Spark plug dating guide black speed dating tampa
It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. In fact it is a Champion spark plug from the 1920's.Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. It was probably, but not certainly, used to power an engine associated with mining operations.As I see it, the Coso object has been so often called an OOPART that it should be in the same category as the others.Joshua Z , 10 January 2007 (UTC)I agree with Joshua Z.Hammer Film Fan (talk) , 13 February 2013 (UTC) Certain young-earth creationists have hailed the artifact as evidence for a young earth, arguing that if a modern item such as a spark plug can become encased in stone then the entire idea of rocks taking millions of years to form can be shown to be false. That is why it isn't cited by any YEC, because there is no science to refute.124.1 (talk) , 16 February 2011 (UTC) The report seem to have much more meat than the speculation on extra terrestrials and time travellers, yet the "Origin" section is being lead by the supernatural explanations.It is true that Young Earth creationists make the argument from either hats, leaves, and forth encrusted with either rust, travertine, or concretions and objects found in beachrock that the "idea of rocks taking millions of years to form can be shown to be false." However, I have yet to find any specific author, who uses the Coso Artifact to make this specific argument. I was thinking of reversing the paragraphs, because I think reports should come before the ill-sourced supernatural speculations.--Guyzero , 28 January 2007 (UTC)Without being too much of a sceptic, surely if 'its a champion spark plug from the 1920's ' and is therefore clearly not an OOPART then it should be removed from the OOPART list.After all, finding something somewhere from the present era in an unusual circumstance hardly fits the OOPART criteria.
This artifact has an article only because of this claim, so it should be put in the category "OOPArt" which should contain claimed OOPArts and ex-claimed OOPArts which are now clearly explained.Sun Sw0rd , 9 January 2007 (UTC) It should be listed as such in that it is commonly described as one by people who don't know any better and we can veriffy that description.In fact, all OOPARTS are almost certainly not really OOPARTS, but we still list them.Thus the Antikythera mechanism is not on the list either.Sun Sw0rd , 10 January 2007 (UTC)Mayve we should make the category about OOPARTS and claimed OOPARTS then?