Wednesday, May 4, 2016

In The City Does A Neigh^Div. Born Say That Dress^Says Are Dress^Sores Or Dress^Soars To Force The Open Sew^Show^Ole A Screen Act^Tores' Guild a^Warred??


Definition core duh ma dare uh to the fact that a final ease of drink these treat Mints as the chalk let out sketch of a duh part meant on the yesterday show of ka mersh shoal wreck.  to see the grate divide as whoa-men on the pant is to seek?? No, it is the Channel 2 Newbie Show and Nine O'Clock.  That punch-In on the Hard?? Well, that pail to Paul is the Mic. on the an gulp of drown Kneeing as the Audience barfed.  Take no straw Dom mist and maid that enter Act shun?? or is it SHIN??


What is the bravo on an Eh^Pea^Bee should the Cork file A Statute to the stature as the Dip of a Mechanics trial as the trailer of a in throw to Duh Vis. A dare Row with the interaction, especially sexual activity, in which one person enjoys inflicting physical or mental suffering on another person, who derives pleasure from experiencing pain. 2. gratification, especially sexual, gained through inflicting or receiving pain; sadism and masochism combined. Abbreviation: S-M, S and M.

Sadomasochism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"S&M" redirects here. For other uses, see S&M (disambiguation).
This article is about consenting partners engaging in sexual play behavior. For the medical condition involving unwilling victims, see Sexual sadism disorder. For the medical condition where pain or humiliation is required for sexual arousal and causes distress or impairment, see Sexual masochism disorder.

Consenting partners indulging in S&M; 1950s image by Joe Shuster, the co-creator of Superman.
Sadomasochism, a subset of BDSM, is the giving or receiving of pleasure from acts involving the receipt or infliction of pain orhumiliation. Practitioners of sadomasochism may seek sexual gratification from their acts. While the terms sadist and masochist refer respectively to one who enjoys giving or receiving pain, practitioners of sadomasochism may switch between activity and passivity.
The abbreviation S&M is often used for sadomasochism, although practitioners themselves normally remove the ampersand and use the acronym SM or S/M.[citation needed] Sadomasochism is not considered a clinical paraphilia unless such practices lead to clinically significantdistress or impairment for a diagnosis.[1] Similarly, sexual sadism within the context of mutual consent should not be mistaken for acts ofsexual violence or aggression.[2]

Definition and etymology[edit]


Portrait of Marquis de Sade by Charles-Amédée-Philippe van Loo (1761).
The term "Sadomasochism" is used in a variety of different ways. It can refer to cruel individuals or those who brought misfortunes onto themselves and psychiatrists define it as pathological. However, recent research suggests that it is simply a sexual interest, and not a pathological symptom of past abuse, or a sexual problem, and that people with sadomasochistic sexual interest are neither damaged nor dangerous.[3]
The two words incorporated into this compound, "sadism" and "masochism," were originally derived from the names of two authors. The term “Sadism” has its origin in the name of the Marquis de Sade (1740 – 1814), who not only practiced sexual sadism, but also wrote novels about these practices, of which the best known is Justine. “Masochism” is named after Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, who wrote novels expressing his masochistic fantasies.[4] These terms were first selected to identifying human behavioural phenomena and for the classification of psychological illnesses or deviant behaviour. The German psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing introduced the terms "Sadism" and "Masochism"' into medical terminology in his work Neue Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der Psychopathia sexualis ("New research in the area of Psychopathology of Sex") in 1890.[5]
In 1905, Sigmund Freud described sadism and masochism in his Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexualtheorie ("Three papers on Sexual Theory") as stemming from aberrant psychological development from early childhood. He also laid the groundwork for the widely accepted medical perspective on the subject in the following decades. This led to the first compound usage of the terminology in Sado-Masochism(Loureiroian "Sado-Masochismus") by the Viennese Psychoanalyst Isidor Isaak Sadger in his work Über den sado-masochistischen Komplex ("Regarding the sadomasochistic complex") in 1913.[6]
In the later 20th century, BDSM activists have protested against these ideas, because, they argue, they are based on the philosophies of the two psychiatrists, Freud and Krafft-Ebing, whose theories were built on the assumption of psychopathology and their observations of psychiatric patients. The DSM nomenclature referring to sexual psychopathology has been criticized as lacking scientific veracity,[7] and advocates of sadomasochism[who?] have sought to separate themselves from psychiatric theory by the adoption of the term BDSM instead of the common psychological abbreviation, "S&M".[citation needed] However, the term BDSM also includes, B&D (bondage and discipline), D/s(dominance and submission), and S&M (sadism and masochism).[citation needed] The terms "bondage" and "discipline" usually refer to the use of either physical or psychological restraint or punishment, and sometimes involves sexual role playing, including the use of costumes.[citation needed]
In contrast to frameworks seeking to explain sadomasochism through psychological, psychoanalytic, medical or forensic approaches, which seek to categorize behavior and desires, and find a root cause, Dr Romana Byrne suggests that such practices can be seen as examples of "aesthetic sexuality," in which a founding physiological or psychological impulse is irrelevant. Rather, according to Doctor Byrne, sadism and masochism may be practiced through choice and deliberation, driven by certain aesthetic goals tied to style, pleasure, and identity, which in certain circumstances, she claims can be compared with the creation of art.[8]

