Giants

[Amo]

https://www.6000years.org/frame.php?page=giants

Quoted information below, found below other articles and photos at above link.

Giant Human Remains

- From records and sources all over the world.

Giant Skeletons:

In his book, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, author John Haywood describes "very large" bones in stone graves found in Williamson County, Tennessee, in 1821. In White County, Tennessee, an "ancient fortification" contained skeletons of gigantic stature averaging at least 7 feet in length.

Giant skeletons were found in the mid-1800s near Rutland and Rodman, New York. J.N. DeHart, M.D. found vertebrae "larger than those of the present type" in Wisconsin mounds in 1876. W.H.R. Lykins uncovered skull bones "of great size and thickness" in mounds of Kansas City area in 1877.

George W. Hill, M.D., dug out a skeleton "of unusual size" in a mound of Ashland County, Ohio. In 1879, a nine-foot, eight-inch skeleton was excavated from a mound near Brewersville, Indiana (Indianapolis News, Nov 10, 1975).

A six foot, six inch skeleton was found in a Utah mound. This was at least a foot taller than the average Indian height in the area, and these natives- what few there were of them -were not mound builders.

"A skeleton which is reported to have been of enormous dimensions" was found in a clay coffin, with a sandstone slab containing hieroglyphics, during mound explorations by a Dr Everhart near Zanesville, Ohio. (American Antiquarian, v3, 1880, pg61).

Ten skeletons "of both sexes and of gigantic size" were taken from a mound at Warren, Minnesota, 1883. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 23, 1883) A skeleton 7 feet 6 inches long was found in a massive stone structure that was likened to a temple chamber within a mound in Kanawha County, West Virginia, in 1884. (American Antiquarian, v6, 1884 133f. Cyrus Thomas, Report on Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 12th Annual Report, Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology, 1890-91).

A large mound near Gasterville, Pennsylvania, contained a vault in which was found a skeleton measuring 7 feet 2 inches. Inscriptions were carved on the vault. (American Antiquarian, v7, 1885, 52f).

In 1885, miners discovered the mummified remains of woman measuring 6 feet 8 inches tall holding an infant. The mummies were found in a cave behind a wall of rock in the Yosemite Valley.

In Minnesota, 1888, were discovered remains of seven skeletons 7 to 8 feet tall. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 29, 1888).

A mound near Toledo, Ohio, held 20 skeletons, seated and facing east with jaws and teeth "twice as large as those of present day people," and besides each was a large bowl with "curiously wrought hieroglyphic figures." (Chicago Record, Oct. 24, 1895; cited by Ron G. Dobbins, NEARA Journal, v13, fall 1978).

The skeleton of a huge man was uncovered at the Beckley farm, Lake Koronis, Minnesota; while at Moose Island and Pine City, bones of other giants came to light. (St. Paul Globe, Aug. 12, 1896).

In 1911, several red-haired mummies ranging from 6 and a half feet to 8 feet tall were discovered in a cave in Lovelock, Nevada. In February and June of 1931, large skeletons were found in the Humboldt lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada. The first of these two skeletons found measured 8 1/2 feet tall and appeared to have been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similiar to the Egyptian manner. The second skeleton was almost 10 feet long. (Review - Miner, June 19, 1931).

A 7 foot 7 inch skeleton was reported to have been found on the Friedman ranch, near Lovelock, Nevada, in 1939.(Review - Miner, Sept. 29, 1939) In 1965, a skeleton measuring 8 feet 9 inches was found buried under a rock ledge along the Holly Creek in east-central Kentucky.

AUSTRALIAN GIANTS:

There was a race or group of people found in Australia called "meganthropus" by anthropologists. These people were of very large size--estimated between 7 to 12 feet tall, depending on what source you read. These people were found with mega tool artifacts, so their humaness is difficult to question. Four jaw fragments and thousands of teeth have been found in China of "gigantopithecus blacki"--named after the discover. Based on the size of the teeth and deep jaws, its size has been estimated at around 10 feet and as tall as 12 feet, 1200 pounds.

PROOF OF AUSTRALIAN GIANTS:

In old river gravels near Bathurst, NSW, huge stone artifacts -- clubs, pounders, adzes, chisels, knives and hand axes -- all of tremendous weight, lie scattered over a wide area. These weigh anything from 8, 10, 15, to 21 and 25 pounds, implements which only men of tremendous proportions could possibly have made and used. Estimates for the actual size of these men range from 10 to 12 feet tall and over, weighing from 500 to 600 lbs. A fossicker searching the Winburndale River north of Bathurst discovered a large quartzitised fossil human molar tooth, far too big for any normal modern man. A similar find was made near Dubbo, N.S.W.

