Smithsonian destroying more evidence of alternate human evolution?

originally posted by: Marduk
Just one giant human bone please, from any country, anyone ?

There are over 1000 documented finds of giant skeletons unearthed in North America over the first many decades of colonial settlement. Average unusual height reported was about 8 - 9 foot. Many more at 7 ft + found. largest accurately measured and recorded was 10 ft 9 inches. More sketchy reports from town gazettes (no peer review) place some found at 12ft.

Many of these were documented by scientists and doctors ... most of the bones were shipped to the Smithsonian institute, but not before some were written up in Scientific American and National Geographic in the early years before editorial would not speak of these finds. One dig unearthed over 3000 skeletons in one cemetery, all over 7 foot .

All these bones are no longer available for study. The reason why there is no peer reviewed articles is simply the fact that the upper reaches of a certain scientific establishment (a private organisation with public funding ) appears to have had an agenda to hide the evidence of an earlier species of hominids that were intelligent, made tools,writing and art and were of a stature that made us look like dwarfs.

I do not even begin to guess what their reasons could be for the obfuscation... This evidence is mounting and the truth of the matter will find the light of day one day soon... of this I am certain.

www.youtube.com...

Professor Francis Thackeray shows Michael Tellinger and friends the rarely seen part of the upper leg bone with hip joint of a giant that would have stood about 12 feet or 3,5 metres tall.

This bone has been in the vaults of of the medical school at WITS University, Johannesburg since the early 1960s, when it was found by miners in a mine in northern Namibia. It is one of the most precious and rare specimens available today that clearly indicate the existence of giants in Southern Africa more than 40,000 years ago.

Michael shares this video clip as part of his continued research into the origins of humankind, the vanished civilisations of southern Africa and the strange anomalies we discover on this journey.

Um no, that's the hidden religious relics section, I'm looking for the Smithsonian hidden anthropology relic section

I've heard of this before......forbidden archaeology (Michael Cremo was it?). More evidence against the text book history of civilisation and the history of the planet than for it now. But I do I have a few questions that are more about the general concept than any specific detail;

1) Why? Why would the Smithsonian et al go to such lengths to keep archaeology that doesn't fit from the masses. And I don't buy the 'funding' angle. The funding may well increase significantly if there were so much anomalous evidence, enough to require a massive co-ordinated study and major re-write of text book history. And ego? Well what better way to feed the ego than by proving generations past and masters present that wrote the text books up to now wrong.

2) What difference would it actually make to us the average person outside of these specialist areas of academia? Don't get me wrong. I'm fascinated by history and the fact we don't know the half of it! But I can quite happily get through life without knowing for absolute certain that Atlantis DID exist/Giants DID roam this earth and have sophisticated culture/man and dinosaurs co-existed and aliens openly had contact with man and intervened in development of life on this planet etc. etc. Why MUST they tell us the truth if it is any different to what we've been taught?

We are pretty much screwed.

a reply to: whyamIhere

Exactly what the PTB want. Remember the saying "the truth shall set you free?" They don't want us to be free, even if this is a hoax, they have us covered everywhere else.

originally posted by: HumberWarrior
I've heard of this before......forbidden archaeology (Michael Cremo was it?). More evidence against the text book history of civilisation and the history of the planet than for it now. But I do I have a few questions that are more about the general concept than any specific detail;

?

I read it and his creationist agenda clearly befuddles what he passes for evidence, he holds no scientific credentials

a reply to: SLAYER69

Jimmy Hoffa was smooshed in a car compactor if the stories are to be believed.

The Mafia were quite creative. However I don't think any curators have that mean streak in them.

'Burn the microfiche, take the canoli.'

a reply to: spookysully

I've read stories of how some native Americans encountered red haired giants when arriving in north America and had to wipe them out for survival. Truth? Myth? Parable type story? Don't know.

Could they be hiding proof of this? Maybe. But if they are , it's hidden and we wouldn't know. So the question becomes who would you believe? Bible with nephilliam, native American with story of red haired giants, other cultures with similar stories. Or Smithsonian? Depends on who you are.

originally posted by: HumberWarrior
Why? Why would the Smithsonian et al go to such lengths to keep archaeology that doesn't fit from the masses.

It's actually quite simple once you connect a couple of dots...

The TPTB's CEO is Lucifer.

Why do they intentionally do this you may ask? Because the archeological findings would prove the Biblical account of creation, and they can't as easily deceive the world into believing the lies we have all been taught. www.wearesmrt.com...

"The express aim of the Order was to abolish Christianty, and overturn all civil Government." ~ John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy

Ultimately, the New World Order is about replacing the rule of God with the rule of Lucifer. That's why "God" has become a dirty word.

www.henrymakow.com...

My apologies for the lame OP everyone. I was home for a quick lunch, saw the article and put it up. I shouldn't have done so without checking the link and I'm sorry for that but not for the content as I believe the Smithsonian to be guilty as charged in regards to hiding or destroying certain avenues they or their contributors don't want trespassed. I mostly just read while I visit this site and should polish up on posting new or rehashed material. As mentioned, sorry to those inconvenienced.

I should have checked the link and I guess added more to the post but as it seems, most are getting on fine and claiming that the Smithsonian is all legit and only presents the truth...?? I don't agree. I'll find the link and post it again when I have more time. Again, sorry.

I also don't put much stock in snopes. Many here seem to think there's nothing to this and maybe there's not but whether or not snopes ok's it doesn't mean much to me.

