In science for polite suggestions “and not the fake that try to present as an unexpected finding” there is a term “out of place artifact ”
Inappropriate artifact (Fig. out-of-place artifact) object of historical, archaeological or paleontological interest found in unusual or unlikely at first glance. The term was coined by American naturalist and cryptozoology Ivan T. Sanderson and applies to a wide range of objects studied by science (for example, the iron pillar in Delhi), and pseudo-science.
Supporters of the “inappropriateness” of the artifacts believe that science ignores a vast area of knowledge, whether intentionally or out of ignorance. Some random discoveries, such as the antikythira mechanism. led to the fact that scientists have revised their ideas about the technology of ancient civilizations. However, many critics believe that the “inappropriateness” of artifacts most often occurs because of an incorrect interpretation of wydawania of wishful thinking or extreme Kulturzentrum (belief that culture could not create an artifact or to invent technology because he was too underdeveloped or just not smart enough).
Known examples of the “inappropriateness” of artifacts was caused by the insufficiency of our knowledge of witty simple solutions, invented by the ancient engineers. For example, it was shown that the multi-ton statymai on Easter island could be moved and lifted without the use of modern technology.
Misplaced many of the artifacts have not been subjected to a serious investigation and nothing is known about them, except for the fact findings. In such cases, the question arises, what the artifact actually existed. Some, such as crystal skull, have been exposed as outright fakes.
Often inappropriate artifacts attract the attention of creationists and other groups searching for evidence to disprove the theory of evolution or confirm a universal flood; they are also used as evidence in favor of religious descriptions of prehistoric times, the paleocontact and ancient civilizations that had technology more advanced than ours. Many unscientific or pseudo-scientific authors of the literature used inappropriate artifacts to back up its judgments.
In this case “inappropriate” is determined by the time, which dates back to the artifact. The artifact allegedly 800 years old and he is a “mobile phone” with inscriptions of the Sumerian cuneiform and it was found in Austria (In Austria was found a cast mobile phone XIII century: bloggers have already suggested that this is proof of the existence of time machines ):
Archaeologists in the Austrian city of Salzburg have found a truly sensational find. This is a clay mold of the age of 800 years . which to the smallest detail resembles a modern mobile phone. However the button labels made cuneiform . Scientists suggest that this subject came to Austria from Mesopotamia . For which it was intended, the researchers have not yet figured out, but bloggers have already decided that this is proof of the existence of the time machine. Video with image findings being actively discussed in the Internet.
In Austria, found a cast mobile phone XIII century
Historical artifact resembling a mobile phone, was discovered in archaeological excavations in Austria in Fuschl am see in Salzburg. As stated in the article of the newspaper the Sun, at first glance the find is a clay copy of the mobile phone. The truth inscribed on the keys are not the usual numbers and letters, and Sumerian cuneiform style of writing.
On the Internet, after the publication of the video with the image findings, we can already find comments about what the artifact demonstrates advanced ancient civilization or proof that time travelers brought back several centuries ago, the phone to our ancestors.
The publication notes that in General clay tablets with ancient Cuneiform writing are not a very rare finding. But none of them still had similarities with the mobile phone.
There is another version is of extraterrestrial origin of the cast. Ufologists believe that in ancient times, UFOs have repeatedly visited Earth.
IMHO, if this is not a direct falsification (i.e. direct fake), we would love to see a plausible version of what happened. MK, of course, to absolutely reliable sources does not apply, but before April 1, far.