You made two assertions. No documentation, and refusal to let it be examined. Cite your sources for that information.<quoted text>
In order to claim the hammer as a reliable out-of-place artifact, one would need either
1. Convincing documentation that the hammer was once naturally embedded in an ancient rock formation.(The very creationists who claim the "anomaly" is real have openly admitted that they have absolutely no documentation to support their claim).
2. Independent scientific evidence indicating a problematic age for the hammer.(The creationists who own this hammer refuse to allow the hammer to be independently analyzed, go figure.)
Why are the Folsom points older in America than China?
Explain the bell, especially the figure on top and the alloy.
Explain the skull.
Those things exist. They have been around for a while. They are not recent finds.