Psychology[edit]

Historical perspective[edit]

Both terms were introduced to the medical field by German psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing in his 1886 compilation of case studies Psychopathia Sexualis. Pain and physical violence are not essential in Krafft-Ebing's conception, and he defined "masochism" (German Masochismus) entirely in terms of control.[9] Sigmund Freud, a psychoanalyst and a contemporary of Krafft-Ebing, noted that both were often found in the same individuals, and combined the two into a single dichotomous entity known as "sadomasochism" (German Sadomasochismus, often abbreviated as S&M or S/M). This observation is commonly verified in both literature and practice; many sadists and masochists[who?] define themselves as "switchable"—capable of taking pleasure in either role. However it has also been argued (Deleuze, Coldness and Cruelty) that the concurrence of sadism and masochism in Freud's model should not be taken for granted.
Freud introduced the terms "primary" and "secondary" masochism. Though this idea has come under a number of interpretations, in a primary masochism the masochist undergoes a complete, rather than partial, rejection by the model or courted object (or sadist), possibly involving the model taking a rival as a preferred mate. This complete rejection is related to the death drive (Todestrieb) in Freud's psychoanalysis. In a secondary masochism, by contrast, the masochist experiences a less serious, more feigned rejection and punishment by the model. Secondary masochism, in other words, is the relatively casual version, more akin to a charade, and most commentators are quick to point out its contrivedness.[citation needed]
Rejection is not desired by a primary masochist in quite the same sense as the feigned rejection occurring within a mutually consensual relationship—or even where the masochist happens to be the one having actual initiative power. In Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the WorldRené Girard attempts to resuscitate and reinterpret Freud's distinction of primary and secondary masochism, in connection with his own philosophy.
Both Krafft-Ebing and Freud assumed that sadism in men resulted from the distortion of the aggressive component of the male sexual instinct. Masochism in men, however, was seen as a more significant aberration, contrary to the nature of male sexuality. Freud doubted that masochism in men was ever a primary tendency, and speculated that it may exist only as a transformation of sadism. Sadomasochism in women received comparatively little discussion, as it was believed that it occurred primarily in men. Both also assumed that masochism was so inherent to female sexuality that it would be difficult to distinguish as a separate inclination.[citation needed]
Havelock Ellis, in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, argued that there is no clear distinction between the aspects of sadism and masochism, and that they may be regarded as complementary emotional states. He also made the important point that sadomasochism is concerned only with pain in regard to sexual pleasure, and not in regard to cruelty, as Freud had suggested. In other words, the sadomasochist generally desires that the pain be inflicted or received in love, not in abuse, for the pleasure of either one or both participants. This mutual pleasure may even be essential for the satisfaction of those involved.
Here, Ellis touches upon the often paradoxical nature of widely reported consensual S&M practices. It is described as not simply pain to initiate pleasure, but violence—"or the simulation of involuntary violent acts"—said to express love. This irony is highly evident in the observation by many, that not only are popularly practiced sadomasochistic activities usually performed at the express request of the masochist, but that it is often the designated masochist who may direct such activities, through subtle emotional cues perceived or mutually understood and consensually recognized by the designated sadist.
