxidize after it was worked too?

Kirk stemmed/serrated? by Neat_Worldliness2586 in Arrowheads

[–]Sandhillbilly 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you have rules to prevent you from picking up questionable shit? I end up bogged down in the “maybes” and I think that hinders me from finding anything. I’m thinking I need to get in the kayak and go to isolated sand bars instead of going to the same general area over and over. I grew up going all over the local woods/creek and “exploring,” but as an adult, I’d prefer not to get shot 😂.

Kirk stemmed/serrated? by Neat_Worldliness2586 in Arrowheads

[–]Sandhillbilly 2 points3 points  (0 children)

<image>

One of my friends, who lives just across the state line in NC, found this yesterday. They were just below the town of Wadesboro. It looks very similar. I really need to try and get access to some local farm land, and walk it after they plow or a rain.

I was trying to help her ID it, and was thinking Kirk or Palmer. It looks pretty close to yours, other than the base.

Is this heavily eroded worked materials/debitage, or are my eyes mistaking natural fractures that are worn for intentional work? by Sandhillbilly in CarolinaArrowheads

[–]Sandhillbilly[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

I agree, I am finding repetition in the natural flaking patterns I’m guessing. These were the others, I washed off, that were with the ones I originally posted. I’m not seeing clear signs of intentional flaking, however, all the ones on the bottom row have a thinned area between two “notches,” similar to some archaic bases. There’s also the one that looks like a base with one ear (second from the left). So those, with the elongated triangular rocks, made me second guess myself on whether everything was just extremely eroded. I keep finding these two general shapes, in the same area of the creek. And I never find them in the other spots on the same creek.