Ancient America’s Giants, Native Legends From Many Tribes

originally posted by: Marduk
maybe you should stop reading Sitchin because apparently you are clueless about the entire culture

Interesting how when one is in contact with Shymhz, Ananel and Azazel the truth really starts to hurt the weak.

How can you cause fear on an entity who is already up to his left Achilles Heal in the Lake of Fire.

Go ahead coward, do something. i challenge you to silence me in 24 hrs.

Somehow i already know that things will continue as expected until Feb 8 2016. Then the fun will really begin.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: stonerwilliam

The atmosphere was no different than now 3 KA, 8 KA or 30 KA.
(etc - excellent explanation)

We should also add that the bones of those giant animals were MUCH different than bones of cows or whales or other quadrupeds. They are, in fact, VERY lightweight and similar to bird bones (though incredibly thick.)

Excellent point. Not only was the skeletal structure and composition markedly different than that of modern mammals but the dispersal of air sacks throughout was a huge part in allowing such large creatures to maintain appropriate levels of oxygenation in their blood. If an organism of that size were to rely solely on 2 lungs it wouldn't work. Trying to say that humans should be able to have uninhibited levels of growth because dinosaurs reached such massive sizes isn't even apples and oranges. It's grapes and tractors.

Oh, delightful!!! I see you're acquainted with sauropod physiology! They're fascinating, aren't they?

Hey! Don't forget about the Pterosaurs! Very identical physiology and their air sacks allowed them to pull off some pretty amazing feats. Were they alive today, they would have been capable of flying across the Atlantic or Pacific without the need to stop and rest. They were much better at ting than any birds living today. Though I don't blame the birds. It's not
their fault that convergent evolution from theropods. But yeah... The whole concept of subcutaneous air sacks improving respiratory function while simultaneously reducing body density is pretty mind blowing.

a reply to: peter vlar

a thread on this would be great. You have me thinking about the various/novel ways such a system could end up being utilized by nature.

originally posted by: Rapha
Go ahead coward, do something. i challenge you to silence me in 24 hrs.

Can I at least correct your spelling?

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: stonerwilliam

The atmosphere was no different than now 3 KA, 8 KA or 30 KA.
(etc - excellent explanation)

We should also add that the bones of those giant animals were MUCH different than bones of cows or whales or other quadrupeds. They are, in fact, VERY lightweight and similar to bird bones (though incredibly thick.)

The Paraceratherium didn't have bird bones... it's estimated that they could reach a maximum weight of 33,000 to 44,000 lbs with average size of about 24,000 lb.

And no one can say for certain that Gigantopithecus was bipedal or quadrupedal because no hip bones have ever been found. However, the jaw bones found suggest that the windpipe was positioned similar to humans allowing the creature's head to sit squarely on an erect spine when standing on two legs... just like humans and unlike any other known primate. These things were truly giants, weighing as much as 1,000+ lbs and almost 10' tall.

The fact is that no one knows for sure whether or not giant humans could have existed based solely upon physiological constraints.

originally posted by: Blarneystoner


The Paraceratherium didn't have bird bones... it's estimated that they could reach a maximum weight of 33,000 to 44,000 lbs with average size of about 24,000 lb.

Size estimates are a little difficult with these guys considering no complete specimens have been found. I've seen estimates that were considerably lower than the weights you cite. However...

Like sauropod dinosaurs, Paraceratherium had pleurocoel-like openings (hollow parts of the bone) in their pre-sacral vertebrae, which may have helped to lighten the skeleton.[33]

And no one can say for certain that Gigantopithecus was bipedal or quadrupedal because no hip bones have ever been found. However, the jaw bones found suggest that the windpipe was positioned similar to humans allowing the creature's head to sit squarely on an erect spine when standing on two legs... just like humans and unlike any other known primate. These things were truly giants, weighing as much as 1,000+ lbs and almost 10' tall.

Keep in mind that Gifantipithecus is a Genus. Only one species was in the 3m range. The others were considerably smaller. And as you point out, the lack of complete skeletal remains makes size as difficult to be sure of as form of locomotion. With that said, there are clues that indicate G. Blacki was likely, at least primarily, a knuckle walker utizing mostly quadrupedal locomtion. Unless it's morphology was dramatically different than that of other apes, it is extremely unlikely that it was bipedal and the forest environment it lived in was far better suited to a similar form of locomotion as Gorillas and Gigantopithecus relatives, Orangutan's.

The fact is that no one knows for sure whether or not giant humans could have existed based solely upon physiological constraints.

No, based on our particular morphological adaptations, it's impossible, without major adaptations for a human to have reached heights in the range of G. Blacki, let alone in excess of them. And if a hominid were to have those traits, it wouldn't be a human anymore. It would be something different.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Think I'll ask Johnny this question. Haven't talk to you much lately.
Johnny why does it seem that two facts coming together ie all
the finds of large stature bones, as recorded by newspapers thru
out the country. In burial mounds and also siting them to be in
the correct chronological frame according to white settlers moving
across the country. Becoming curious about the mounds.

All seems logical so far right?