Prospectors working in the Bathurst district in the 1930's frequently reported coming across numerous large human footprints fossilised in shoals of red jasper.

Even more impressive were fossil deposits found by naturalist Rex Gilroy around Bathurst. He excavated from a depth of 6 feet (2 m) below the surface a fossil lower back molar tooth measuring 67 mm. in length by 50mm. x 42 mm. across the crown. If his measurements are correct, the owner would have been at least 25 ft. tall, weighing well over 1,000 lbs!

At Gympie, Queensland, a farmer, Keith Walker, was ploughing his field when he turned up the large fragment of the back portion of a jaw which still possessed the hollow for a missing lower back molar tooth. This is now in Rex GiIroy's possession. The owner of the tooth would have stood at 10 feet tall.

In the Megalong Valley in the Blue Mountains NSW, a Mr P. Holman found in ironstone protruding from a creek bank the deeply impressed print of a large human-like foot. The print was that of the instep, with all 5 toes clearly shown. This footprint measures 7 inches across the toes. Had the footprint been complete it would have been at least 2 feet (60 cm in length, appropriate to a 12 foot human. However, the largest footprint found on the Blue Mountains must have belonged to a man 20 feet tall!

A set of 3 huge footprints was discovered near Mulgoa, south of Penrith, N.S.W. These prints, each measuring 2 ft long and 7 inches across the toes, are 6 ft. apart, indicating the stride of the 12 ft. giant who left them. These prints were preserved by volcanic lava and ash flows which "occurred millions of years" before man is supposed to have appeared on the Australian continent (if one is to believe the evolutionary theory): Noel Reeves found monstrous footprints near Kempsey, N.S.W. in sandstone beds on the Upper Macleay River. One print shows toe 4 inches (10cm) long and the total toe-span is 10 inches (25cm) - suggesting that the owner of the print may have been 17 feet tall.

MORE GIANT RECORDS:

In an old book entitled "History And Antiquities Of Allerdale," there is an account of a giant found in Cumberland, England, at an unknown date in the middle ages. Called "A True Report of Hugh Hodson, of Thorneway," it states: "The said gyant was buried four yards deep in the ground, which is now a corn field. He was four yards and a half long, and was in complete armor; his sword and battle-axe lying by him....his teeth were six inches long, and two inches broad...." The bones of a twelve foot tall man were dug up in 1833 by a group of soldiers at Lompock Rancho, California. The skeleton was surrounded by giant weapons, and the skull featured a double row of teeth. Yet another giant was unearthed in 1891, when workmen in Crittenden, Arizona excavated a huge stone coffin that had evidently once held the body of a man 12 feet tall. A carving on the granite case indicated that he had six toes.

A living giant was sighted in the little village of Buffalo Mills,
Pennsylvania, on August 19, 1973. A man at least nine feet tall strode down the main street of the village, dressed in strange clothing, which appeared to be made of some sort of shimmering material. He gazed at the startled townspeople in a dark, penetrating way and then loped off casually into oblivion.

OTHER GIANT EVIDENCES:

In July, 1877, four prospectors were looking for gold and silver outcroppings in a desolate, hilly area near the head of Spring Valley, not far from Eureka, Nevada.

Scanning the rocks, one of the men spotted something peculiar projecting from a high ledge. Climbing up to get a better look, the prospector was surprised to find a human leg bone and knee cap sticking out of solid rock. He called to his companions, and together they dislodged the oddity with picks. Realizing they had a most unusual find, the men brought it into Eureka, where it was placed on display.

The stone in which the bones were embedded was a hard, dark red quartzite, and the bones themselves were almost black with carbonization - indicative of great age. When the surrounding stone was carefully chipped away, the specimen was found to be composed of a leg bone broken off four inches above the knee, the knee cap and joint, the lower leg bones, and the complete bones of the foot. Several medical doctors examined the remains, and were
convinced that anatomically they had indeed once belonged to a human being, and a very modern-looking one.

But an intriguing aspect of the bones was their size: from knee to heel they measured 39 inches. Their owner in life had thus stood over 12 feet tall. Compounding the mystery further was the fact that the rock in which the bones were found was dated geologically to the era of the dinosaurs, the Jurassic - over 185 million years old. The local papers ran several stories on the marvelous find, and two museums sent investigators to see if any more of the skeleton could be located. Unfortunately, nothing else but the leg and foot existed in the rock." Strange Relics from the Depths of the Earth--Jochmans

EVEN MORE RECORDS OF GIANTS:

In 1936 Larson Kohl, the German paleontologist and anthropologist, found the bones of gigantic men on the shore of Lake Elyasi in Central Africa. Other giant skeletons were later found in Hava, the Transvaal and China. The evidence for the existence of giants is incontrovertible. "A scientifically assured fact," says Dr. Louis Burkhalter.

