It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proof of Ancient Giants?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 12:31 PM
link   
There is some proof "Giants" exsisted back then. But there not described as Gods in Egyptian or other literature of the time. This link may help.




posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Well Neanderthals were 5'- 5'4" while Cro-Magnon ranged from 5'10"- 6'2" A foot difference in rather sociologically primative people would be quite impressive.



posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 02:04 PM
link   
They might of had a pre-histoical civilization something like pre-history meets the bronze age, which would make more since with the history records and what archelogical and anthropoloical evidence found throughout the world.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Forgot to bring the file to Ron today, but the more I look, I believe the skull is either a pachyrhinosaurid type or a camarasaurus.

In any case, not human.

[edit on 16-10-2006 by Byrd]



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 12:39 AM
link   


They might of had a pre-histoical civilization something like pre-history meets the bronze age, which would make more since with the history records

Non sequiteur
a pre historical civilisation leaves no historical records
like thats where it gets its name from Dude




posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by usaforever
There is some proof "Giants" exsisted back then. But there not described as Gods in Egyptian or other literature of the time. This link may help.


Usaforever,

Thanks for the link to one of the "giants" of Egyptology, though his (Henri Edouard Naville's) methods were lamentable, we must remember that he was a product of his time and hence should not be judged by today's standards.

In the old days before archaeology became an established science, with a general methodology and standard procedures to follow, many such "fortune hunters" conducted searches for relics of the ancient past, in Egypt as well as in other countries. This was true in paleontology as well, by the way. No doubt much detail was lost from rich archaeological (and paleontological) sites due to the crude methods used and the lack of care for the minutiae at a site that such scientists today are so trained to consider.

In any case, it was an interesting profile of a person that helped increase our knowledge of the Egyptians. Though what it has to do with real "giants," I haven't a clue.

Harte



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I found a site with plenty of unusual, large skeletons. Here it is.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Patrick_D
I found a site with plenty of unusual, large skeletons. Here it is.


Only because of poor research, I'm afraid. They keep stating "These types of skulls are bordering on biological impossibility" but they show no evidence that they know much about anatomy or the practice of binding limbs and bones to cause deformation.

This one is one we're all familiar with. :
www.tracone.com...

It's Peruvian, and they bound the heads of their children to shape them that way.

Another bound skull. Note that these aren't "giant skulls" as the site is claiming. They're the same size as your skull:
www.tracone.com...

This one's an example of trepanation... the individual actually survived having that much of the bony matter removed, as you can see from the growth on the edges of the hole. Again, it's a known specimen in a museum. You could go see it for yourself and see that it's a normal-sized skull. This one WAS bound, by the way. :
www.tracone.com...

Interesting skull, possibly hydrocephaly. Again, not gigantic. The skull appears to be that of someone who died about age 24. :
www.tracone.com...

The web page is getting tiresome with the same claims. Another bound skull, and a very famous one:
www.tracone.com...

Now they get sneaky. They show you the side view of the skull in #4. Now you can see that the deformation is caused by binding:
www.tracone.com...

Another one of the bound skulls from the same group:
www.tracone.com...

More bound skulls from the museum visit:
www.tracone.com...

Hydrocephaly, child, about 6 years old:
www.tracone.com...

This one is actually a sculpture and not a real skull. A closer look (larger photos are out there on the web) shows that the item is actually sculpted in one piece and is not a real skull (which would show the joints where the facial bones grew together) :
www.tracone.com...

And none of them are giants... sorry.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
If you want to see real giant bones, ask the Smithsonian Intistute to open their vaults and show what they have been hiding there for years. But I doubt they will do it. It was one of the greatest American archaelogical cover-ups to hide skeletons of extraordinary size.