Cheers!

a reply to: Murgatroid

Agreed! I don't trust snopes as far as I could spit a piano. Same goes for any of the government funded main stream research institutes. If the government gives them money, they lie like a cheap rug, simple. I think there are to many historical references to the giants to simply dismiss them as stories, of course until we see one, who knows?

originally posted by: spookysully
My apologies for the lame OP everyone. I was home for a quick lunch, saw the article and put it up. I shouldn't have done so without checking the link and I'm sorry for that but not for the content as I believe the Smithsonian to be guilty as charged in regards to hiding or destroying certain avenues they or their contributors don't want trespassed. I mostly just read while I visit this site and should polish up on posting new or rehashed material. As mentioned, sorry to those inconvenienced.

I should have checked the link and I guess added more to the post but as it seems, most are getting on fine and claiming that the Smithsonian is all legit and only presents the truth...?? I don't agree. I'll find the link and post it again when I have more time. Again, sorry.

I also don't put much stock in snopes. Many here seem to think there's nothing to this and maybe there's not but whether or not snopes ok's it doesn't mean much to me.

Cheers!

I will look for it but i swear not a week ago I saw a blog post saying something very similar about the Smithsonian hiding away things in vaults and destroying OOPARTs and the like, If I can find it in my browser history I will come back and edit the link in. But I don't think it was a bad post buddy, it did spark a conversation right?

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: spookysully

I've read stories of how some native Americans encountered red haired giants when arriving in north America and had to wipe them out for survival. Truth? Myth? Parable type story? Don't know.

Could they be hiding proof of this? Maybe. But if they are , it's hidden and we wouldn't know. So the question becomes who would you believe? Bible with nephilliam, native American with story of red haired giants, other cultures with similar stories. Or Smithsonian? Depends on who you are.

Very well put. I personally believe the stories about the red haired giants and have actually talked to investigators that have heard oral traditions on them. Again, proving these things to people with only a passing interest is difficult at best but I think the Smithsonian is much more of a deterrent than many are willing to admit on things that go against its position and its backer's beliefs/agendas. Cheers!

a reply to: spookysully

What will the idiotic religious right

Now that is a harsh indictment!
Jealousy rears it's ugly head.

originally posted by: sycomix

originally posted by: spookysully

I will look for it but i swear not a week ago I saw a blog post saying something very similar about the Smithsonian hiding away things in vaults and destroying OOPARTs and the like, If I can find it in my browser history I will come back and edit the link in. But I don't think it was a bad post buddy, it did spark a conversation right?

The Smithsonian has been proving the bible wrong for a long time, which is why its usually claimed to be hiding the evidence, because there isn't any evidence, it creates a great god of the gaps argument

There were giants
The Smithsonian has the evidence
The Smithsonian says there isn't any evidence
The Smithsonian is lying
Now we've discredited the Smithsonian, we can lie all day long and blame them...

Kermit must be so pissed off

a reply to: spookysully

Logics is a fine trait when used =)

a reply to: Murgatroid

Im gonna tell you a secret, "castrato".

Guys try using logics, its isnt that hard, everything has a logical answer. SMithsonian isnt gonna send bones out to space just to hide giants from the past. Its deformities, same as, chinese feet, South american skulls, castratos, african necks, humans are twisted when experimenting on perfection.

originally posted by: yulka
Logics is a fine trait when used =)

Totally agree...

In the distant past the earth was highly oxygenated which led to bigger animals.

Dinosaurs were able to reach huge sizes because of the oxygen rich atmosphere that was present then.

If man was alive then and I believe he was, then there is no reason why he could not reach large sizes that his environment allowed.

It's not physically impossible, just certain factors need to be in place.

On a planet that is 40% smaller the body would be liberated of gravitational force, allowing for large growth.

Look at the dinosaurs for example...

It is a fact that T-Rex could not live on this planet, he would would be so massive when he moved he would break his neck.

Why do you think the tallest animal today is the giraffe?

The only reason people have a hard time accepting that large humans once lived on Earth is they have been fed lies from the day they are born until the day they die.

There was something going on with gravitation in earth's distant or not so distant past that is unaccounted for by current scientific theories and which might help us understand which is these viewpoints is correct. Birds with wingspans of up to twenty-five feet lived and flew in those days. Much smaller birds have trouble even getting airborne these days.

There existed in the past sauropod dinosaurs which were well over 100 feet from head to tail. In today's gravity, those creatures would not be able to hold their heads up even to stand.. Basically, the larger an animal becomes the larger and thicker will his bones have to be. However, the gross weight of large animals increases faster than that same animal's musculature and strength.

At some point, the animal's weight would be unsupportable by bone and muscle. Estimates of this maximum possible weight ranges from 20,000 to 40,000 pounds under earth's current gravity. The largest elephants weigh in at about 20,000 pounds and all they can get up to is a brisk walk.

The largest sauropods were thought to have weighed as much as 360,000,000 pounds, some nine times the estimated upper limit for a land animal in today's gravity.

Dinosaurs weren't the only mega creatures in the earth's past. As we've shown in the section of s8int.com called 'Mega Fauna' in the past virtually everything was bigger; i.e. a rhino, 17 feet at the shoulders, deer, eight feet at the shoulder, pigs the size of cows, a type of sloth the size of a monkey today was over 18 feet long in the past, a fifteen foot penguin, dragon flies with two foot wing spans.etc..

Proved that the Earth was Shrinking-Along with Gravity

a reply to: Murgatroid

Wouldnt a reptilian race be more of logic than humans living with dinosaurs, when the asteroid hit everything above water almost went extinct weighing over 20 kg.
Humans gathering food in those days, meat. No, grass probably since the appendix is there. Could humans compete with dinosaurs, unlikely.

So you are saying the asteroid is a hoax also?

i made a whole new OP, just for you

Castrato

originally posted by: Murgatroid

The only reason people have a hard time accepting that large humans once lived on Earth is they have been fed lies from the day they are born until the day they die.

Oh, I thought it was because the only people who were making those claims have no evidence for giant humans existence
Did you find a single giant bone yet ?