1. Large bones in stone graves in Williamson County and White County, Tennessee. Discovered in the early 1800s, the average stature of these giants was 7 feet tall.
2. Giant skeletons found in the mid-1800s in New York state near Rutland and Rodman.
3. In 1833, soldiers digging at Lompock Rancho, California, discovered a male skeleton 12 feet tall. The skeleton was surrounded by caved shells, stone axes, other artifacts. The skeleton had double rows of upper and lower teeth. Unfortunately, this body was secretly buried because the local Indians became upset about the remains.
4. A giant skull and vertebrae found in Wisconsin and Kansas City.
5. A giant found off the California Coast on Santa Rosa Island in the 1800s was distinguished by its double rows of teeth.
6. A 9-foot, 8-inch skeleton was excavated from a mount near Brewersville, Indiana, in 1879.
7. Skeletons of "enormous dimensions" were found in mounds near Zanesville, Ohio, and Warren, Minnesota, in the 1880s.
8. In Clearwater Minnesota, the skeletons of seven giants were found in mounds. These had receding foreheads and complete double dentition.
9. At Le Crescent, Wisconsin, mounds were found to contain giant bones. Five miles north near Dresbach, the bones of people over 8 feet tall were found.
10. In 1888 seven skeletons ranging from seven to 8 feet tall were
discovered.
11. Near Toledo, Ohio, 20 skeletons were discovered with jaws and teeth "twice as large as those of present day people." The account also noted that odd hieroglyphics were found with the bodies.
12. Miners in Lovelock Cave, California, discovered a very tall, red-haired mummy In 1911
13. This mummy eventually went to a fraternal lodge where it was used for "initiation purposes."
14. In 1931, skeletons from 8 � to 10 feet long were found in the Humbolt lake bed in California.
15. In 1932, Ellis Wright found human tracks in the gypsum rock at White Sands, New Mexico. His discovery was later backed up by Fred Arthur, Supervisor of the Lincoln National Park and others who reported that each footprint was 22 inches long and from 8 to 10 inches wide. They were certain the prints were human in origin due to the outline of the perfect prints coupled with a readily apparent instep.
16. During World War II, author Ivan T. Sanderson tells of how his crew was bulldozing through sedimentary rock when it stumbled upon what appeared to be a graveyard. In it were crania that measured from 22 to 24 inches from base to crown nearly three times as large as an adult human skull. Had the creatures to whom these skulls belonged been properly proportioned, they undoubtedly would have been at least 12 feet tall or taller.
17. In 1947 a local newspaper reported the discovery of nine-foot-tall
skeletons by amateur archeologists working in Death Valley.
18. The archeologists involved also claimed to have found what appeared to be the bones of tigers and dinosaurs with the human remains.
19. The Catalina Islands, off California, are the home of dwarf mammoth bones that were once roasted in ancient fire pits. These were roasted and eaten by human-like creatures who were giants with double rows of teeth.

THE KOSSUTH GIANTS:

Kossuth: October was a month of some excitement in scientific circles as seven strange and gigantic mummies were discovered just outside of Kossuth Center. Marvin Rainwater, a local farmer, had been digging a new well on his property and struck a deposit of very hard stone about nine feet below the topsoil. In attempting to dig it out, he found that it was more than four feet wide in every direction. Removing it would be a terrific chore. He considered the possibility that this was a layer of bedrock, but that would certainly be odd that close to the surface. Further, being somewhat familiar with geologic deposits, he knew that the stone was not the familiar limestone for which such Eastern Iowa areas like Stone City are famous. This was something else entirely. Upon close inspection Rainwater also saw that the stone was not as rough as might be expected in a natural formation, but was in fact smooth and polished.  Now very curious as to the nature of the find, he called several friends from surrounding farms and they began an excavation. They discovered that it was not a single stone, but rather one of at least several irregularly cut slabs stretching out over a wide area, yet fitted so tightly together that not even a knife blade could be put between them. Each slab measured roughly 8'x10', and when struck with a sledge seemed to ring with a hollowness that might indicate this was not a floor but the outside portion of a ceiling. Rainwater wondered if he had not stumbled upon some sort of buried stone structure on his property. Believing that there might be a way to parlay living other than farming if he played his cards right, Mr. Rainwater contacted Georg Von Podebrad College, who in turn dispatched a team of archeologists, anthropologists, and geologists to the site.  The researchers were delighted with the anomalies presented them.  Firstly, the stone was not at all native to Iowa, but was in fact basalt-a hard, dense volcanic rock composed of plagioclase, augite, and magnetite. The type of stone used by the Egyptians to build their massive monuments. The depth of the slabs indicated that they had been there for a very long time, predating the advent of the kind of modern transportation and heavy machinery needed to bring such a large quantity of foreign stone to Iowa, and quite probably the slabs had been laid down before the last glacial age.

