It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Giant Footprint - 200 Million Years Old

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:11 PM

Originally posted by caladonea
reply to post by wavemaker

I am not sure if this is the same footprint...but it is interesting Africa they have named it (Goliaths Footprint).

Yes, that is the same footprint.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:15 PM
Sorry if someone has already mentioned this but, to me, at 2:38 it looks as though there could be 6 toes.
Anyone else see this?

Another thing, is that Goliath written above the foot when he first walks up?

*oh okay I see Caladonea has mentioned it being called Goliaths footprint.
edit on 6-1-2012 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:17 PM
You know what they say... Giant feet... Giant.......Appetite....

edit on 6-1-2012 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:17 PM
Well this would explain exactly how all the pyramids, statues, and monuments were created because our main issue has been exactly how they all have been placed due to the enormous weight issue. Weather or not its real or not its a great story that opens the imagination to new thought..

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:23 PM
Just because it LOOKS like a footprint, doesn't mean it is a footprint. Plenty of people have already pointed out that it is in igneous rock, so I won't even emphasize why that seems preposterous enough of a claim. Secondly, the footprint would certainly be on an odd angle for a giant to leave a footprint, albeit one lone footprint.

Seriously though, the apparent toes don't even seem to be in proper proportion. Not saying I don't believe in ancient giants, but this is one of the least convincing bits of evidence I've seen.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:41 PM
reply to post by OnceReturned

It might of been that hot that's why you see one footprint he or she hopped right of that hot granite lol

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:46 PM
I see a rock formation

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:48 PM
I've seen this crap before. Total nonsense. Granite is igneous rock. Unless some thirty foot guy was walking in molten lava.....aaagh, it's just stupid.

ANd I like the nice round numbers of 200 million to 3 BILLION years old. Since a billion is a thousand million, their plus or minus error is more than 200 billion right there, and by a lot. IN other words, you could equally plausibly say it is anywhere from one day old to 280 billion years. Just proves they have no clue at all....the geologists, I mean. AND this numbskull in the video. AND you guys for believing this twaddle.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:49 PM
AND if you look at it it doesn't even look like a real footprint, unless the guy had not only huge but severely deformed feet.

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:50 PM

Originally posted by OnceReturned
"What's fascinating about this is, anybody that does a study of this will notice this piece sticking out, here. It's like when you put your foot it mud, and you pull it out. Your toes will lift up a little mud where your toes were. And that's exactly what seems to have happened here: this rough granite is just - psshh - pulled up, this overhang here. It's spectacular."

Granite is made from magma when it cools, not mud. Unless the "giant" was walking on molten rock as it was cooling (>1000 degrees C), barefoot, this isn't a real footprint.

Well, there are exceptions:

Rock with the same composition as granite can form through long and intense metamorphism of sedimentary rocks. But that kind of rock has a strong fabric and is usually called granite gneiss.

Granite and Its Geology -

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:58 PM
Why is it that there is only one footprint in there?

its as if..the giant put its feet in only one place? what about the other footprint?

Like Hans said, you don't get the like mud analogy with granite.
Granite is an igneous rock, formed from molten lava.
and this giant dude put its feet into a filed of molten lava or semi cooled stuff of lava, leaving a print.
he found it hot, screamed and leapt up into the air, leaving just a print in the whole area.


posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:00 AM
Although giants did exist at times throughout history I do not believe this is authentic.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:01 AM
I see the foot print and it is very convincing but so are the holy pictures we find in pieces of bread and fruit etc.,

Sorry to put a dampner on it but I'm not totally convinced just as I'm not convinced of the many religious faces in many items of food etc.

But interesting yes.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:02 AM

Originally posted by CaptChaos
AND if you look at it it doesn't even look like a real footprint, unless the guy had not only huge but severely deformed feet.

The giant's foot was deformed by the hot magma of course.
Everything was big in those days except the brain.
edit on 7-1-2012 by carewemust because: formatting

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:08 AM

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by Kemal
Well in Islam it's also said that there once were giants on Earth.
Yeah, the Bible also states that there were giants so big that regular humans felt like grasshoppers in their sight.

