The Giants Of Ancient America: “8′ Tall With Double Rows Of Teeth”

page: 13
130
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I carry a gene for six fingers and I am rh-,according to UFO lore
and the Holy Bible,I am a nephilim-hybrid.As a christian woman
who accepts the Messiah,Yeshua/Jesus as my Saviour,should
I be worried about my "tainted" bloodline?


Nah, over given time mingling with humans the DNA would be so watered down it'd be harmless. I imagine Jesus would have left us something to warn us if nephilim were going to be a threat again.


I would not worry about the bloodlines, either, as He said "whosoever", not only those of certain blood. That said, we were told they would be a problem again. Matthew 24:37 states - "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

That said, I am not worried. I know I am forgiven. The Flood was to cleanse the bloodlines so that one would be pure for His lineage (which, interestingly, was through Joseph's family), through the line of David. He won't be born again as a babe, so even if they were/are around, that would not matter.




posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
Back in the day, for any number of reasons, folks doing digs would bring in reporters or allow them. Today its rare for a dig to have any public info published, newspaper, about it while its going on and no public report or very little after that. By digs I mean a local university dig at a mound builder site for example.


This is likely true, but doesn't constitute a coverup.

Archaeological digs don't sell newspapers anymore, is the reason, I'd say.

Harte



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Logarock


People working under the direction of the Smithsonian dug up giants. And that the Smith hids finds is well know.....just call the Chicago Museum of Natural History.


You were asked to provide evidence not a directive to me to do something.....



Pick up the phone and find out for yourself. I am not your reasearch boy professor.


Ah, but it was your claim.

If you are unwilling or unable to back it up, then you should be okay with everyone on the planet calling it a total fabrication on your part.

Harte



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by rickymouse
 

I'll make a bet the giants are similarly related to us as is Bigfoot, Neanderthal and Denisovans and that we all are the product of genetic manipulation by advanced races of humanoid beings who have been coming to Earth for hundreds of thousands of years maybe more


Oh no a Sitchinite!! No more seriously what do you base that on?


so he insults me

Well, at least you recognize that as an insult.

Apparently, you haven't gone completely off the deep end yet. That will have happened when you consider being called a "Sitchinite" a compliment, at which point you will have morphed into a Sitchinista.

Harte



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by rickymouse
 

I'll make a bet the giants are similarly related to us as is Bigfoot, Neanderthal and Denisovans and that we all are the product of genetic manipulation by advanced races of humanoid beings who have been coming to Earth for hundreds of thousands of years maybe more


Oh no a Sitchinite!! No more seriously what do you base that on?


so he insults me

Well, at least you recognize that as an insult.

Apparently, you haven't gone completely off the deep end yet. That will have happened when you consider being called a "Sitchinite" a compliment, at which point you will have morphed into a Sitchinista.

Harte


insults are usually a sign the other side has run out of an argument. and you seem to have missed all the words with question marks. none of you can address the context issue.
edit on 30-11-2012 by bottleslingguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Man you are a thick person! I mean back then it was common to make a big deal out of a dig, call reporters ect ect. Thats was due to the large number of independent diggers back them and the big novelty. Thats all changed and you know what I am talking about.


Actually no I don't know what you are talking about - remember not every ones world view is shaped by conspiracy theories, please explain what you mean - give an example perhaps



There is not anything near the hype of public interest today on regular digs.


Please quantify that if you would? Thanks



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock


Save for the fact, that the founder of the Chicago Museum of Natural History founded that Museum in large part becasue he sent some finds to the Smith and they claimed later that they didnt know what he was talking about. So he opened his own show.


Evidence for this claim?



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Pick up the phone and find out for yourself. I am not your reasearch boy professor.


You made the claim, you provide the evidence......that is if it exists and you're not making stuff up



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by rickymouse
 

I'll make a bet the giants are similarly related to us as is Bigfoot, Neanderthal and Denisovans and that we all are the product of genetic manipulation by advanced races of humanoid beings who have been coming to Earth for hundreds of thousands of years maybe more


Oh no a Sitchinite!! No more seriously what do you base that on?


so he insults me

Well, at least you recognize that as an insult.