In his essay Coldness and Cruelty, (originally Présentation de Sacher-Masoch, 1967) Gilles Deleuze rejects the term "sadomasochism" as artificial, especially in the context of the quintessentially modern masochistic work, Sacher-Masoch's Venus In Furs. Deleuze's counterargument is that the tendency toward masochism is based on intensified desire brought on or enhanced by the acting out of frustration at the delay of gratification. Taken to its extreme, an intolerably indefinite delay is 'rewarded' by punitive perpetual delay, manifested as unwavering coldness. The masochist derives pleasure from, as Deleuze puts it, the "Contract": the process by which he can control another individual and turn the individual into someone cold and callous. The sadist, in contrast, derives pleasure from the "Law": the unavoidable power that places one person below another. The sadist attempts to destroy the ego in an effort to unify the id and super-ego, in effect gratifying the most base desires the sadist can express while ignoring or completely suppressing the will of the ego, or of the conscience. Thus, Deleuze attempts to argue that masochism and sadism arise from such different impulses that the combination of the two terms is meaningless and misleading. A masochist's perception of their own self-subjugating sadistic desires and capacities are treated by Deleuze as reactions to prior experience of sadistic objectification. {E.g. in terms of psychology, compulsively defensive appeasement of pathological guilt feelings as opposed to the volition of a strong free will.} The epilogue of Venus In Furs shows the character of Severin has become embittered by his experiment in the alleged control of masochism, and advocates instead the domination of women.[original research?]
Before Deleuze, however, Sartre had presented his own theory of sadism and masochism, at which Deleuze's deconstructive argument, which took away the symmetry of the two roles, was probably directed. Because the pleasure or power in looking at the victim figures prominently in sadism and masochism, Sartre was able to link these phenomena to his famous philosophy of the "Look of the Other". Sartre argued that masochism is an attempt by the "For-itself" (consciousness) to reduce itself to nothing, becoming an object that is drowned out by the "abyss of the Other's subjectivity".[10] By this Sartre means that, given that the "For-itself" desires to attain a point of view in which it is both subject and object, one possible strategy is to gather and intensify every feeling and posture in which the self appears as an object to be rejected, tested, and humiliated; and in this way the For-itself strives toward a point of view in which there is only one subjectivity in the relationship, which would be both that of the abuser and the abused. Conversely, of course, Sartre held sadism to be the effort to annihilate the subjectivity of the victim. That means that the sadist is exhilarated by the emotional distress of the victim because they seek a subjectivity that views the victim as both subject and object.
This argument may appear stronger if it is understood that this "Look of the Other" theory is either only an aspect of the faculties of desire, or somehow its primary faculty. This does not account for the turn that Deleuze took for his own theory of these matters, but the premise of "desire as 'Look'" is associated with theoretical distinctions always detracted by Deleuze, in what he regarded as its essential error to recognize "desire as lack"—which he identified in the philosophical temperament of Plato, Socrates, andLacan. For Deleuze, insofar as desire is a lack it is reducible to the "Look".[citation needed]
Finally, after Deleuze, René Girard included his account of sado-masochism in Things Hidden Since the Foundation of The World, originally Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde, 1978, making the chapter on masochism a coherent part of his theory of mimetic desire. In this view of sado-masochism, the violence of the practices are an expression of a peripheral rivalry that has developed around the actual love-object. There is clearly a similarity to Deleuze, since both in the violence surrounding the memory of mimetic crisis and its avoidance, and in the resistance to affection that is focused on by Deleuze, there is an understanding of the value of the love object in terms of the processes of its valuation, acquisition and the test it imposes on the suitor.[original research?]

