petrified human skull found in coal bed.



How old is man?

The following is from the Congressional Record and is quoted in its entirity for your benefit.  Its implications are monumental.



HON. Paul E. KANJORSKI of Pennsylvania Tuesday October 27, 1987

Mr. Kanjorski, Mr. Speaker, I would like to call your attention to an article from the October 10, 1987 Hazleton Standard Speaker entitled "man as Old as Coal” The story concerns the research of one of my Constituents, Ed Conrad whose findings are on exhibit in the Greater Hazleton Historical Society Museum.

As the inscription above Mr. Conrad's exhibit reads: "This is the only museum in the world where petrified bone, Found between coal veins, is on display". On behalf of my constituent I request that this article be inserted in THE RECORD. The article follows:

Writer's Claim: Man as Old as Coal-If Correct, it would destroy Darwin's Theory. It is only a small sign neatly dressed in a frame and its message is not only short and sweet but also loud and clear: "This is the only museum in the world where petrified bone, found between coal veins is on display"

The sign hangs amid an exhibit in the Greater Hazleton Historical Society Museum in Hazleton and Ed Conrad who discovered the specimens he insists are petrified mammalian bone, claims it is 100 per cent factual.

The microscope doesn't lie and the Haversion systems, the tell-tale evidence of bone are clearly visible in my specimens," He explained. "Therefore, there is no question that it is bone. And, most importantly, it has been confirmed by one of the most prestigious scientific Institutions of its kind in America Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center in Atlanta, Ga."

Conrad discovered what he claims is petrified bone in spill banks removed from between veins of anthracite and, if anyone doubts they are as old as or older than coal (which science claims is a minimum of 280 million years), he simply points to specimens still embedded in slate which also are on display.

"Science says coal is of Carboniferous age and it is considered one of the golden rules of geology," he said. "But my discoveries may be much older. After All, for bone to petrify in slate means it had to exist before the material that turned into slate had hardened."

"In any event, science has long maintained that large land animals did not even exist during the time frame of the coal formations that they Wouldn’t come along until many millions of years after coal was formed--but my discoveries prove that this particular theory is totally in conflict with the facts."

The discovery of bones of large land animals between coal veins would stand as a monumental scientific breakthrough in itself but it's really minor league when Compared to Conrad's other discoveries.

He claims he has found human skeletal remains, petrified and also of Carboniferous age, that originally had been situated between coal veins, making them older that the topmost vein.

A newspaperman for more than a quarter century and a member of the Standard Speaker staff for the past seven years, Conrad says there is no question that his discoveries include human bone.

"Two of the world's foremost authorities in human comparative anatomy have been extremely impressed with a number of my specimens which they strongly feel are human remains" he said.

These experts are Walton Krogman author of "The Humans Skeleton in Forensic Medicine" and Raymond A. Dart. M.D. the internationally acclaimed anatomist, both of whom had physically examined a number of Conrad's key specimens.

"Their very favorable opinion is documented in writing above their signatures" Conrad revealed. “And, since testing has confirmed that some of these key specimens in particular, portions of two craniums are indeed mammalian bone, they unquestionably are human".

And, he says, this is why scientists-in particular, anthropologists and paleontologists as well as the biggest name scientific institutions have given him a very difficult time over the past six or seven years.

"My discoveries of what I insist are petrified human skeletal remains, removed from between coal veins in carboniferous strata, is the ammunition to destroy sciences flimsy version of how man originated," Conrad said. "It really very simple: Evolutionists insist our most remote ancestors were monkey-like, cat size primates which existed 50 to 65 million years ago. and that we man climbed up the ladder from that very insignificant beginning.

"Therefore, to place man on earth in almost his present form during the coal formations means that we could not possibly have evolved from these Monkey like creatures. It's impossible if our ancestors were around about 200 million years previously".

Conrad, a native of Mahanoy city who had worked at newspapers in Philadelphia Montreal and Toronto, said his first discovery of what he Says is petrified bone was nothing more than a fluke-but there have been no accidents since.

"One day back in June 1981, I just got the urge to search for leaf fossils" he recalled "so I drove to a slate bank but gave up in disgust after about 15 minutes when I couldn't find a single one."

"While walking back to my car, I spotted a copper-colored, peculiarly shaped small boulder in the distance and, for some strange reason walked Over to investigate," said Conrad. "When I looked it over more closely, I got the distinct impression that it resembled a large skull and took it home."

He then sent photographs of the specimen to the University of Pennsylvania. Alan Mann, an anthropologist, was impressed with the photograph and invited him to bring the specimen to Philadelphia.

But, after seeing the object and without performing any scientific testing, Mann told his visitor that it was nothing more than a natural formation.

Conrad then sent the same photo to the Smithsonian Institution and was invited to bring the object to Washington D.C. so it could be examined.