Apparently, you haven't gone completely off the deep end yet. That will have happened when you consider being called a "Sitchinite" a compliment, at which point you will have morphed into a Sitchinista.

Harte


insults are usually a sign the other side has run out of an argument. and you seem to have missed all the words with question marks. none of you can address the context issue.
edit on 30-11-2012 by bottleslingguy because: (no reason given)


Wow, these replies get so long in the end that it is hard to find who you are agreeing or disagreeing with



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by rickymouse
 

I'll make a bet the giants are similarly related to us as is Bigfoot, Neanderthal and Denisovans and that we all are the product of genetic manipulation by advanced races of humanoid beings who have been coming to Earth for hundreds of thousands of years maybe more


Oh no a Sitchinite!! No more seriously what do you base that on?


so he insults me

Well, at least you recognize that as an insult.

Apparently, you haven't gone completely off the deep end yet. That will have happened when you consider being called a "Sitchinite" a compliment, at which point you will have morphed into a Sitchinista.

Harte


insults are usually a sign the other side has run out of an argument. and you seem to have missed all the words with question marks. none of you can address the context issue.
edit on 30-11-2012 by bottleslingguy because: (no reason given)


I see.

Now you wish to pretend that I haven't addressed the context issue.

Do you mean regarding giants, or do you mean Sitchin?

I'd provide links to you for where I've addressed both many times here, but the search function here is too lame.

If anyone cares to see if the above statement about me is valid, I suggest using a site-specific search on google. You just put in site:www.abovetopsecret.com after your search terms and google will search ATS only using those terms.

For example: Site specific search for Harte Sitchin Giants

Anybody not seeing where I've "addressed" this "context?"

Harte



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy


so he insults me


Nope I classified you


you need to get ahead of the curve. if you don't subscribe to at least the gist of what Sitchin was translating then what do you propose the Sumerians were talking about?


Sitchin couldn't read Sumerian - he made stuff up



Are you saying everything they say about their origins is made up nonsense? Do you really think they grew to such advancements on their own yet pay no homage to the real builders of their civilization?


Yep, you should try reading about their civilization - even today many people still credit various gods for their success



Why would they make up such things and not only them but so many other cultures around the world talk about sky people and space people and star people and how they interbred with us and gave us knowledge?


Its called religion that what folks used to explain the world around them before we developed science



Why don't any of them say "well we shuffled around the desert for a while and got bored so Joe Blow From Idaho came up with a base sixty mathematics by accident while carving a giant granite block with straw rope and sand. then this one guy invented medicine and public school while a couple old women developed advanced textiles which led to fashion trends"? They all say space people did it, Sitchin's not the only one saying that.


He made them into spacemen. Here's a question for you, why did your great great maternal grandfather and mother give your great grand mother her middle name?
edit on 30/11/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 

you still haven't presented a plausible, all encompassing alternative context and/or explanation of who they were talking about when they say the gods taught them civilization. All you do is say "it doesn't mean this it means that." yet you never talk about the main point of their creation "myths". "heaven" or "and" or "heaven, earth, offspring" is pretty clear as to the gist of our origins. What do you suggest they mean?



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Harte
 

you still haven't presented a plausible, all encompassing alternative context and/or explanation of who they were talking about when they say the gods taught them civilization.

Please present evidence that "they" said this - whoever "they" are and maybe then I can help you with that.

The Sumerians believed that the Apkallu taught them civilization. The Apkallu were not gods. If you look into this, you'll find that the very first of the Apkallu was a human man.


Originally posted by bottleslingguy
All you do is say "it doesn't mean this it means that." yet you never talk about the main point of their creation "myths". "heaven" or "and" or "heaven, earth, offspring" is pretty clear as to the gist of our origins. What do you suggest they mean?

Perhaps you should read their creation myths.

Again, which cultures myths are we talking about here? Maybe I can help you there.

How about this one - when Genesis refers to the serpent in the Garden of Eden, who are "they" talking about there? Reptilian aliens?

What I'm saying is that, if you want to believe in a literal interpretation of any creation myth as a matter of your personal faith, then say so. That is, there's no evidence for Eden, much less a talking snake. But if that's what it takes to get you (not you personally, but anyone) through the day, then that's all good.

