The so-called ‘London hammer’
In June 1936 (or 1934, according to some versions of the story), Max Hahn (1897-1989) and his wife Emma were walking along Red Creek, near their home in London (Texas, USA), when they spotted a rock nodule with a piece of wood sticking out from it. Some time later (perhaps in 1946 or 1947), their son George (born 1921) broke it open, to reveal a metallic hammerhead in the centre of the nodule, to which the wooden handle was attached. The creationist Carl Baugh (born 1936) purchased the object about 1983 and began to promote it as ‘the London Artifact’ at his Creation Evidence Museum, which opened in 1984.
On the Museum’s website, Baugh asks:
“If the artifact is truly from the Cretaceous time frame, where does this leave evolutionary theory, since man was not supposed to have evolved for another 100-million years or so? If the artifact is relatively recent, that means that the Cretaceous Hensell Sand formation from which it came is relatively young… Again, where does that leave evolutionary theory with its traditional dates for the Cretaceous formations?”
The Museum sells replicas of the hammer, one of its star exhibits.
One of the major problems with this object is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the nodule was ever part of the Red Creek’s geology, which is the Lower Cretaceous Hensel Sand Formation. These deposits are thought to be roughly 110-115 million years old. Having acquired the object in the early 1980s, Baugh promoted it as a ‘pre-Noachian’ artefact (in other words, dating from a time before the mythical Flood of Noah). However, it was soon pointed out by a geologist that minerals dissolved from ancient strata can harden around a recent object, making it look impressive to someone unfamiliar with geological processes. In fact, the style of the hammer would lead us to recognise it as nineteenth-century in date and of definitely American provenance.
Has anyone ever done carbon dating on the organic handle? Although I’m inclined to believe it’s old compared to me, it ain’t ancient.
I doubt that anyone has tried and I suspect that, as it’s a star exhibit in a creationist museum, its owners won’t be inclined to submit it for dating. Creationists pooh pooh radiocarbon dating when it gives ancient results, claiming that it’s unreliable, but love it to give unexpectedly young results on supposedly ancient objects.
I agree totally with you keith.
Unlike say, granite, sandstone can form very quickly. Experiments showed you can grind up sandstone, mix it with water and pour it into shapes and voila, instant sandstone blocks. Dont try it at home though, the quartz powder in sandstone is very dangerous to your lungs.
Carbon dating is not particularly accurate on many time-scales. Easier would be to try and match tree rings to archival data.
Easiest would be to check the mineral types and attempt to replicate an action of enclosing an artifact into the rock.
Of course, without th ability or desire to incorporate new data into your world-view (a skill the vast majority of creationists seem to lack,) no evidence could be convincing enough to withdraw the speculations.
The thing I find striking about this artifact is that the hammer is not bound to the rock in any of the many places you would assume if it had been incorporated into the rock. In fact, it dosen’t look like it would be a major problem to replicate the artifact by the use of chisels, a drill, a hammerhead and a hammer handle….
The lack of provenance and in many cases the original artifacts themselves in so many of these cases sets alarms ringing. It’s so convenient for an unusual artifact to be unavailable for investigation….
Pingback: Christians and modern myths « Gary Shogren's Blog
Pingback: CHRISTIANS AND MODERN MYTHS « EL NUEVO ORDEN MUNDIAL DE YAHWEH// blog del Apologista, Ingº Mario A. Olcese Sanguineti APO.21:5, JOB 34:13
It looks like a blacksmith’s swage tool for pointing rock drill bits. Typical of the 1800′s.
Here’s a picture of one from our Guild’s shop which is a bit more modern (maybe early 1900′s):
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150889164859317&set=a.10150149284994317.295360.674029316&type=3&theater
Check out some mining tools on this page, and the swage tool at the bottom which is another variation of this type of tool:
http://www.stonestructures.org/html/tool_gallery.html
All mines that used rock drills used to have a blacksmith on site to sharpen the drills because they would go dull very quickly. They had boys that acted as “runners” going down in the mine to collect the warn out drills, and bring them back to the blacksmith, who would sharpen them, then run the new sharp drills back to the miners”. This “hammer” was not a hammer at all, but a blacksmith tool probably left behind at an old mine from the 1800′s.
Check out this picture of the “hammer” which shows the end better to note it’s similarity with these types of tools:
http://www.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/london-hammer-2.jpg
That is very helpful, thanks! A tool with relevance to quarrying explains perfectly why it was found where it was. A so-called “mystery” that is no longer in the least mysterious.
What about the metallurgy of the hammer head itself? It is a strange mix of iron, chlorine and sulfur which, in this case at least, rendered a type of tool steel that is highly resistant to oxidization. Modern steels have nothing in common with this formula and the technique in the hammer’s manufacturing is not in the last few centuries of steel making history. If this artifact was actually a common type of 19th century metal working hammer, where are all the others just like or very similar to it in their composition? The closer we are to the things actual time of origin the easier it should be for us to fully understand if we are really talking about something within that of modern human’s ancestry or from something outside of it. As far as I’ve dug into this thing there have been no definitive explanations as to it’s process of manufacture. A 19th century hammer would be easy to expose. Probably right down to the very person who made it! Tools like this were made in mass, not unique one offs so to speak.
Pingback: What was the #1 MOST SIGNIFICANT DISCOVERY of "creation science" ? - Page 6 - Christian Forums
Pingback: Falsi reperti: il martello di London | Mistero Risolto
I looked carefully throughout my family’s genealogy, and yes, OK, I do see an ancestor who made tools for the other cave people. Now you must understand this was a very long time ago. In fact, this relative made a full set of nice tools for Noah sometime before the building of the Ark, which itself is somewhere up on Mount Arrarat. So if there’s a good Christian out there somewhere who would like to help fund our expedition to find those tools, which may indeed still be aboard the good ship Righteous Brother (That’s its proper name), you may send me a generous donation. What we hope to do is to compare the tools, and that would confirm everything. God bless you one and all, for you’ll all get your just desserts in the end.