Giant Footprint - 200 Million Years Old

page: 12
151
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
To those of you that cried hoax on this one I have this to say ,who in their right mind would haul all the equipment generators ,power tools and other rock working equipment necessary to work granite which is quite a hard substance all the way into the african bush and then manage to shape a footprint in the rock which has no visible tool marks at all, or somehow managed to get the rock soft enough to be able to work it like putty or maybe you think they worked on the rock in their workshop then somehow transported it to where it is now?? Come on think before you just shout HOAX! There is a plausible explanation for this maybe the giant walked over a cooling lava bed and his/her foot sank into the cooling crust ,now before you flay me alive with the argument that the skin would have been cooked off think for a minute someone that big and heavy would not have normal human skin the skin would be thick enough to account for the extra body weight otherwise you would have a very tenderfooted giant coupled with the fact that it did not wear shoes if you walked around barefoot your entire life the soles of your feet would be pretty tough I think this guy had skin that was as tough as a pair of boots just my thoughts.




posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
crap, accidently deleted my post and im not going to type it again. sorry.
edit on 8-1-2012 by A NeWorlDisorder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by cookiemonster32
Come on think before you just shout HOAX! There is a plausible explanation for this maybe the giant walked over a cooling lava bed and his/her foot sank into the cooling crust ,now before you flay me alive with the argument that the skin would have been cooked off think for a minute someone that big and heavy would not have normal human skin the skin would be thick enough to account for the extra body weight otherwise you would have a very tenderfooted giant coupled with the fact that it did not wear shoes if you walked around barefoot your entire life the soles of your feet would be pretty tough I think this guy had skin that was as tough as a pair of boots just my thoughts.


Did you say plausible?
Really?
Really?




posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by cookiemonster32
To those of you that cried hoax on this one I have this to say ,who in their right mind would haul all the equipment generators ,power tools and other rock working equipment necessary to work granite which is quite a hard substance all the way into the african bush and then manage to shape a footprint in the rock which has no visible tool marks at all, or somehow managed to get the rock soft enough to be able to work it like putty or maybe you think they worked on the rock in their workshop then somehow transported it to where it is now??


Who in their right mind would make such a statement as the above without even checking the satellite view on Google maps and seeing the site is a few meters off a paved road?

Harte



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier

Originally posted by kozmo
HOAX! That is the flattest foot ever. No dermal ridges. No arch. Not even the heel, which carries the most weight, is rounded out. It is as flat as a board. If a real foot made that, the foot wouldn't even be suitable for creating movement in a bi-ped. There isn't even any sign of toe curl, which would be evident in a "Walking" track.

My take is that someone intentionally carved this as a hoax, and not a very good one at that. Oh, and I should add, I have decades of experience in identifying tracks and direct tracking skills.


I would not be so sure, ever hear of a flat foot? This is what happened when your arch breaks down . Heck millions of years of erosion of footprint of some unknown species were talking about here. You expect to see these fine details, it is not a finger print it is a foot print. I am not saying it is a real foot print but your assumption that it is a hoax is premature to be honest. I do see toe curl going downward. Perhaps "if this is a real foot print" that the Giant walked a little bit different then modern day humans? I mean neanderthal foot prints differ from modern humans. So why wouldn't it be any different? The thing could have been a giant reptilian for all we know. We recognize the familiarity and assume this is a fully human upright walking creature.


Over 200 million years ago the oxygen levels were much higher causing larger animals, flora, insects, ocean life ect. This is why the Dinosaurs were so large. And as time passed the oxygen levels decreased with green house gasses. The dinosaurs are now birds and smaller versions of lizards and reptiles of today. So perhaps the original humans were in fact this size and became increasingly smaller to accompany all other biological forms of life here on earth.

Maybe that's who moved those giant blocks and built the pyramids. Perhaps evolution branched humans off in different paths and there were giants in the earth in those days

Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. Gen 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. Gen 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

And maybe these Giants are what became Sasquatch?