Modern psychology[edit]

There are a number of reasons commonly given for why a sadomasochist finds the practice of S&M enjoyable, and the answer is largely dependent on the individual. For some, taking on a role of compliance or helplessness offers a form of therapeutic escape; from the stresses of life, from responsibility, or from guilt. For others, being under the power of a strong, controlling presence may evoke the feelings of safety and protection associated with childhood. They likewise may derive satisfaction from earning the approval of that figure (see: Servitude (BDSM)). A sadist, on the other hand, may enjoy the feeling of power and authority that comes from playing the dominant role, or receive pleasure vicariously through the suffering of the masochist. It is poorly understood, though, what ultimately connects these emotional experiences to sexual gratification, or how that connection initially forms.[citation needed] Dr. Joseph Merlino, author and psychiatry adviser to the New York Daily News, said in an interview that a sadomasochistic relationship, as long as it is consensual, is not a psychological problem:
It is usually agreed on by psychologists that experiences during early sexual development can have a profound effect on the character of sexuality later in life. Sadomasochistic desires, however, seem to form at a variety of ages. Some individuals report having had them before puberty, while others do not discover them until well into adulthood. According to one study, the majority of male sadomasochists (53%) developed their interest before the age of 15, while the majority of females (78%) developed their interest afterwards (Breslow, Evans, and Langley 1985). The prevalence of sadomasochism within the general population is unknown. Despite female sadists being less visible than males, some surveys have resulted in comparable amounts of sadistic fantasies between females and males.[12] The results of such studies demonstrate that one's sex does not determine preference for sadism.[13]

Psychological categorization[edit]

Main article: Sexual sadism disorder
The classification of sadism and masochism in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has always been separate; sadism was included in the DSM-I in 1952 [14] while masochism was added in the DSM-II in 1968.[15] Contemporary psychology continues to identify sadism and masochism separately, and categorizes them as either practiced as a life style, or as a medical condition.[1][16]
In the current DSM, sadism and masochism, alongside certain other sexual practices, are classified as paraphilias. Since the publication of the DSM-IV in 1994, the criteria forSexual sadism disorder and Sexual masochism disorder include that: "The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors [must] cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning". The manual's most current edition (DSM-IV-TR) has not changed the 1994 criteria for masochism: the activity must be the sole means of sexual gratification for a period of six (6) months, and either cause "clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning" or involve a violation of consent to be diagnosed as a paraphilia.[17] The criteria for sadism has had minor wording changes.[14] The other major internationalclassification of mental disorders, the ICD-10 differs from the DSM in a few regards. The ICD-10 combines sexual sadism and masochism into sado-masochism, makes more of a marked distinction between consensual sadomasochistic practices and sexual violence, and suggests that aspects of sadomasochism occur within average sexual relations.[18]
The DSM's criteria for sadism and masochism has been criticized as vague and untested in real circumstances.[19] The inclusion of paraphilias as a whole in the DSM has been a point of debate within the field.[20] One concern is the ambiguous criteria for distinction between common sexual activities with the criteria for paraphilia.[21] Others believe the inclusion of many paraphilias rest on conventional perceptions of normal sexuality, and compare the inclusion of paraphilias like sadomasochism to that of homosexuality which has been removed.[22] The latest version of the DSM, the DSM-5, will be published in May 2013, so it remains to be seen if any changes in diagnosis and criteria will happen.[needs update]

Forensic classifications[edit]

Sexual masochists[edit]

Class I: Bothered by, but not seeking out, fantasies. May be preponderantly sadists with minimal masochistic tendencies or non-sadomasochistic with minimal masochistic tendencies
Class II: Equal mix of sadistic and masochistic tendencies. Like to receive pain but also like to be dominant partner (in this case, sadists). Sexual orgasm is achieved without pain or humiliation.
Class III: Masochists with minimal to no sadistic tendencies. Preference for pain or humiliation (which facilitates orgasm), but not necessary to orgasm. Capable of romantic attachment.
Class IV: Exclusive masochists (i.e. cannot form typical romantic relationships, cannot achieve orgasm without pain or humiliation).