This was done and the Smithsonian "experts“ including an anthropologist and a paleontologist as aid it was nothing more than rock, also without performing any scientific testing.

Instead of tossing the specimen over the nearest embankment, Conrad decided to probe the inside of what appeared to be a jaw and when he patiently did this over a period of Several weeks, he learned to his amazement that the interior was hollow being full of hardened mud.

He felt certain a rock shouldn't have a hollow interior and informed both Penn and the Smithsonian but neither expressed any further interest in the specimen

Three months later, rather disgusted about their lack of interest, Conrad accidentally broke off the portion which he felt resembled a jaw and discovered the Hollow interior contained peculiar hardened protrusions. He later learned, after reading about human teeth and jaws in the library, that the interior of the Jaw like area which the "experts" at Penn and the Smithsonian claimed was nothing more than a rock contained what he says is a portion of a human mandible As well as two humanlike teeth: a canine and a premolar, precisely where they would be expected to be found on a human dental arcade...

I should be noted that this pair of tooth-like protrusions had been X-rayed much later by a veteran dentist who wrote a letter stating that the X-rays he had taken read just like teeth.

Meanwhile, Conrad insists he had gotten the fast shuffle from various "experts" to whom he had taken not only his original specimen but also a few other strange-looking Objects he had found in the same general locality everybody turned thumbs down on me. “He said, including the anthropologist at Penn; three experts at the Smithsonian Roger cuffey, a paleontologist at Penn state's main campus: Dr. Robert eckhardt, an anthropologist at Penn State; and Allan Walker of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore Md. who is considered one of the world's foremost authorities on fossilized teeth.

All I was getting was the brush-off and only later did I realize why." said Conrad, "it was because I had been completely honest in informing them that the Specimens had come from between anthracite veins.

"Since science maintains that neither man nor large land animals had existed while coal was being formed, I was shot down out of hand because they simply felt it could not be possible. And, besides, how could I-a nobody, who never spent five minutes in a classroom studying earth sciences, find something that men of great education in science never found? "But the problem is, the anthropologists and paleontologists simply did not know what to look for. Unfortunately, the vast vast majority of them only know what they have read in books, or had been taught by professors who also had read it in books.

"Anybody even third or fourth graders can find fossilized bone. If, for example: you take them to a place where fossilized bone has been found in the past and let them walk around the terrain for awhile, “said Conrad. This is because fossilized bone generally is white, so it’s relatively easy to spot when it's sticking out of the ground.

However, when bone petrifies and turns to a rock like-material, no one on the face of this earth no one from Penn, Smithsonian, Penn State or anywhere else can say positively that a rocklike object is bone or rock, no matter how impressive it bone-like contour might be. That is, if they're basing their opinion on visual observation alone.

"This is where the microscope comes in. A ground section a wafer thin slice) must be cut from the specimen in question and the cell structure examined microscopically to determine if the Haversian systems the cell structure are visible. Conrad said he stumbled onto this fact by a stroke of good luck.

"I had been in Montreal on other business and paid a visit to McGill University where I dropped into a geology lab to show them a few of my specimens and ask a few basic questions,” he said. "While there, I casually mentioned that it would be a shame if my specimens were in fact, petrified bone but there was no way of ever proving it."

"One of the grad students seemed shocked and immediately told me that bone is always identifiable because petrification cannot alter the cell structure. He explained that this is because bone requires oxygen and food which are supplied through miniscule canals, and these canals, the Haversian systems, always remain."

Conrad said the shame of his entire project is that neither Mann nor people from the Smithsonian, Penn State nor Johns Hopkins had revealed this information that a conclusive determination of bone can be made with a microscope after a ground section is prepared and examined. In any event, Conrad returned home, became a steady customer at the Hazleton area Public Library, obtained a scientific journal entitled "Science in Archaeology" in which it clearly states precisely what the geologist had told him about bone always being identifiable no matter its age or degree of petrification. It was then that Conrad began studying the internal structure of bone, as explained and pictured in textbooks, purchased a microscope, acquired several bones of a human cadaver and eventually determined that under the microscope using about the very same degree of magnification the cell structure of the specimens he had discovered between anthracite veins was totally similar.

When I brought this to the attention of various scientists and scientific institutions, I was totally ignored and in fact, they treated me as though I was a crackpot, he said. And at this point, I knew I required documentation of the cell structure in my rock like specimens from major laboratories, However, I learned rather quickly that they simply refused to perform the testing, even though I was quite willing to pay them or their time and effort. They simply returned my specimens untested with one weak explanation or another.

It seemed that somebody high up, who knew I possessed petrified bone of carboniferous age and wanted me to give up in disgust had alerted them to avoid me like the plague. This is the only answer I can give. "Eventually I realized that since it seemed I couldn’t go in the front door to get documentation. I’d have to enter through the back door," Conrad explained. So I sent one of my specimens to Yerkes and asked if one of their experts in the study of bone could determine if a specimen of petrified bone I would like to send them was part of a primate. "I sent the specimen to Dr. Jeremy Dahl, who later wrote back to dismiss all possibilities that the specimen was primate, primarily because he insisted that no large primates existed on the North American continent further back than 20 million years ago, obviously admitting that, based on its petrification the specimen was very, very old.