Goliath was about 9 feet 6 inches tall. Most people back then didn't reach much more than 5 feet. I am 5 foot 3 and I feel small next to a 6 and 1 1/2 or 7 foot man. I'm sure those people did feel like grasshoppers even if he was only 7 and a half feet tall.

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:29 AM
reply to post by Gwampo

i'm about 6'2 an my foot it about 12 inches

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:38 AM
# 1) We need accurate analysis of the stone itself to determine what type of rock it may be. This will allow us to make better conclusions about how the 'footprint' was formed.

-If it were indeed granite, than this leads us towards hoax explanations.
-If it were a type of clay that hardened, than we may have something authentic to study here.

# 2) If it were a type of clay that hardened, than it must have happened very quickly. I like to use the term 'flash frozen', because any decent amount of rain would have washed the shape out within a few weeks. So if indeed it turns out to be authentic, than it may have been formed very quickly, through a type of cataclysmic event.

# 3) It doesn't make much sense to assume this is millions or billions of years old, it seems much safer to assume that it is less than 2 million years old. Possibly much younger even.

# 4) If it were a hoax, we run into a major problem with our explanation because of the 'scoop material' at the toe area, because it would have been exceptionally difficult to fake this feature, and any explanations of how this was possible need to be presented. This is the crux of the 'hoax argument', and without explaining how this 'scoop feature' was created we cannot nail the coffin on this anomaly.

Carving a depression into a flat surfaced rock is one thing, but either picking the perfect spot to carve it in order to fake a 'scoop material' feature, or faking the 'scoop material' feature through whatever unknown method seems to be quite a stretch and it needs to be explained properly and in depth. Also why would local natives fake such a feature in the first place? I don't expect a local tribe to be as highly scientific as we are and to require such inexplicable features to 'believe in it', if it were some sort of religious carving.

Something isn't adding up here, and it's clearly the 'scoop feature' anomaly.

Also we cannot make reasonable determinations about "what the foot should look like" because we don't have any giant corpses to compare this with to base those assumptions on. The argument that larger creatures require a flatter foot surface to remain stable is a reasonable argument and this could explain the 'flatness' features. Also we need to use modern equipment to measure exactly how 'flat' it is, because this could be an optical illusion as well.

We need this rock type identified in a laboratory so we can make better judgement. I am not going to take anyone's word on what type of rock it might be without at least some science to back it up.

edit on 7-1-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-1-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:39 AM
Now if I was a pro football coach, that is the kind of lineman I would want to protect my quarterback.
Maybe a little hard to throw over though
For sure he would be banned from playing defense.

Actually you could win the game out of forfeiture from sure fright of the opposing players!

A giant like that would change the whole rules of the game.

I know there are sumerian tablets that have kings or rulers sitting in a chair and if he stood up he would be twice as large but I don't think as large as Michael Tellinger displays. But he really is an interesting guy!

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:43 AM
LOL its the Norn From GW

But yes indeed almost every Ancient culture has some story of Folklore about giants, Really all you have to do is look back at everything we know from the Prehistoric Area, Everything was much Larger!

posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 12:45 AM

Originally posted by spiderbadarse
reply to post by Gwampo

i'm about 6'2 an my foot it about 12 inches

Roughly 1/6 th.

So with that basic approach we could say this 4-5 ft 'footprint' would indicate something between 20-25ft in height.

However this is an estimate based on various assumptions.
We are assuming this thing was similar to us in proportions because it's foot is strikingly similar to our foot shape. (Primate-like).

Also we are assuming the footprint was from a living organism.

It could have been a 'mech-suit robot' or something similar that the foot belonged to, there is really no way to know without a ton of additional evidence to base all of this on.

Who knows right? It could have been someone just like you or me that merely invented a type of suit that used the same similar features as we have, and even this guesstimate is 'way out there', but it appears that all current explanations are also 'way out there' as well.

We need additional evidence to build a reasonable theory here, and it appears that we are lacking it.
edit on 7-1-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in