The Smithsonian's Board of Regents still refuses to open its meetings to the news media or the public. If Americans were ever allowed inside the 'nation's attic', as the Smithsonian has been called, what skeletons might they find?
From: Archaeological Coverups

Here are some pics of giants
If you are interested in learning more about giants
Steve Quale
and
Burlington News
have plenty of info an the subject.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
your link to archaeological coverups is truly amusing
I read as far as where it said "by David Hatcher Childress" and gave up
this is the man who in one of his books claimed that radioactive skeletons had been found in harappa at the end of the 19th century and the truth had been covered up by orthodox scholars
this discovery apparently made a full 30 years before the invention of the geiger counter
hes an idiot in other words who requires cover ups to be an essential truth for people to believe the crap that he claims is true
without the cover ups his work is just so much toilet paper and you have to be pretty naieve imo to even bother reading it

steve quayle if anything is even less reliable than Childresstake for instance his quote from the bible
which is from the king james version:-

genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

I'm afriad it is a well known mistranslation of the Hebrew word Nephilim
who weren't giants according to the Hebrews. and they would know wouldn't they

Hebrew bible
Genesis 6:4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown. [P]

and burlington news is a very well known UFO crank site




[edit on 23-10-2006 by Marduk]



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Consider this if you are a Jew or Christian, or whoever uses the Bible as a source text for clues of what might be.

Sepherim are Elohim (plural - gods) high angels who happen to be fiery reptilian. (fact if you believe Judaic bible (and Christian).

They came to earth, perhaps, and "Children" were born to the women of the earth from these "alien" encounters.

You have the dinosouars.
Sound wierd, well now they speculate that dinosours have feathers, or they had colors, no one really has a clue. Who is to say they went around growling, etc.

Its of interest to note the Bibles account that the giants devoured every living thing...practically...this sounds like a t-rex to me.

I know, the mind cant handle the mixed terminologies at first, as it has grown accustomed to associating different roles with each term used.

Laughable that a woman could have a dinosouar, or reptilian...no more so then any U.F.O. theory that aliens come down and take out the babies after a certain period...why is this? Could it be the womb couldnt handle the giant size?

Interesting stuff...so yeah, I say we have fossils to prove that "giants" exist, but perhaps not in how we intially thought.

Peace

Dalen



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   


Consider this if you are a Jew or Christian, or whoever uses the Bible as a source text for clues of what might be.

Jews don't use the Bible as a resource
they use it as a pillar of their faith

to them Giants don't exist because God didn't make any and certainly didn't mention any Giants to moses.
Aliens don't exist because God didn't mention them to Moses
see you're starting off with a bit of a hurdle there

Christians follow the teachings of Christ which means that it isn't essential to even read the bible like it isn't essential to even believe that Jesus was the son of god.

if you'd started off your post with



consider this you people who don't know any real history and who use the Bible as a source text for clues of what might be.

that I would have agreed with



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 02:31 AM
link   
I (and millions of people) consider David Hatcher Childress to be a very good researcher. He is a leading voice in the field of alternative science, better that than certain orthodox scientists who are afraid of telling the truth.
Giants did exist, no doubt about that. Their skeletons have been found worldwide.
The Smithsonian Institute have a number of giant skeletons in their basement. They have been hiding it for a number of years.

And Steve Quale is an authority on giants.

A great book on Giants is also Charles DeLoach - Giants.

And yes, aliens do exist. YOU must be rather naive Marduk if you think the human race is alone in the universe.

I don't have time for this. To tell the obvious thing is a waste of time.
Bye



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 08:54 AM
link   
well what can i say
I expect that life is wonderful and full of surprises for you
"wowow look the sun came up again"
or
"hey look things are growing in that ground over there"
basically buddy if you havent got the intelligence to work out when Childress is lying then you probably haven't got the intelligence to post at this forum anyway
so yeah
Bye
have a nice life
for those of you who do care that Childress regularly lies to his readership



However many people ignore this warning, and the story has a sinister aspect. The belief in this lost Egyptian/Tibetan temple has consequences today. Ever since unorthodox researcher David Hatcher Childress published the newspaper hoax as fact in his book Lost Cities of North and Central America, the story took on the trappings of truth, without regard for actual facts.

jcolavito.tripod.com...