Then junction the fact that native americans oral history is in total
agreement. It's seems to me there's plenty of reason to take this
subject a lot more seriously into the mainstream

Just right there alone.
Are so many accusations whereby archeaologists are accused of cover ups.
Are they all just bull# Johnny?
Respectfully of course.

a reply to: Rapha

What's with the name calling?
That's just over the top childish.

Go ahead coward, do something. i challenge you to silence me in 24 hrs.

originally posted by: randyvs
What's with the name calling?
That's just over the top childish.

'Marduk' as in the name of the immortal coward not the alias of the ATS member.

Marduk imposed slavery upon humans which makes him quite an evil negative entity.

a reply to: Rapha

Holy crap my bad! Apologies respectively.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Think I'll ask Johnny this question. Haven't talk to you much lately.
Johnny why does it seem that two facts coming together ie all
the finds of large stature bones, as recorded by newspapers thru
out the country. In burial mounds and also siting them to be in
the correct chronological frame according to white settlers moving
across the country. Becoming curious about the mounds.

All seems logical so far right?

Then junction the fact that native americans oral history is in total
agreement. It's seems to me there's plenty of reason to take this
subject a lot more seriously into the mainstream

Just right there alone.
Are so many accusations whereby archeaologists are accused of cover ups.
Are they all just bull# Johnny?
Respectfully of course.

Let's see if I can address some of that...
1) I've spoken before about some of these 'journalistic reports...that they were meant to sell papers AND to disenfranchise the First Nations, whose presence on the land was really awkward. For starters, they were not represented in the Bible, and the settlers really, really wanted to steal their lands. If you take away their primacy, especially if you accuse them of killing off the 'gentle moundbuilder race', then it's ok to kill them off. Problem solved.
2) A lot of these 'correspondents' considered themselves to be on a Christian mission. It was also part of a big Mormon movement as well, as they were making it up as they went along.
3) Ever notice that these reports stop at the Canadian border? Did the giants not have the paperwork?
4) Mounds are still being excavated...no giants.
5) Yes, giants may well exist in FN oral histories...doesn't mean they're any more real than the white flavour.
6) Archaeological cover-ups? There are truths that governments wish to suppress for selfish reasons. Our recently dumped Dear Leader suppressed some discoveries of Norse sites in the Arctic as they could bolster a Danish claim for off-shore resources. Steve-o also embargoed all the news coming out of the search for the Franklin Expedition. The US Army Corp of Engineers meddled in the Kennewick Man story as it messed with a chemical weapons dump they were negotiating with the local FN. Who knows what shenanigans go on in Biblical Archaeology as scholars are part of the battle for land and human rights in the Middle East.

But...how do I know about this stuff? Because archaeologists are kinda like the cowboys of anthropology and history, and they really resent being reined in. They talk, and if they can't talk, they mutter. They don't like secrets.
Thanks for asking. Here's a useful link.

www.academia.edu...

There is one mound and
neighborhood that I am especially
anxious to explore, and it can be done at
a very slight expense. It is the so-called
Great Chickasawba mound, where for
10 acres, a spade can scarcely be thrust
without turning up human remains,
and those too of a most interesting and
valuable character. Not only are these
scattered bones in great quantity, but
entire skeletons of gigantic size are
frequently found. T have seen several
over 7ft, 6in, in height. In these cases the
vases or urns buried with them are large
in proportion. Many of the crania found
there show signs of artificial flattening,
some of them being pointed" (letter with
accession #6268, dated Nov. 22, 1877,
to Professor Joseph Henry, Smithsonian
Institution).

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I'm sure he had a hidden agenda though.....

There is no discussing this with Harte, or Johnny or Byrd... they all just summarily dismiss arguments with blanket statements. They expect everyone on ATS to just roll over and take their word for it because they are "experts"... pffft... doesn't sound like it to me. ATS is the ego refill station for these folks... whatever.

originally posted by: Rapha

originally posted by: randyvs
What's with the name calling?
That's just over the top childish.

'Marduk' as in the name of the immortal coward not the alias of the ATS member.

Marduk imposed slavery upon humans which makes him quite an evil negative entity.

Again, ignorance.

You're talking about Bel Marduk.

Marduk's just a name.

Marduk, my buddy, is trying not to get banned once again from this site (which has no ignore function.) Stupidity irks him into vehement refutation at times.

Were I you, I'd take my advice and read some of his postings here over the years before even pretending that you are on the same level as him regarding ancient Mesopotamia. I've spent years reading on forums about that very subject, and I've never seen anyone like him for in-depth knowledge of Sumer and later civs in the area.

Harte

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

3) Ever notice that these reports stop at the Canadian border? Did the giants not have the paperwork?

No i didn't and what a compelling point that is.
I seem to have directed my question very well.
Appreciate the link and thank you Johnny man
for the detailed answer.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

3) Ever notice that these reports stop at the Canadian border? Did the giants not have the paperwork?

No i didn't and what a compelling point that is. I seem to have directed my question very well. Appreciate the link and thank you Johnny man for the detailed answer.