It is impossible to gauge with any certainty just how long they had been there.  After the soil covering the slabs had been entirely removed, the area covered by the stones was a perfect square measuring 188 feet on each side. Digging around the perimeter revealed that Rainwater had been correct, the structure did go deeper into the ground. The cyclopean structure was revealed to be a pyramid similar in shape to one located at Marietta, Ohio, although those mounds and monuments erected by the prehistoric Indians were made of sun dried brick mixed with rushes. This technique, too, is curiously similar to the Egyptian technique of brick making with straw and mud.  It took many months, but the entire structure was finally exposed, and on the eastern side was found a massive filled in archway with strong resemblance to those of ancient Greece. At the bottom of the arch was a smaller arch, measuring only 6' to the capstone. This too had been filled in and blocked off. With genuine awe and some hesitancy the scientists of the Rainwater Site began the work of opening the smaller entryway, wondering what  light from the first torch penetrated the gloom of the ancient structure, Albert Grosslockner gasped at what he thought were seven huge and exquisitely detailed statues seated in a ring around a very large and deep fire pit. Moving closer, he realized that the figures were not carved of stone, but were in fact the mummified remains of some giant humanoid race.

Could what they found be in fact a prehistoric burial vault for some pre-human creatures or was it a prison designed to hold some freakish aberration of nature? The figures, were each fully ten feet tall even when measured seated in their cross-legged positions. They all faced into the circle with arms folded across their legs. Upon close examination it was seen that they had double rows of teeth in their upper and lower jaws. The foreheads were unusually low and sloping, with exceedingly prominent brows. The skin of the mysterious giants was wrinkled and tough, as though tanned, and the hair of each of them was distinctly red in color. Their faces, still very expressive even in death, taunted the scientists with their silence. Who, or what, were these creatures, how had they come to be locked in this stone room, and where had the stone itself come from originally?  After careful excavation of the site, the bodies were removed for x-ray and autopsy examination. The excitement over the find was far in excess of the "Gypsum Man" find in Iowa so many years before-a hoax from which the Putnam Museum of Davenport had never fully recovered from. These giants were very real. The medical examinations demonstrated that there was definite skeletal structure, that they were organic creatures who had once been very much alive. 

One explanation for the mummies might lie in the legends of the Paiute Indians who tell of a race of red-haired giants who were their mortal enemies centuries ago. They were called the Si-Te-Cahs, driven from Nevada by a previously unheard of alliance of tribes. Did the Si-Te-Cahs retreat from the west to Iowa? Was the stone structure here before and simply co-opted by the giants? No one may ever know, however it is interesting to note that among the Indian relics held in the Kossuth County chapter of the State Historical Society are three robes made entirely from very long strands of red hair. We await DNA comparisons of samples taken from the mummies and the robes to determine a connection.  In the mean-time, Marvin Rainwater has had his farm purchased by interested parties in Hopkins Grove for an undisclosed sum, and is quite happily no longer toiling in his fields or digging wells.

GIANT SKULLS FOUND:

Ivan T. Sanderson, a well-known zoologist and frequent guest on Johnny Carson's TONIGHT SHOW in the 1960s (usually with an exotic animal with a pangolin or a lemur), once related a curious story about a letter he received regarding an engineer who was stationed on the Aleutian island of Shemya during World War II. While building an airstrip, his crew bulldozed a group of hills and discovered under several sedimentary layers what appeared to be human remains. The Alaskan mound was in fact a graveyard of gigantic human remains, consisting of crania and long leg bones. The crania measured from 22 to 24 inches from base to crown. Since an adult skull normally measures about eight inches from back to front, such a large crania would imply an immense size for a normally proportioned human. Furthermore, every skull was said to have been neatly trepanned (a process of cutting a hole in the upper portion of the skull).

In fact, the habit of flattening the skull of an infant and forcing it to grow in an elongated shape was a practice used by ancient Peruvians, the Mayas, and the Flathead Indians of Montana. Sanderson tried to gather further proof, eventually receiving a letter from another member of the unit who confirmed the report. The letters both indicated that the Smithsonian Institution had collected the remains, yet nothing else was heard. Sanderson seemed convinced that the Smithsonian Institution had received the bizarre relics, but wondered why they would not release the data. He asks, ""...is it that these people cannot face rewriting all the textbooks?""