The above individuals are claimed to represent a "new breed" of
scientific investigators. When their statements are subjected to
critical examination, however, it becomes evident that their ideas are
neither new nor scientific, as we shall see.
David Hatcher Childress, described as an "author researcher," claimed
that the geologic time scale had been compressed by cataclysmic events
so that what appears to have taken place over millions of years actually
occurred over the last several thousand years. Of course, this claim is
contradicted by the detailed historical records of the ancient Egyptians
and others, which go back 5000 years
Childress also claimed that dinosaurs are still alive today
www.xmission.com...

in this link read the section entitled
ANCIENT ATOM BOMBS
jcolavito.tripod.com...
It reveals the sources that Childress uses to acquire his information

I could post links l;ike this about Childress all day
but I'm sure the intelligent posters here already know hes a bigger fraud than Hancock
ce la vie



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   
And for all of those who are interested in reading about how the Smithsonian Intitute covered up giant skeletons, I suggest to read
Holocaust of Giants: The Great Smithsonian Cover-up
Exerpt from Professor Vine Deloria personal communication

here is the link:
www.freerepublic.com...

Orthodox scientists have been lying for long about a number of things.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 07:46 PM
link   


Orthodox scientists have been lying for long about a number of things

clearly you havent read a single of the posts in this thread already
this smithsonian cover up stuff is rubbish
it has been proved fraudulent
but hey
they make a great scapegoat for pseudo historians who require a gullible readership to beleive this kind of thing to sell their books
so if you want to believe it thats fine
but don't expect any accolades for believing something obviously fraudulent you read somewhere verbatim without checking it out first



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 03:20 AM
link   
It is a well-known fact the Smithsonian did hide giant skeletons.
The archaelogical findings were listed by the Smithsonian Institute itself.
So what are they lying to themselves??? hehehe

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to
the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891
(published in 1894)
(mounds at Dunleith, Illinois)

Mound Group, Dunleith, Illinois.
"Near the original surface, 10 or 12 feet from the
center, on the lower side, lying at full length on its
back, was one of the largest skeletons discovered by
the Bureau agents, the length as proved by actual
measurement being between 7 and 8 feet."

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to
the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891
(published in 1894)
(Pike County, Illinois)

No. 11 is now 35 by 40 feet at the base and 4 feet
high. In the center, 3 feet below the surface, was a
vault 8 feet long and 3 feet wide. In the bottom of
this, among the decayed fragments of bark wrappings,
lay a skeleton fully seven feet long, extended at full
length on the back, head west. Lying in a circle above
the hips were fifty-two perforated shell disks about
an inch in diameter and one-eighth of an inch thick.

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to
the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891
(published in 1894)
(Kanawha County, West Virginia)


Spring Hill Inclosure, Kanawha County, West Virginia.
In the bottom of Mound 11 (upper left) was found a
skeleton "fully seven feet long."

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to
the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891
(published in 1894)
(Kanawha County, West Virginia)

A Section of the Great Smith Mound, Kanawha County,
West Virginia.
This cone-shaped mound rose 35 feet high and measured
175 feet in diameter at its base. The interior of the
mound contained a vault made of timber measuring 12
feet by 13 feet. It was positioned within the mound 20
feet above surface level.

Holocaust of Giants: The Great Smithsonian Cover-up

and so it goes on and on. It is a huge list... and the document is written by a recognized Professor.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 03:39 AM
link   
I came across this article a few months ago not sure how real it is but check it out





An article from Strand magazine (December,1895) reprinted in Traces of the Elder Faiths of Ireland by W.G. Wood-Martin mentions this fossilized giant discovered during mining operations in County Antrim, Ireland:



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Yes, I have seen this one. I remeber reading the story also. It was 12 feet high, had six toes and it was on an exhibition in Ireland and UK. Interesting indeed.
Thanks for the tip


[edit on 25-10-2006 by Patrick_D]



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 04:14 AM
link   
I wonder where the body is now?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join