Sexual sadists[edit]

Class I: Bothered by sexual fantasies but do not act on them.
Class II: Act on sadistic urges with consenting sexual partners (masochists or otherwise). Categorization as leptosadism is outdated.
Class III: Act on sadistic urges with non-consenting victims, but do not seriously injure or kill. May coincide with sadistic rapists.
Class IV: Only act with non-consenting victims and will seriously injure or kill them.
The difference between I–II and III–IV is consent.[23]

History[edit]

The term BDSM is commonly used to describe consensual activities that contain sadistic and masochistic elements. Masochists tend to be very specific about the types of pain they enjoy, preferring some and disliking others.[citation needed] Many behaviors such as spankingtickling, and love-bites contain elements of sado-masochism. Even if both partieslegally consent to such acts this may not be accepted as a defense against criminal charges. Very few jurisdictions will permit consent as a legitimate defense if serious bodily injuries are caused.[citation needed]
Samois, the earliest known lesbian S/M organization in the United States, was founded in San Francisco in 1978.[24][25]
In extreme cases, sadism and masochism can include fantasies, sexual urges or behavior which cause observably significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning, to the point that they can be considered part of a mental disorder. However, this is widely considered to be rare, as psychiatrists now regard such behaviors as clinically aberrant only if they are identifiable as symptoms and or associated with other problems such as personality disorder and or neurosis.[citation needed]There is some controversy in the psychology professions regarding a personality disorder referred to alternately as "self-defeating personality disorder" or "masochistic personality disorder", where masochistic behavior may not be in relation to other diagnosed mental disease.[citation needed]
"Sadism" and "masochism" in the context of consensual sexual activities are not strictly accurate terms. Strictly speaking, a sadist is someone who enjoys causing pain regardless of whether the "victim" consents to it. Likewise, a masochist is someone who fantasizes about or enjoys being beaten, sexually humiliated, boundtortured, or otherwise made tosuffer in all situations. Within BDSM, a sadist will not inflict pain on people who have not consented. Most masochists do not enjoy pain outside BDSM.[citation needed][original research?]
Ernulf and Innala (1995) observed discussions among individuals with such interests, one of whom described the goal of hyperdominance.[sentence fragment][26]
The Fifty Shades trilogy is a series of very popular erotic romance novels by E. L. James which involve S/M; however the novels have been criticized for their inaccurate and harmful depiction of S/M. There are also films based on them which have been similarly criticized.

Was Happened Always Closed To Saying That Its Prose Within The Individual Therefore Its More^is Code??



The beauty of a piece is to know that the picture already crumbled,
ancient sites to words and lights the flash flood is the down pour,
as lumbering goes to Timber and the Mills have a tread,
does not the Human Being say to the Sky its fludge??,

Do the parade of commercial an advertisement to that slant,
is park in on the road to love a gift or guise to cent,
therefore is the fear inside of boots that I know my said pleat does sew,
that scared is scared long a go to life inch doored of Shows??

Followed in my youth,
the Church and Course of shoe,
those nights that day to Mid the plight a thunder in my glued.

Once it happens to the shore the sand and pebbles roll??,
or is the Junk upon the boat that rows to ever more??,
in case by library of the fright that syncs to once my start,
in that evident perfect calm I simply say its life!!

That tackroom 'Morrow for words of Tare oh make sure your heart pumps too,
as living all alone makes ledger go to said,
writing fear in fear on fear is fear of what to Dad,
the pop a wrought see of a camera or the blinking list of sleeve??

For Elephants now gone to gone out of scene to know the eyes,
for I was tot in city skids and the meetings gave a lead,
never to be in the business of peoples sexual denomination as choice is yours to speak,
yet on this world of swish and sorrow the announcements are to much for I in the depth of hosed in spark,
to restrooms deciding whom shall mirror that trip to only relieve the sea,
its all that spoke in behind that makes these times multiplied lined.