GIANT FOOTPRINTS:

In South Africa, a giant footprint of a woman measuring over 4 feet long has been carbon dated at approximately 9 million years old. Pointing to the probability of this being a female human-like species' foot, proportionally the two-legged being would need to be some 30 feet tall! The local African people commonly refer to this as a highly revered and sacred site. Giants, twice the size of gorillas, were found in Java.

The petrified remains of a giant were found in South Africa. A well-known anthropologist declared that these remains showed that these man's ancestors must have been giants.

REVISED ARTICLES:

In Lampec-Rancho California, in 1833, soldiers discovered a skeleton 11' 9'' long which was covered with boulders with an unidentified writing. A similar writing was unearthed on the isle of Santa Maria off the cost of Los Angeles. In July of 1887 in Eureka Nevada, a human leg was found measuring 38.9 inches form the knee to the heel. The man was over 11 foot tall. In Crittenton Arizona in 1891 a sarcophagus was uncovered containing a human 3 meters high and had 12 toes. More recently skeletons ranging from 2.8 meters to 3.12 meters were found by soviets in the Caucasus Mountains. In China skeletons 10 feet tall have been found. In the Philippines a giant human skeleton was found at gargation, Measuring 17 feet long. In the Eagle three Cole mine at Bear Creek Montana in 1920 two human molars were found three times larger than normal. In Braton Tennessee human footprints were found in solid rock 33 inches log and one foot wide. These also have six toes each.

Tools found in Morocco are so large their users must have been at least 12 foot tall. Other Giants found around the world are: the Java giant, the south China giant, and the South Africa giant. (See The Timeless Earth p. 26)

In 1833,soldiers digging a pit for a powder magazine at Lompock Rancho, California, hacked their way through a layer of cemented gravel and came up with the skeleton of a giant man about twelve feet tall. The skeleton was surrounded by carved shells, huge stone axes, and blocks of porphyry covered with unintelligible symbols. The giant was also noteworthy in still another respect :He had a double row of teeth, both upper and lower. When the natives began to attach some religious significance to the find, authorities ordered the skeleton and all the artifacts secretly reburied- and, of course, lost to the scientific study they deserved.

This particular giant, incidentally, bore marked similarity to another, that of a giant man with double rows of teeth whose skeletal remains were dug up on Santa Rosa Island, off the California coast. Subsequent research has shown that he, or his descendants, feasted on the small elephants which once lived on that island and which have vanished like the giants who ate them, countless ages ago.

Near Crittenden, Arizona, in 1891, workmen excavating for a commercial building came upon a huge stone sarcophagus eight feet below the surface. The contractor called in expert help, and the sarcophagus was opened to reveal a granite mummy case which had once held the body of a human being more than twelve feet tall -a human with six toes, according to the carving of the case. But the body had been buried so many thousands of years that it had long since turned to dust. Just another silent witness to the truth of Genesis, which tells us that there were giants in the earth in those days, the excavation of over a dozen skeletons 8 to 12 feet tall, around the world, shocked archeologists.

These skeletons were positively human. Some of these skeletal remains are on Maui in lava caves near Ulupalakua and Olowalu. An example of this is the "mysterious" disappearance of more than 50 perfectly kept gigantic antediluvian skeletons (between 10-14 feet tall) found in a cave in Arizona.

Earth Giants : over the years a number of gigantic human skeletons have been unearthed. The most distinctive of these were the remains of some American giants found in the 1880s at Tioga Point, near Sayre in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, as recounted by Robert Lyman in Forbidden Land. Some other examples include the following:

A decayed human skeleton claimed by eyewitnesses to measure around 3.28 metres (10 feet 9 inches tall), was unearthed by labourers while ploughing a vineyard in November 1856 in East Wheeling, now in West Virginia.

A human skeleton measuring 3.6 metres (12 foot) tall was unearthed at Lompock Rancho, California, in 1833 by soldiers digging in a pit for a powder magazine. The specimen had a double row of teeth and was surrounded by numerous stone axes, carved shells and porphyry blocks with abstruse symbols associated with it.

Several mummified remains of red haired humans ranging from 2-2.5 metres (6.5 feet to over 8 feet) tall were dug up at Lovelock Cave, (70 miles) north-east of Reno, Nevada, by a guano mining operation. These bones substantiated legends by the local Piute Indians regarding giants which they called Si-Te-Cahs. For some reason scientists did not seem to want to investigate these finds further so many of the bones were lost. Fortunately one of the giant Lovelock skulls is still preserved today. It measures almost 30cm (1 foot) tall and resides along with other various Lovelock artifacts in the Humboldt Museum in Winnemucca, Nevada. Some of these artifacts can also be found in the Nevada State Historical Society's museum at Reno.