As we are still learning more and more that Humans are an older species then we thought. That previous civilizations were wiped out and destroyed and rebuilt time and time again. Here is an example.

12,000-year-old mine found in Chile
www.abovetopsecret.com...



You are ignoring the natural movement that every foot exhibits when moving. Random anecdote: I have very flat feet, and despite that I still show much more 'flex' in my prints than this (an excellent way to demonstrate this is to step on some sort of light stone surface with wet feet, or on a glass bathroom scale when the room is still humid from a shower.) This is exactly what you would expect if someone made a fake foot and stamped it down, or attempted to chisel a footprint into a stone. Even animals with very flat feet (hoofed animals or elephants for example) still show a good bit of flex in their prints which is a logical result of shifting a weigh bearing limb as required when walking. The flex varies depending on the weight of the animal. A human walking around with stuffed elephant feet for shoes cannot correctly imitate the print of an actual elephant. This is also the most common method of debunking used for fake Bigfoot prints.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Wolfenz
 


My apologies for misinterpreting your post (too much crazy posted way too fast.) While I do feel that the hominid skeletal structure could not hold up the the size a print like that would require, I also feel that point is moot based on the rock itself. Granite, as posted over and over, forms miles underground from molten magma and cools and hardens long before reaching the surface to acquire a giant footprint. There is no physically plausible means for a footprint to be placed there unless giant hominids possessed both a Wolverine-like skeleton and a bad temper. The only other way would be for the supposed giant hominid species to have a fondness for Tai Chi on one leg in the exact same spot over hundreds of years to weather it just so.

Your Giant Sumerian Alien theory also ignores the well known human penchant for grandiosity. There has been a longstanding theme in art to depict rulers or those of higher caste as larger, better looking, and more endowed than their 'lessers.' Is this all the consequence of ancient giant alien rulers, or the habitual arrogance of those in high station (who were also often deified.) The ceiling mural in the United States Senate building of George Washington set amongst a Greek pantheon while dressed like Jupiter shows this tendency to deify is still popular.

edit on 8/1/12 by Equidae because: (no reason given)
edit on 8/1/12 by Equidae because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 04:48 AM
link   
No no no no no no it's not real, the world is only 5000 years old.... I know this because stupid people have told me



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by malcr
 


You see you my friend had missed the point....and just by the way you yourself may approach a thread by tear down effect .....the statement put out by the person i quoted opens the door for even a imprint to survive....Plausible......foot steps into sedimentry material....then material over time becomes invaded by lava flow .....possible....is this the case....one does not know now do they....

highly...yes very highly unlikely but indeed plausible....so you see ...could it be in the realm of possibility...yes it could....

Now my point to Wmd is the attack method of going at peoples opinions....It is a tactic used to boost ones ego....to make themselves feel supperior to another because they grasp hold of a touch of info and say to others this is the way it is and the only POSSIBLE way it could be....well the world has many.....many unanswered questions in it's mystreious past.....and could this footprint be a hoax....well it is POSSIBLE....but by the same token...could it be a true representation of something for our distant past....POSSIBLE.

So to come in and and just say this is not true...because he found a bit of info that says this cannot happen yet soomeone else comes in with a bit of info that says it can shows POSSIBILITES....now your saying that fossils are possible....yet a footprint could not be possible.....Now in the vid the man actually claims nothing he states nothing really...he just points out it is there....He also just makes an observation of the mudlike structure from the imprint just as any person would so if one takes that into account....in order to carve that into the stone one would need to take away the stone around it would he not?

Carving is about taking away to expose a structure underneath....now that is quite the hoax which means someone has far to much time on their hands IMHO.

Now as a stated in the beginning....when people do a word for word breakdown on a reply it tells me they are use to trying to rip peoples comments apart just as yourself has tried to achieve....It is a method of character assassination which IMHO is another ego building method of reply because words get taken out of context which then have no meaning to the whole reply.

