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

page: 8
125
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by pacifier2012
 


Well, just about everything can be taken with a grain of salt. But, if you did have giants back in the day, as the various newspaper clippings suggest, it could be plausible that they are the one responsible for the movement and transportation of huge slabs of stone.




posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
The reason 'what would be the gain of hiding that info'

is that some scientists do not want to be caught with their pants down as they are ignorant morons who will not admit there are holes in the History Of Evolution by Darwin and refuse to think that there may be more than that.

Who knows if humans weren't just dropped to evolve from some point, not been Dinosaurs... like the monkeys who evolved from them and STILL REMAIN ANIMALS WITH NOWHERE ACTING LIKE CAVEMAN - still animals..

The fact is - in the past religion dictated and did not allow scientists to speak or their findings to be the truth, now a bunch of scientists called 'Main Stream Scientists' are unwilling to accept anything out of their theories - even if evidence has been found, somewhere the measures used may be wrong.. but hey it needs an explanation for the sake of it, so forget anything different.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 



Good find. However, to play devil's advocate, it has been claimed repeatedly that the smithsonian is complicit in the coverup of many remains. That claim, I feel, might bring the claim of the smithsonian in this case into question. If they were truly trying to cover up evidence of giants, why in the world would they confirm one, as opposed to debunking it, even if the evidence gave a confirmation?

In fairness, it is absolutely true that a lot of "side show" type stuff was manufuactured back then, to bring in a crowd. But if this sideshow guy did that, why would he let the smithsonian test it?





Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by stiver
 


And the winner is stiver!

You have to ignore facts like this to believe this stuff.


"Oh giants!" And suddenly people's brains turn off.




Oh, totally.

"It looks like giants could not have fit into the aforementioned stone structures, therefore giants definitely did not exist."

Solid logic.

edit on 27-11-2012 by iwilliam because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Fascinating stuff. I also appreciate the fact that there is research and historic documents to support all these findings.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Don't forget ... archeologist don't always come forward what they have found...to be banned from the system!



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Interesting stuff.

I think it's a bit funny that he's talking about ancient civilizations building these things, but then points out how the fronts of the caves/other parts line up perfectly with the equinox Sun...today.

Someone's gotta fill these guys in on the Precessional cycle.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I agree.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Hi OP,

Just wanted to say thanks for bringing Jim Vieira's work to our/ attention. I have really been enjoying tracking down more stuff by him and it has really re-stimulated my interest in ancient megaliths and earthworks.

The idea that the colonists found a sort of Disneyland of giant earthworks when they arrived in North America just completely blows my mind.

Artist's rendition of the building of Cahokia




posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by LUXUS
 


While I found this interesting, I did some googling of Tuatha de Danaan and I believe you may be relating the ancient god like race incorrectly to giant-ism. According to physical descriptions I've been able to find they were not giant but averaged in height between 5'3" and 7'. They did share a lot of the other physical descriptions you mentioned though and they did fight with giants called Fomorians at some point. Although further investigation of Fomorians leads me to believe they are not the giants people may in fact find in Ireland as they are believed to have goat heads or are ugly looking for the most part with few exceptions.

Tuatha de Danaan

Fomorians

I could be wrong about the Tuatha de Danaan being average height in one aspect however because I've also been able to find information leading me to believe some of the Tuatha de Danaan were believed to have mated with some Fomorians.
edit on 27-11-2012 by GrimReaper86 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 





To get access to the Smithsonian vaults you have to: * sign up as a volunteer (or give credentials as a reseracher) * take training on your area * volunteer on a regular basis for about 6 months. * ask "may I look at" and tell them what you want to see. You'll see it. I am speaking from experience. I work as a volunteer at a large museum. I did get to see the paleo lab at the Smithsonian last week. If I'd volunteered there or had a degree in paleontology (Masters' or better) I could have gone through channels and gotten back into the collection to look at bones. And, for the record, I'm considering doing that next year, to look for something that I want to write a paper about.


Woe, thank you for the info Byrd. Any procedure to follow for applying as volunteer to the Smith ? I would do back flips to get a look in there.
edit on 27-11-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

This is really interesting stuff.
I will read all that I can on this.
Thank you.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Just to throw it out there since we had giant mammals up until the last glacial period why not giant humans? many ancient cultures had solar calendars of 360 days length. Is it possible that the earth's rotational speed has changed significantly thus affecting specific gravity? This would make moving such stones easier as they would have actually weighed less than they presently do.
Maybe all the nephilim and Nibiru stories have something to them. There does seem to be evidence of cataclysmic changes on Earth in our past.


You know...I certainly wouldn't discount the idea of the Earth's rotation actually having been 360 days in the past. You would think all those 360 calendars weren't juat because of superstition of numbers, etc., when their calendar would have been so out of whack so quickly that in 36 years the seasons would have completely flipped (5 days "off" per year.)

That said, I had once read an explanation which I thought said that the rotation of the Earth actually slightly diminished the effect of gravity, by something like 0.3% I don't know if that is accurate or not, but something about the rotational force being perpendicular to the earth-mass gravitational force. In this case, the reduction of gravitational force in a slower-rotation Earth would actually be less of a reduction, so weight would actually increase (very negligibly.) or, if I have it backward, then a slower rotation would reduce weight/gravitational pull, but it would be something akin to a 10,000 pound boulder only weighing 9,997 pounds.