THE HUBBARD DISCOVERY:

In this magazine for September, 1923, we mentioned a reported discovery by Mr. Samuel Hubbard, of remains of giants in the Grand Canyon of Arizona. Owing to press unreliability, we did not notice this to a great extent. We have now, however, obtained more knowledge on the subject, and there remains no doubt that Mr. Hubbard has actually made a discovery composed of the following parts:

(a) Petrified bodies of two human beings about 18 and 15 feet in height respectively. One of these is buried under a recent rock fall which would require several days' work to remove; the other, of which Mr. Hubbard took photographs, is in a crevice of difficult accessibility. The bodies are formed of a limestone petrification embedded in sandstone.

(b) An ancient beach, now sandstone, containing a great number of footprints of a giant race, men, women and children; the prints of adults about 17 to 20 inches in length, and corresponding in size and shape to the Carson City and Blue Ridge prints.

EVEN MORE GIANT RECORDS:

According to a press clipping, dated Nayarit, Mexico, May 14, 1926, Capts. D. W. Page and F. W. Devalda discovered the bones of a race of giants who averaged over ten feet in height. Local legends state that they came from Ecuador. Nothing more has been heard of this, but that is not surprising; the word "giant" will flutter the feathers of any scientist into rapid flight, metaphorically speaking, in the opposite direction. So also with a report from the Washington Post, June 22, 1925, and the New York Herald-Tribune, June 21, 1925. A mining party, it is reported, found skeletons measuring 10 to 12 feet, with feet 18 to 20 inches long, near Sisoguiche, Mexico. The Los Angeles Times, October 2, 1927, says that explorers in Mexico located large human bones near Tapextla, indicating a race of "gigantic size." All this, if unfounded, would be straining coincidence or imagination pretty far.

Press accounts say that the skeleton of a gigantic man, with head missing, has been unearthed at El Boquin, on the Mico River, in the Chontales district. The ribs are a yard long and four inches wide and the shin bone is too heavy for one man to carry. "Chontales" is an Indian word, meaning "wild men."

In the late 1950's during road construction in Homs southeast Turkey, many tombs of Giants were indeed unearthed. These tombs were 4 meters long, and when entered in 2 cases the human thigh bones were measured to be 47.24 inches in length. They calculated that the person who owned this Femur probably stood at fourteen to sixteen feet tall. A cast of this bone is seen at the Creationist museum in Texas.

Flavius Josephus, the noted Jewish historian of the first century A.D., described the giants as having "bodies so large and countenances so entirely different from other men that they were surprising to the sight and terrible to the hearing." And he adds that in his day, the bones of the giants were still on display!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: THIS INFORMATION WAS TAKEN FROM VARIOUS SOURCES - WE CANNOT CONFIRM THE ACCURACY OF THESE REPORTS.

[Rella]

https://www.6000years.org/frame.php?page=giants

Quoted information below, found below other articles and photos at above link.

If true....

"Flavius Josephus, the noted Jewish historian of the first century A.D., described the giants as having "bodies so large and countenances so entirely different from other men that they were surprising to the sight and terrible to the hearing." And he adds that in his day, the bones of the giants were still on display!"

Then why have they disappeared?

For me it is things that go bump in the night time 

[Amo]

While I do believe in giants it is becoming increasingly more difficult when there is not a single concrete skeleton of one that
could support this belief.

Perhaps they have all been spirited off to Area 51??? 

Short of a belief that these would be on par with the ETs many also believe in what earthly reason could there be for a hoax to span 100 plus years in multiple locations.

It seems that even every one of them that was ever sketched and/or photographed has managed to disappear....

Has to be an Area 51 kind of thing or perhaps dropping them to the well on Oak Island.....

Unless their genealogy could trace back to Nephilim and they dont want people to be afraid?

Amo.. please keep posting these... one day something will turn up....

Scientifically acknowledged human giants, would pose a serious problem for present day widely accepted narratives. There certainly is good reason to hide such info, for those defending such narratives. The evidence of giants is plentiful concerning so very many other creatures, the existence of which is not denied. Much larger and possibly advanced humans though, are a big problem for the deep time evolutionary concept of simple to complex biological and societal progression postulated by those of said faith. In this world, entire peoples have been exterminated for not accepting popular or powerfully backed up narratives of the past. Cover ups such as seems to be suggested, are certainly not then, beyond the scope of fallen humanity to perpetrate in defense of their pet narratives.