"However when he returned the specimen, Dahl referred to it as bone several times in his letter. And, best of all, he provided a drawing of the specimen from which he had cut off a slice for a ground section which was examined microscopically to determine if the cell structure of bone was visible.

Conrad also went through the back door so to speak while seeking a confirmation from Teledyne Isotopes, one of America’s largest independent testing laboratories.

He wrote to Teledyne to ask if someone there could determine if a specimen of petrified bone he would send them was mammalian or reptilian. Jonathan Powell, geochemistry manager at their facility in Westwood N.J. became very interested and invited Conrad to send him the specimen. Much later Powell informed Conrad in writing it appears to be more mammalian than reptilian.

"What I did was outfox the foxes” said Conrad. “I had to trick them into giving me their honest opinion and it paid off because I received the necessary confirmation that my rock-like objects were PETRIFIED BONE.

"If the anthropologists and paleontologists scream and holler that my rock-like specimens are not petrified bone, they’re blowing hot air. Are they going to question Yerkes’ written report for example?

"All I can say is that I have everything I say I have and I have no reason to lie,” said Conrad. “I have operated as a true scientist in every sense of the word. I have had all kinds of other testing done and all at my own expense without receiving a dollar in funding.

This testing includes a cat scan on one of my human skull like specimens which revealed impressive similarities with human skulls. And scanning electron microscope SEM work which revealed that the surface features of one of my specimens which both Krogman and Dart feel may be a portion of a human tibia are almost totally similar under 2000 power magnification with the surface features of a human skeleton.”

Conrad said he has an incredible number of specimens of human skeletal remains but his prize possession is what he insists is an almost complete human skull embedded in a boulder, with its left side protruding.

"This skull-like object dramatically resembles a human skull in contour and it is absolutely, positively, unquestionably mammalian bone because I have examined granules taken from the rind and the Haversian systems are crystal clear," he revealed.

Getting back to the display of his petrified bones at the historical museum, Conrad explained why he has done so.

"For one thing, I've been chasing all over the country for the past six or seven years via letters and phone calls and often in my car-trying to seek out honest scientists who aren't afraid of rocking the evolutionists' boat," he said, "But I was getting nowhere, which is a total disgrace and makes a mockery of the contention of most scientists that they are always seeking the truth.

"Then Spotlight Newspaper in Washington, D.C. (with an international circulation of approximately 234,000) became very interested in my discoveries and published a three part series on me and my specimens last January. The Standard Speaker ran a news item on their series and a few days later Harold Rinehimer, president of the museum, asked me for copies of the Spotlight stories so he could put it in a display case.

"I gave him copies, then almost completely forgot about them, "said Conrad. "However, about six weeks ago, Harold flagged me down as I was walking past the museum and excitedly told me that a former college professor from Arizona, spending time in Hazleton because his car had broken down and simply killing time until it was repaired, had visited the museum the previous day and had spent almost an hour and a half reading and rereading the Spotlight articles.

"The former professor was very, very impressed, Harold told me. And that's when I decided to go all the way with the historical museum because I believe everyone living in the coal region should be aware that our area plays a monumental role in man's ancestry and origin."

Conrad continued: "look, publications like Time, Newsweek, The NewYork Times and the Washingon Post as well as network television news program such as "60 minutes" wouldn't even give me the time of day. That's because they realize what a sensitive, controversial issue it is, and how many enemies they'd create in established science just by giving my story some national publicity.

"But I'm not worried about making enemies more than the very long lineup which I already have because I'm offering mankind the evidence that Darwin's Theory is nothing more than another Aesop's fairy tale" he remarked. " And, unless the evolutionists are able to come up with the physical evidence of some lowly primate older than my specimens of petrified bone, they'll be on the outside looking in."

"I feel, if we realized that the scientific evidence is now available that we are something very, very special in the grandiose scheme of creation that we aren't the result of a series of incredible, and always favorable, accidents of evolution maybe it'd make this a much saner and safer world in which to live."

As for his numerous enemies in science and various scientific institutions, Conrad offers the last word by recalling what President to be John Adams stated very eloquently back in 1770 while a defense attorney at the Boston massacre trial:

"Facts are stubborn things: and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

This article in the Congressional record makes many very serious and far reaching claims. For more on this area of research see Ed Conrads website Ed Conrads website.


1. Congressional Record: Volume 133 No. 168 October 27, 1987

2. Congressional Record: Volume 134 No. 50 April 19, 1988

3. Reading Eagle: February 21,1988

4. Pottsville Republican: December 5, 1987