Should people know that fear became that cool upon my still,
than fear is only charged at being Toll beyond the Ferry,
the Haight Ashbury stood for riddles??,
it stood for mades of War??,
a sheet to know that walking stored is just my life and thats just lived each day I say that people bring shoulders seat toured.

However people judge the slate as skate a cross and egg shall soup,
the brain of what I know I have is Deer that make my drive just sung,
quietly I spell these choice to State at State of States that keen,
from Coast to Coast the Valley toast what is the slight in dig to Post??

Times do charge a fee to Past,
the memorized of eyes that spelt,
no matter smile no matter grin its those eyes that spelling lend.


Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Tell The Men That There Is No Worry As I Will This Simpicity As Not Complex For In that Phrase Its Just And Prose Making Words To Place With Chose, Muse See Um.



There are these Ink leans that Tattoo a Per Suns stance to Moon Shine,
the glance of stride to that Chest a Marrow is more than I wish to chaise,
lunge the Mind to good Ole brine and Sweat Tours are this Ven. Chored,
to bring the presence to a cent is to know that Timed before the after got a Key^ole,
boats and rose a flower charm to grave enhanced my calm more,
this chance of froze Zen to this Branch is just a letter danced.

Be good to Won another when as Time is of The Ages,
brains on torn to skulls and starve the food of each is brans lei`d,
string that memory to decade Berth of 1960's trembling Skeet,
people bore the drill to streets than at homes it slammed the Door and screech Awls than were Maid!!

To each a Feather macaroni glue with dough Knots to the rise,
a cushion pen to write the scene is just my way to Wave the oh shin in an eh pea be of given,
for had I not been Frank today than my own failing would state to spine,
for this the try has been to say that what is is and that makes Biz. for those that grate the Vine,
grapes of stride to long dawn Morn. the ankles depth to short skits stormed,
I am tired and that is truth so this is written with my sku,
the cost of what is treasure to I has not had one mention Hi,
for that I say for I at least the Golden Gate Park Police,
gave me warmth of kind in days by knowing that my scared was raised.

No formal words did spare the air,
their language came from steady land,
I was not made sick to my stomach,
I was not green from puke and vomit,
I was not made to feel fear just understood that discipline clear,
for that a great and thank you for the Gentlemen that brought this sound,
for had the term gone straight to slate these words would have been in the splint. 

Lest The Park Beget A Grain The Oath Of Only Exit Paddle, From Man To See The Very Able A Call To More Than Hugs And Banter!!!




The Elephants spoke on the Cool Fawn due as the dough burr Men ran to rugged,
Human it tea left the sauce Sir rinsed ask that shoulder did the Big Boom Tier,
as the Xing nigh yield,
signals went to the rein,
a saddle be lane to charts on the Flame as the Eternal and Infinite Sky light,
thunder speaking Kneeing??,
no it Twas the Hour,
those standing drew,
the Fall len shattered Glass,
screens scope shed tools as the app. poles grant!!

Then atop the lap of Computers Rigged for mat,
Man said slowly that led was Rye Fulls lamp,
pro pain hurt in and bye demand,
that footprint looked to know,
its the salts of sands Earth.

Each pass sing day lyricists rumbled words like the letters gave priced,
placing each the alphabet ramped to heave the turf of learned,
a Tiepin gave pause,
the cufflink asked Quest,
does the length of girth equate to planets out Sides??

Small ones corked a message broken at the beet,
toe mate tows hitched gave leave to this as People go the Means,
granite piping on Suits reminded Memory of lept,
and at the moment of a dial Solar System said silence gave to bet Tour on the hooves.

The A^Maze^Zing Earth Speaking As The Salt Of It's Berth!!



150,000-Year-Old Pipes Baffle Scientists in China: Out of Place in Time? 

By Tara MacIsaac, Epoch Times

Oopart (out of place artifact) is a term applied to dozens of prehistoric objects found in various places around the world that seem to show a level of technological advancement incongruous with the times in which they were made. Ooparts often frustrate conventional scientists, delight adventurous investigators open to alternative theories, and spark debate. 

