The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1908-08-13
NO pErn1rAcr1oN OF FLESH.
Scientists HIVE Never Been Able to Find
Any, and the Reason.

Any, and the Reason.
| Editor National Tribune: In your
paper of the 18th inst l find an edi-
torial with reference to Swedenborg,
concluding with . the words There
never has been such a thing as petri-
faction of animal flesh. You reside in
great city, publish a great paper, and
have access to the records and collec-
| lions of the Smithsonian Institute, yet
with all the conveniences for accuracy
in research at your command, a dwell
er on the plains of Kansas feels that he
| cannot let your statement go by I'M
challenged. Consult the charts which
! locate the fossil beds of the United
States, and you will find Kansas has a
| large share of these rich deposits of
history material. Seeing, my dear sir,
| is believing. l am a novelist and writer
of fiction, therefore You may on these
grounds be inclined to doubt my state
ments, yet the actual possession of a
! number of splendid specimens of petri-
fed animal flesh, and the fact of my
having seen and examined many others
is evidence too strong for mind to re-
sist. 1 have a number of specimens Of
the Americans Bisutcatus' this Latin
is subject to corection), one of them
weighing so pounds, and 1 saw one ly
ing on its side in the bed of the Elm
Fork of the Trinity River, of Texas,
which was Is PAGES across; the dis
lance between the ribs or folds of this
enormous snail being a full step! A
friend of mine, living here, has pet
rified fish taken from the mari beds of
this region. Petrified snakes abound
here. 1 have twice seen the body of
the man taken from a spring near Jop-
lin, Mo, which was such perfect and
unmutilated specimen of a petrified hui
man that a short skirt was tied about
his waist for decency sake. l have bro
ken open the sections of petrified SER
penis found in the quarries of Kansas
and was able to distinguish even the
dark marrow of the spinal cord, and in
some other animals the strata of the
flesh, as well as large veins, are plainly
discernible. You probably do not deny
the petrifaction of wood, so perfect the
variety can be easily named; of bone,
showing the cellular constructions; then
why not flesh? Take no mans word.
If you are unprejudiced and will "own
the corn when shown, it will not be
hard to find specimens of petrified flesh
that will set all doubts aside. Under
the old saltpeter process the packing
houses put out cured hams that only
lacked the added responsibility of age
to be called what they really we're
petrified hog meat.
The argument put forth by many
putty-headed scientists is to the effect
that 1.-THE animal does not petrify; the
structure disintegrates and a deposit
from mineraliZed water takes it's place, |
assuming the form OF the original ami
NAL If this be true of flesh. which / |
deny. then why not of all other sub |
and deny the phenomenon of
petrifaction entirely? Go into the fields, |
the plains and mountains. touch hands
with the God of nature and many a
wonder and mystery will be mutely |
unto you.-John c. Baird,
Vesper, Kan.
Inquiry of all the experts in the
United States Geological Survey and of
the National Museum brings concur
renee of the statement that there is
no authentic record of the petrifaction
of flesh or muscular tissue" The rea-
son is obvious: Flesh or muscular It's
sue decomposes too rapidly for it's re-
placement, molecule by molecule, by
mineral matter.-Editor MATERIAL
Tribune.