My pleasure, Dude. I'm interested in what's on the fringes, too, so I end up learning by chasing down some of these questions, myself. I go to places. I've walked sites with psychics. I am a licenced archaeologist, I know a bunch of archaeologists, and I network with a bunch more and nobody has talked about giants. They've talked about ghosts, they've talked about Norse silver, they've talked about 'intuitives' and dowsing for graves....but no giants.

Sorry to be a buzzkill for the Blarneystoner, but I went to university to be able to answer these questions that I had. Not the University of Youtube, though.

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: stonerwilliam

The atmosphere was no different than now 3 KA, 8 KA or 30 KA.
(etc - excellent explanation)

We should also add that the bones of those giant animals were MUCH different than bones of cows or whales or other quadrupeds. They are, in fact, VERY lightweight and similar to bird bones (though incredibly thick.)

The Paraceratherium didn't have bird bones... it's estimated that they could reach a maximum weight of 33,000 to 44,000 lbs with average size of about 24,000 lb.

Quite true - however - their bones were quite thick and proportioned differently than human bones.

And no one can say for certain that Gigantopithecus was bipedal or quadrupedal because no hip bones have ever been found. However, the jaw bones found suggest that the windpipe was positioned similar to humans allowing the creature's head to sit squarely on an erect spine when standing on two legs... just like humans and unlike any other known primate. These things were truly giants, weighing as much as 1,000+ lbs and almost 10' tall.

My sources say that it was estimated to be 9.5 feet tall... however, again, the bones are much different than human bones.

The fact is that no one knows for sure whether or not giant humans could have existed based solely upon physiological constraints.

Gorillas themselves have a different physiology than humans (though they are hominids.)

originally posted by: Telos
And the following link is even more interesting because in a way, is a "collage " of various new paper articles on giants discovered throughout USA. Very interesting read the least

IN Texas we have 18 footers then right on down to 12 footers as the next step.....the 18 footer was west of Possum Kingdom Lake.......and others down south.

originally posted by: Rapha

originally posted by: randyvs
What's with the name calling?
That's just over the top childish.

'Marduk' as in the name of the immortal coward not the alias of the ATS member.

Marduk imposed slavery upon humans which makes him quite an evil negative entity.

No, that was Bel Marduk
Marduk is just a Babylonian name
I didn't expect someone as scholarly as you to know that of course
And your information is wrong, Marduk didn't create humanity as slaves, that was Enlil
The word used in the text is buršanu, which means servant. So humans were created to serve the Gods
In fact the originator of the slavery claim was Zechariah Sitchin, not much point reading that nonsense, the guy couldn't even read Sumerian, but he did a good job of pretending he could, despite not having a single qualification in that area. What he did have was an economics degree and experience as a journalist, or in other words, he was qualified to examine a market and then write crap about it that only other unqualified people would swallow,
people like you Sir,

originally posted by: BlarneystonerThere is no discussing this with Harte, or Johnny or Byrd... they all just summarily dismiss arguments with blanket statements. They expect everyone on ATS to just roll over and take their word for it because they are "experts"... pffft... doesn't sound like it to me. ATS is the ego refill station for these folks... whatever.

That's right, what's the point in discussing anything with people far more knowledgeable than you, you'll never learn anything that way, much better to go read some books written by people who like to profit from lying to the gullible.

originally posted by: Marduk
I didn't expect someone as scholarly as you to know that of course

Exactly the response that i expected to get. Did you not realise that it was a basic trap to allow the spirit world to judge your attitude problem to others ?

Now you are ready to be judged when Universal Karma introduces the false Tribulation (3.5Y) during Feb 2016 followed instantly by the real 7 Year Tribulation.

Oh the fun that awaits this evil world now is going to be so entertaining to all jinn.

a reply to: Marduk

That's right, what's the point in discussing anything with people far more knowledgeable than you, you'll never learn anything that way, much better to go read some books written by people who like to profit from lying to the gullible.

well it is true, no debating that, you are very knowledgeable, but because of this knowledge there are some things you don't see and or recognize because of bias. I personally enjoy reading very much all replays of people who are in the field. But after a while certain degree of arrogance can be detected in some posts, because a person such as you won't admit that you may be wrong or that history may be different than what is generally excepted by mainstream. You are always leaning back to the mainstream knowledge and cannot seems to put the mind into the out of the box area.

This point is especially obvious with old megalithic structures. There is no way that they were using ropes and sliders to get them around. I mean the size of the rope would have to be 30 cm in diameter more or less for the big ones, or else the rope would not hold such weight. So how can humans even hold that and pull with any kind of efficiency? Or how can humans even tie a knot with such size?
Well guess what, maybe giants helped?

Maybe...but the last question is more of a joke, just to not go out of the OP to much.

The fact is that stories/legends/myths of giants are all over the place in history and to think they were just fantasy...well yes you can do that. It is perfectly normal that people over the world imagines about big strong man. Or you know, maybe the women were writing and spreading her wet dreams, just as today there is a wet teenage fantasy about white prince on a horse. Maybe back in the day, women ideal man was big giant man, with double rows of teeth and red hear...

hello UniFinity....

you have style and decorum....

its very rare in this forum....the arrogance here is as thick as mud....a reply to: UniFinity