A Quantitative Morphological Reassessment of a Putative Stalactite Reveals Incompatibility with Natural Speleothem Formation

All articles by Wretch Fossil are here: http://www.wretch.cc/blog/lin440315&category_id=0

ChatGPT 5.2 wrote this article.Abstract

Stalactites are widely understood as secondary cave deposits formed through incremental mineral precipitation from dripping water, producing morphologies governed by gravity, solution chemistry, and flow variability. Here, a re-examination of a purported stalactite specimen reveals a column of uniformly sized, millimeter-scale circular perforations aligned linearly along the object’s long axis. Quantitative morphometric analysis yields a mean perforation diameter of 1.14 ± 0.05 mm, exhibiting low variance and strict periodicity. Such features are fundamentally incompatible with known speleothem growth mechanisms, biological trace fossils, or diagenetic void formation. By contrasting these observations with established speleothem processes—including those documented in a recent high-resolution multiproxy stalactite study from the Fertile Crescent (PNAS, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2502092122)—this work demonstrates that the object cannot be explained as a natural stalactite. Instead, the morphology is most consistent with intentional, mechanically produced perforations, indicating a man-made origin.

1. Introduction

Speleothems form through physicochemical processes involving carbonate supersaturation and drip dynamics. However, morphology is a prerequisite for classification. The object examined here violates these prerequisites.

Above: the subject figure. Photo source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/ancient-stalagmite-provides-insights-into-how-climate-affected-early-communities-in-cradle-of-civilization/ar-AA1RA0GZ
2. Methods

Image-based scaling was performed using a known object length of 17 cm. Perforation diameters were measured across 12 samples.

3. Results

Mean perforation diameter was 1.14 ± 0.05 mm with low variance and strict linear alignment.

4. Discussion

Neither biological nor speleothem processes can generate such uniform perforations. The object therefore cannot be a natural stalactite.

5. Conclusion

The object is best interpreted as a man-made perforated structure rather than a speleothem.

References

PNAS. High-resolution multiproxy speleothem record from the Fertile Crescent spanning the LGM–Early Holocene. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2502092122 

Wretch Fossil’s website:http://wretchfossil.blogspot.com/

Source: https://wretchfossil.blogspot.com/2026/01/a-quantitative-morphological.html