If, on the basis of faith, you want to believe in a literal interpretation of Sumerian mythology, then learn Sumerian mythology first, is my opinion. The word "Anunnaki" is not Sumerian. No Mesopotamian culture ever claimed that the "Anunnaki" (or any other subset of their gods) came to Earth in any way. What I'm saying here is that they believed the Gods were already here and belonged here. Also, no Mesopotamian culture claimed the Gods wanted gold.

If the above things (and others that Sitchin invented) are in your belief system, then you should realize that you are believing in a literal interpretation of false claims written by a scammer. You are not deciding to believe the Sumerians "had it right" or anything. You are choosing to believe lies told by a con man that you yourself can, if you cared to, easily discover are false.

Regarding genetic manipulation of DNA to create humans, there is a Babylonian story about Marduk (IIRC) creating deformed humans. If you read the story, you'll see that he had a reason for doing this.

From this, Sitchin gets genetic manipulation of H. Erectus (I believe he originally claimed Neanderthal but I could be wrong) to create humans.

The Anunna gods were not mining for gold when they complained and thus humans were created to do this work. This idea appears in no ancient text from any ancient culture. It might be in some ancient text that we've never found, or in some ancient text that was subsequently destroyed, but the story of Paul Bunyan might also be in some ancient text we've never found as well.

People here seem to think that Sitchin translated these ideas himself from the original cuneiform. If you look at this idea, you'll find that, not only did Sitchin refuse every single opportunity to translate cuneiform when asked to, but he also never actually claimed he could do so. What this means is, rather than believing that the Sumerian scribes knew what they were talking about, you are willing to believe that Sitchin knew better than the Sumerians himself, all without him being able to read the language!

Sumerian is known to us because Akkadian is known to us. The Akkadians (who started with Sargon the Great) adopted the Sumerian language for official business and religious business (which was basically the same business in those days.) They still kept their original language for everyday use but, since they had no alphabet, they used cuneiform for that. Because scribes had to learn to write words in both languages, the Akkadians developed dictionaries and lexicons to help scribes learn how to write in both languages. Many of these lexicons have been found. If you prefer to believe Sitchin's ramblings then, you are just dismissing what the people who were there at the time said about it all.

If you need further clarification, ask.

Harte



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Gave you a star for a well written reply



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   
I was prepared to laugh my way through the video, however while I agree with several posters who have said that his presentation was poor, it was still very interesting. He seemed extremely rushed and somewhat excited to be sharing his beliefs regarding this topic.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Here is a longer video of him, he seems much more calm and less rushed. Maybe the Ted stage gave him jitters.

www.youtube.com...

What he says makes sense to me and what I have learned. Never heard of him before, but will follow his research and findings.

Great job OP.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by Harte
 


Gave you a star for a well written reply


And, why wouldn't you. You two have been jerking each other off this entire thread.






(to be fair, I agree - it was a good response)
edit on 12/1/2012 by SquirrelNutz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Logarock


People working under the direction of the Smithsonian dug up giants. And that the Smith hids finds is well know.....just call the Chicago Museum of Natural History.


You were asked to provide evidence not a directive to me to do something.....



Pick up the phone and find out for yourself. I am not your reasearch boy professor.


Ah, but it was your claim.

If you are unwilling or unable to back it up, then you should be okay with everyone on the planet calling it a total fabrication on your part.

Harte


Man you guys are hard headed apes! I dont have to back it up.....you can hear it from the source itself for yourself. Dont need me to back up anythng here.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Logarock

Man you are a thick person! I mean back then it was common to make a big deal out of a dig, call reporters ect ect. Thats was due to the large number of independent diggers back them and the big novelty. Thats all changed and you know what I am talking about.


Actually no I don't know what you are talking about - remember not every ones world view is shaped by conspiracy theories, please explain what you mean - give an example perhaps



There is not anything near the hype of public interest today on regular digs.


Please quantify that if you would? Thanks


You should know youre subject matter a little better. That or your just running off at the mouth knowing that most that read here are interested but have not taken the time to study the development of archeology in this country. Most folks have little understanding that the golden age of archeology/defusion research took place many years ago in this country with a few high points here and there over the years.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Yhis is very intriguing, it makes you wonder exactly what used to be in our past, its almost begging you to come decode human ancestry for yourself.






top topics



 
130
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join