It is certainly becoming apparent to a great many people, that at a certain point in our history, humanity lost knowledge and abilities the they once had. Which later peoples built upon, and I believe, even came to worship as their God's of antiquity, upon which many of their religions were built as well. Time will tell, and the truth of all things will come out in the laundry on that great day. Amen.

[Amo]

If true....

"Flavius Josephus, the noted Jewish historian of the first century A.D., described the giants as having "bodies so large and countenances so entirely different from other men that they were surprising to the sight and terrible to the hearing." And he adds that in his day, the bones of the giants were still on display!"

Then why have they disappeared?

For me it is things that go bump in the night time 

For me it is a matter of faith.

Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Num 13:31 But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we. 32 And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature. 33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

Deu 2:10  The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims. 11 Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims.

Deu 2:19 And when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, distress them not, nor meddle with them: for I will not give thee of the land of the children of Ammon any possession; because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession. 20 (That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims; 21 A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; but the LORD destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead:

Deu 3:11 For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man. 12 And this land, which we possessed at that time, from Aroer, which is by the river Arnon, and half mount Gilead, and the cities thereof, gave I unto the Reubenites and to the Gadites. 13 And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, being the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants.

Jos 12:3 And from the plain to the sea of Chinneroth on the east, and unto the sea of the plain, even the salt sea on the east, the way to Bethjeshimoth; and from the south, under Ashdothpisgah: 4  And the coast of Og king of Bashan, which was of the remnant of the giants, that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei,

Jos 13:12 All the kingdom of Og in Bashan, which reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei, who remained of the remnant of the giants: for these did Moses smite, and cast them out.

Jos 15:8 And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same is Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the end of the valley of the giants northward:

Jos 17:14 And the children of Joseph spake unto Joshua, saying, Why hast thou given me but one lot and one portion to inherit, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the LORD hath blessed me hitherto? 15  And Joshua answered them, If thou be a great people, then get thee up to the wood country, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee.

Jos 18:16 And the border came down to the end of the mountain that lieth before the valley of the son of Hinnom, and which is in the valley of the giants on the north, and descended to the valley of Hinnom, to the side of Jebusi on the south, and descended to Enrogel,

The scriptures take it for granted, that there were giants. The antediluvians, and many remnants after the flood.

Apart from this, there is the abundant fossil evidence the world over, of the much larger plants and animals which once roamed this earth. Granted, in a very different time, and even place than the world now is. 

[Rella]

For me it is a matter of faith.



Apart from this, there is the abundant fossil evidence the world over, of the much larger plants and animals which once roamed this earth. Granted, in a very different time, and even place than the world now is.

Yes, the bible is clear ( I mentioned the Nephilim) and while we do have a relative handful of normal skeletal remains that have been discovered under archaeological discoveries, ( I say handful for there is no where near those
that should be found since God created things.) ,
those that have been photographed and examined have been normal sized people.

So I cannot help but wonder if over given time bones disintegrate or animals  decimate those that turn up?

Yes fossil evidence is the world over, and as to sizes of things they have turned up some
fossilized dinosaur bones that are indicative as to their sizes but be them as old as the dinosaurs or as young as the days of Genesis... there are not more then a handful of claims of finding giants.

The Smithsonian: (Cannot be thought of separate from the US Government)

See link for additional info
https://www.gaia.com/article/this-conspiracy-claims-the-smithsonian-destroys-giant-skeletons

Around the turn of the 20th century, The New York Times, London Globe, and Scientific American published articles purporting the discovery of gigantic human skeletons, concluding that the remains were sent to the Smithsonian for further study. But the fact that this evidence was never again seen or reported, continues to elicit questions of whether the Smithsonian destroys giant skeletons in order to cover up an inconvenient anomaly in the archeological narrative we've been told.

The question has been heatedly debated over the past century or more, with researchers finding what appears to be corroborating evidence, while skeptics say the bones were simply those of massive prehistoric animals, reclassified by the Smithsonian and displayed in museums to this day.

And while physical evidence remains tenuous, there is a seemingly endless trail of written and anecdotal suggestion that a larger race of humans once walked the Earth.

A Brief History of the Smithsonian
Though it may not be immediately obvious, the Smithsonian Institution is an extension of the U.S. government with congressional members sitting on its Board of Regents. It was initially founded as "an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men," at the endowment of philanthropist, chemist, and mineralogist James Smithson.

And while it's not a regulatory agency, it is so intrinsically tied to government that it claims immunity from state and local regulations, as well as immunity from lawsuits unless authorized by Congress.

