It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Taupin Desciple
Now that's wild.
As far as regular people throughout history telling stories of giants walking the earth, I'm more apt to believe them than the scientists who are paid to do and say certain things depending on where their grant money comes from. I don't like biased information. It's usually wrong.
What reason would people have 5,000 years ago to lie about such things? Can't think of one.
What reason would scientists have now to lie about such things? Job security.
Besides which, if that's just a natural formation due to erosion, that's one hell of a coincidence. You gotta admit.
And as far as that rock being molten lava at the time, don't automatically assume that the foot of that giant had the same type of skin that we do now. Our skin has softened over time because it doesn't have to be as tough as it used to be. Look at aboriginies around the world. I'll bet you any kind of money that their skin is a lot tougher than ours simply because it has to be if they don't have footwear. Also don't automatically assume that the giant was native to this planet. That's kind of like assuming that aliens have the same basic body structure that we do. 2 arms....2 legs....etc... In the box thinking like that doesn't really get you anywhere.
Originally posted by Gwampo
AMAZING! thank you for sharing, this is incredible. How tall do you think someone with a foot that big would be??? like 20 feet?
... Furthermore, he pointed out that the footprint is that of a woman and that her name was iMpuluzi and named as such by Shaka, which means the naked goddess. .This giant live in a time, which is lost in the mists of time and that this giant was approximately 36ft(10,97m) high and that her footprint was approximately 6ft (1,8m) long. The imprint of her foot was made as she ran across an open piece of ground that was covered with warm lava ash and that is how the footprint came to be in granite, which is now so prominently displayed on the side of this hill.
Originally posted by Hanslune
Granite is igneous rock - lava. So nobody was stepping in while it was hot.
In Sucre, Bolivia, a limestone wall rises at an angle above the ground, its surface criss-crossed with thousands of dinosaur tracks.
I like how you think! Why are things always so damn controversial? Why can't one ancient secret be discovered without all the speculative wiggle room? It seems we are constantly at loggerheads saying "Yeah, it looks like so-and-so but it also can be such-and-such" Is this the life of Human polarity? Where nothing is ever cut and dry? And there's always an alternative explanation? I for one am getting sick and tired of this historical buffet line. I don't want choices anymore. I want conclusions. End rant~
Originally posted by Submarines
Originally posted by Human_Alien
I am not saying this isn't possible nor probable but I'm not understanding the mechanics involving granite and ones footprint. Even if five elephants stepped on a rock it wouldn't make an impression.
So what am I missing here please?