Now i will guarantee niether yourself or Wmd are geologists....just as i am not....so the thoughts put forward are just opinion which can be just presented as information....or presented as an attack on another individual because of their opinion....so as far as the footprint is it real or is it a hoax.....IMHO I would tend to think that no one would have wasted their days in the middle of BFN carvingout a footprint but i guess you would tend to think this would be perfectly logical....and if you read the posting i put forward on pg7 and went to the links....you would know that this is not a new discovery but has been there for a greart many years even if the man in the vid was trying to promote tourism to the area.
edit on 053131p://f06Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 05:50 AM
link   
If you watch some of the slideshows that people like Klaus Dona has assembled then many ancient carved stone artifacts have been found in rocks that are supposedly too hard to carve, even with modern tools. Also walls that we find all over the world appear to have been made from molded stone, These blocks fit so tightly together that it is a complete mystery how these could have been carved. The monuments using this building technique are completely earth quake proof made from irregular shapes, not being of just"normal" constuction.

A certain bird in South America uses leaf juice to literally liquidise the solid rock by constantly rubbing leaves onto the stone to make neat little nest holes in the rock. Also we know that lichens soften rock to plant their roots in the material.

It is therefore being suggested that ancient civilisations had the technology to literally in somehow melt rock or turn it into a powder, so that it could be molded as a form of cement.

I'm not saying the large footprint is genuine - but if the above theory has some validity, then that might explain how a huge human could have stepped in "granite cement", while it was a wet mud and then the granite like rock "set" around the footprint.

Perphaps Michael Telinger should get a barefooted person to step into muddy cement then leave it to dry to see the exact imprint left in the cement, which then might prove or disprive this footprint could be genuine.
edit on 8-1-2012 by JB1234 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


yes I did indeed say plausible it says so right there in my post I do not see your plausible/implausible comment all I see is someone who has nothing to say or add except slate other peoples thoughts



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


I still think it is an awful amount of trouble and toil just to hoax something like this



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
The same force that makes some people see jeebus in a toast or the clouds is at work at here.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by wavemaker
 


Well as far as I understood... granite is formed from magma cooling slowly under ground then erosion of the land gradually exposes the granite. So this guy is trying to say a giant stepped in a pool of cooling magma? I don't buy it. I think its been carved by a regular sized person more like it.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by cookiemonster32
Come on think before you just shout HOAX! There is a plausible explanation for this maybe the giant walked over a cooling lava bed and his/her foot sank into the cooling crust


But the point is, granite forms deep underground. Think!!!


(quite aside from the question as to why anything - giant or otherwise - would walk through molten rock
)
edit on 8-1-2012 by Essan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan


But the point is, granite forms deep underground. Think!!!


(quite aside from the question as to why anything - giant or otherwise - would walk through molten rock


Howdy Essan

Hey you should think outside the box...

think

EXTREME firewalking
edit on 8/1/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Super Mega Ultra Bigfoot



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   


Well as far as I understood... granite is formed from magma cooling slowly under ground then erosion of the land gradually exposes the granite. So this guy is trying to say a giant stepped in a pool of cooling magma? I don't buy it. I think its been carved by a regular sized person more like it.
reply to post by LexiconV
 


omg that makes complete sense! There have been plenty of stories about Giants living underground from Caves found in Israel to Romania Greece Turkey San Marino Island Sicily and especially Malta.

Not to mention that the Mayans had a heavy affinity with underground caves and what not



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by cookiemonster32
reply to post by aorAki
 


yes I did indeed say plausible it says so right there in my post I do not see your plausible/implausible comment all I see is someone who has nothing to say or add except slate other peoples thoughts



That's because if you read the thread I've already commented.
Your comments I responded to were highly implausible.
The rock is granite, the footprint is a hoax and we are discussing pareidolia.
Tell me, have a look at one of my previous posts and give me your highly plausible opinion of the penis rocks and the vagina rocks.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...


edit on 8-1-2012 by Blurps because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Double post cant figure out how to embed videos
edit on 8-1-2012 by Blurps because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
151
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join