Springhead wrote:Hello Min,
I regret you are unable to see this mammoth. Please only look in the lower half of the frame. The mammoth's head is left center at the top (of the lower frame half), and the end of the trunk is about centered in the bottom of the frame with the animal looking right. The head and trunk extend almost fully down the lower half of the image. As I mentioned, I was unable to crop the image down in Photo Bucket.
I do understand that site dating is an individual endeavor. The praying motif may be referenced in the OriginsNet.org site of Dr. James Harrod. I am unable to link, so I'll direct you. In the middle paleolithic gallery 3, N and NE sector, c.100,000 to 24,000 BP, Har Karkom, Isreal, #17 artifact, flint. Harrod describes his analysis as "very tentative," but I was struck with the similarity of the arms composition with the subject artifact in my image. My analysis of the praying subject matter was independent of Harrod's, and I was pleased to see tentative support for my interpretation.
There are multitudes of similarities between many other artifacts I have and those shown by Harrod.
I've been involved with rock art research, to one degree or another, for nearly 40 years. And I've seen many examples of people thinking they see man made images on rock where, in fact, there are no man made images at all. What you are showing is another example of someone making that very same mistake. The image we are seeing is perfectly natural, not rendered by humans at all. Of course, you will dismiss my opinion, and will simply carry on with your insistence that there is indeed a human rendered image of a mammoth on that rock. There is no such thing on that rock. But, you can't help yourself, and will completely ignore an experienced opinion or observation. You're incapable of being mistaken. Which, of course, is an asinine position to take, but we have seen it both here,and on other forums where artifacts and images on stone are presented and discussed. Sad!
And the rock? It's just that. A rock, not an artifact. It's not even a geofact, which is a rock that loosely resembles an artifact. Nope, not an artifact at all. It shows absolutely no sign of having been worked by man. Some artifacts are flaked into shape. Some assume their shape via pecking and grinding. You have absolutely no experience whatsoever recognizing actual human artifacts. And it sure shows! Unfortunately, I have seen this syndrome many, many times on Internet forums. Wherever it appears, the original poster simply prattles on with his/ her delusions, oblivious to the fact that they are delusional. Every. Single. Time.
Here is a genuine image of a mammoth, rendered on bone, and discovered in Florida:https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 131334.htm