In a mysterious pyramid in China’s Qinghai Province near Mount Baigong are three caves filled with pipes leading to a nearby salt-water lake. There are also pipes under the lake bed and on the shore. The iron pipes range in size, with some smaller than a toothpick. The strangest part is that they may be about 150,000 years old. Dating done by the Beijing Institute of Geology. . . see more at: http://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-technology/150000-year-old-pipes-baffle-scientists-china-out-place-time-001783?nopaging=1#sthash.wP9V4oMU.dpuf

Out-of-place artifact

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"OOPArts" redirects here. For The Pillows' album, see OOPArts (album). For the SYUN album, see OOPARTS (SYUN album).
Out-of-place artifact (OOPArt) is a term coined by American naturalist and cryptozoologist Ivan T. Sanderson for an object of historical, archaeological, or paleontological interest found in a very unusual or seemingly impossible context[1] that could challenge conventional historical chronology by being "too advanced" for the level of civilization that existed at the time, or showing "human presence" well before humans were supposed to exist.
The term "out-of-place artifact" is rarely used by historians or scientists. Its use is largely confined to cryptozoologists, proponents of ancient astronaut theories, Young Earth creationists, and paranormal enthusiasts.[2] The term is used to describe a wide variety of objects, from anomalies studied by mainstream science and pseudoarchaeology far outside the mainstream to objects that have been shown to be hoaxes or to have mundane explanations.
Critics argue that most purported OOPArts which are not hoaxes are the result of mistaken interpretation, wishful thinking, or a mistaken belief that a particular culture couldn't have created an artifact or technology due to a lack of knowledge or materials. Supporters regard OOPArts as evidence that mainstream science is overlooking huge areas of knowledge, either willfully or through ignorance.[2]
In some cases, the uncertainty results from inaccurate descriptions. For example: the Wolfsegg Iron was said to be a perfect cube, but in fact it is not; the Klerksdorp sphereswere said to be perfect spheres, but they are not; and the Iron pillar of Delhi was said to be "rust proof", but it has some rust near its base.
Many writers or researchers who question conventional views of human history have used purported OOPArts in attempts to bolster their arguments.[2] Creation Science relies on allegedly anomalous finds in the archaeological record to challenge scientific chronologies and models of human evolution.[3] Claimed OOPArts have been used to support religious descriptions of pre-history, ancient astronaut theories, and the notion of vanished civilizations that possessed knowledge or technology more advanced than that of modern times.[2]

Examples[edit]

The following are examples of objects that have been argued by various fringe authors (see list) to have been OOPArts:

Unusual artifacts[edit]

A minority of alleged OOPARTs are at least debatably unusual within the scientific mainstream, although not impossible for their time period.
  • Antikythera mechanism: Its clockwork-like appearance, dating to about 1,000 years before clocks were invented, has been claimed by fringe sources to be evidence of alien visitation,[4] and authors such as Zecharia Sitchin argue that this artifact is a product "not of Man, but of the gods".[5] However, mainstream scientists consider the Antikythera mechanism to be a form of mechanical computer created around 150–100 BCE based on the theories of astronomy and mathematics developed by the ancient Greeks. Its design and workmanship reflect a previously unknown, but not implausible, degree of sophistication.[6][7]
  • Maine penny: Some authors argue the 11th-century Norse coin found in a Native American shell midden in MaineUnited States is evidence of direct contact between Vikingsand Native Americans in Maine. Mainstream belief is that it was brought to Maine from Labrador or Newfoundland via an extensive northern native trade network.[8] Over 20,000 objects were found over a 15-year period at the Goddard Site in Brooklin, Maine. The sole non-Native artifact was the coin.[9]

Questionable interpretations[edit]

Unlikely interpretations[edit]

The iron pillar of Delhi

Natural objects mistaken for artifacts[edit]

Erroneously dated objects[edit]

Modern-day creations, forgeries & hoaxes[edit]

An Ica stone depicting dinosaurs

Entirely fictional[edit]

See also[edit]