Anyhow, I'm no expert, and going from memory, so don't let my ramble alone kill your theory
Either way, I like your thinking about there possibly really only being 360 days in our distant past, as opposed to humans just being terrible calendar makers back in the day.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
It just meanders from stoneworks to giants unearthed in the US many with double rows of teeth.
That should tell us something important as no modern humans have any such dental structure.


What?

childrensdentistry: Help! My kid has two rows of teeth!

Harte


" their child’s permanent teeth are growing in but their baby teeth are not falling out."

that is not at all the same as adults having two complete rows of permanent teeth

That's true, so my bad for that link.


Originally posted by bottleslingguy
and another example of what people will stoop to just to introduce the shadow of doubt, thus throwing a wet blanket over the subject.

That's a line of crap manufactured to account for the utter and total lack of evidence for the spurious claim of giants in the past.

Here - read about the condition yourself at wiki. Link Then accuse me of editing wiki so it says that.

Harte



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by mythos
Deganawida, the Iroquois Peacemaker who united the 5 tribes of the Haudenosaunee into one Nation, was said to have a double row of teeth... or at least that is what some say his name translates to.

Actually, only the people talking about giants with double rows of teeth say this.


actually, i have learned this in a class i took at Syracuse U. which sat on Onandaga land (one of the 5 tribes). the name was thought to reference said 'deformity' or that Deganawida may have had a stuttering problem. this was part of the reason he traveled with Hiawatha (the first Mohawk he converted to his way of peace). Hiawatha was said to be an excellent orator... a skill the Iroquois greatly valued. a stutterer, or fellow with two rows of teeth would not make such a convincing figure.

unfortunately i do not have the citations other than my memory of the course, though i can do some digging. not every correlation is proposed by we conspiracy nuts seeking to find meaning where there is none.

sometimes that meaning is there already.



the arrows bound in the claw of an eagle on the back of a $1 bill are an Iroquois symbol. 1 arrow is easy to break. 5 arrows bound together, not so easy.

the US, i suppose, not one to underplay things, went for 13!



That's for the 13 colonies of the original United States.


i am aware
i suppose my attempt at humor was lost.



edit on 27-11-2012 by mythos because: fix it
edit on 27-11-2012 by mythos because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bearack

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
many ancient cultures had solar calendars of 360 days length.


I have heard this before. It's not true. Can you tell me which ones?

ETA: Doesn't mean giants did not exist. Just is not a valid proof.
edit on 27-11-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)


From the Mayans to Babylonia to the Summarians have used a 360 day calendar. It's how the defined their months that were unique. They had to account for the short period (Roman calendar used an added day every 4 years). the early Babylonians calculated that they needed to add an extra month three times every eight years.


The Egyptians had a five day party until Sirius rose above the horizon again, signaling the beginning of the new year.

Harte



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imtor


The fact is - in the past religion dictated and did not allow scientists to speak or their findings to be the truth, now a bunch of scientists called 'Main Stream Scientists' are unwilling to accept anything out of their theories - even if evidence has been found, somewhere the measures used may be wrong.. but hey it needs an explanation for the sake of it, so forget anything different.


Then why are there constant flood of new ideas, facts and theories?

Plus you make a common fringe mistake - you assign to group of diverse people a common purpose to do evil when they themselves have no little unity, and forget that there are many who do not go with the consensus views



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProperlyErrant
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Interesting stuff.

I think it's a bit funny that he's talking about ancient civilizations building these things, but then points out how the fronts of the caves/other parts line up perfectly with the equinox Sun...today.

Someone's gotta fill these guys in on the Precessional cycle.


Well, some guy needs to be filled in alright.

An equinox is an equinox, it doesn't vary with precession, though it does vary.

On the other hand, the fact that it varies is meaningless. A thing that lines up with the equinox sun once will always line up with an equinox sun.

Filled in yet?

Harte



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
There are writings of Giants everywhere.

The obvious place is the Bible and Goliath.
We also have Herodotus, Plutarch and Pliny.

One writing you can ignore - but not so many.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beavers
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


For the life of me I couldn't figure out why Pork.

What a strange reality!


Pork is against the laws of God because pigs do not have sweat glands, and do not chew the cud (a process used by land animals to add a layer of breakdown nessisary to remove toxins using saliva) and they cannot physically remove natural toxins from their flesh. The meat is toxic due to the design of the pigs digestive system. "You are what you eat"; pigs eat all things and cannot remove bad things from their flesh naturally, therefore you can ingest all things from pork.

Cannibalism (Khana = Priest; Baal = Sun God of Canaan) is also outlawed by God, but it has nothing to do with pork, pork is outlawed because it is toxic to your body, regardless of flavor comparrisons to human flesh.

God Bless,



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by LUXUS
 


While I found this interesting, I did some googling of Tuatha de Danaan and I believe you may be relating the ancient god like race incorrectly to giant-ism. According to physical descriptions I've been able to find they were not giant but averaged in height between 5'3" and 7'. They did share a lot of the other physical descriptions you mentioned though and they did fight with giants called Fomorians at some point. Although further investigation of Fomorians leads me to believe they are not the giants people may in fact find in Ireland as they are believed to have goat heads or are ugly looking for the most part with few exceptions.


Tuatha de Danaan = Tribe of Dan (son of Israel) in Celtic

As in one of the lost 10 tribes of Israel Dan. This is a great clue when understanding who are called Israel (tribe of Joseph; US/UK) present day by God and who are called Judah (jews) by God, but Israel (Israeli) by mankind.





 
125
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join