The Smithsonian was established in 1846, and was tasked with the mission of organizing the anthropological history of the United States. It is sometimes referred to as "the nation's attic," as it has amassed somewhere in the range of 154 million items between its myriad museums, research centers, and various facilities.

The Smithsonian Destroys Giant Skulls
Looking back at newspaper clippings dating from the late 1800s into the early 1900s, Dewhurst found a multitude of instances in which citizens from disparate areas of the country uncovered massive bones, of seemingly human origin. Upon reporting these discoveries to media outlets or authorities, Dewhurst said unsuspecting citizens would shortly receive a visit from members of the Smithsonian who wasted no time sequestering the bones – allegedly bringing them to a museum or research facility, but which were never seen again.

One could also find instances of giant skulls and skeletons in local papers with pictures to boot. Take for instance this photo from the San Antonio Press showing a giant skull next to two normal skulls for size comparison.

It's worth mentioning that the time period when these skeletal remains were found was drastically different from today — yellow journalism was rampant even for some of the publications we might consider more esteemed.

Religion was also a dominating factor in many people's lives, and attempts to find literal instances of biblical stories was highly sought after. This has become one of the primary arguments against these accounts, as naysayers believe people created counterfeit skeletons or confused the bones of prehistoric megafauna and large animals for humans, hoping they had found proof in the existence of the Nephilim of the Old Testament.

Giants Discovered Throughout the World?
The U.S. is not the only country in which these alleged giants of antiquity are said to have been found. In fact, there are accounts dating back several millennia, which speak of encounters with living giants or the relics hinting at their existence.

In the world's largest prehistoric copper mine in Wales there are accounts of the discovery of thousands of massive sledgehammers alleged to weigh somewhere in the range of 60 lbs.

Whether there's any validity to this assertion is debatable, though if true would require a larger-than-life human with incredible strength to have worked the mine and wielded such a tool – the average sledgehammer today rarely weighs more than 20 lbs. This repository, known as the Great Orme mine or the "Stonehenge of copper mining," dates back some 3,500 years ago.

Another more well-known instance of alleged giants comes from the writings of Ferdinand Magellan's chronicler Antonio Pigafetta, who wrote of a giant race upon discovering Patagonia.

"One day we suddenly saw a naked man of giant stature on the shore of the port, dancing, singing, and throwing dust on his head." Pigafetta wrote.

"The captain-general sent one of our men to the giant so that he might perform the same actions as a sign of peace. Having done that, the man led the giant to an islet where the captain-general was waiting; When the giant was in the captain-general's and our presence he marveled greatly and made signs with one finger raised upward, believing we had come from the sky. He was so tall that we reached only to his waist, and he was well proportioned."

According to the writings of Pigafetta, Magellan and crew attempted to return to Italy with two of the giants they had encountered, though they were unable to survive the long trip back across the Atlantic.

Skeptics say the people referred to in these accounts were likely members of the Tehuelche – a native tribe that may have stood slightly larger in stature due to the strength required to survive in Patagonia's harsh climate, though it's questionable whether they were much larger in height than the average human.

But there are in fact a number of photographs from the late 1800s showing members of the Ona tribe that inhabited the Tierra del Fuego region of Patagonia who clearly stood significantly taller than most humans – six-and-a-half-foot-tall women and men well over seven feet.

This account has also been called into question as some say it may have simply been an instance of giantism, with subsequent reports embellished as to make Magellan's travels sound more exciting.

However, this account was later confirmed by English explorer James Byron, whose story of encountering a race of 9-foot giants in Patagonia was published by the London Chronicle. Other writings from the expeditions of Sir Francis Drake, Francis Fletcher and Sir Thomas Cavendish also reported towering Patagonians and their deceased bodies.

Could these native tribes corroborate the questionable stories of ancient European explorers?

[Amo]

Yes fossil evidence is the world over, and as to sizes of things they have turned up some
fossilized dinosaur bones that are indicative as to their sizes but be them as old as the dinosaurs or as young as the days of Genesis... there are not more then a handful of claims of finding giants.

The above statement is incorrect. Unless referring perhaps to humans only, but even at that, the claims I have presented alone represent far more than a handful. Actual bones and visible evidence is more in the handful range. Nevertheless it does exist and is simply ignored by those who won't travel down that road. Giant plant and animal fossils however, are very abundant, as far as fossils go. I have posted many links and articles regarding the same. Both Creationists and evolutionists understand that plant and animal life at least, were much larger in the past than they are now. The devil himself understands the major problem giant human fossils would present to one of his pet narratives. It is in his best interest to keep such knowledge hidden as long as possible in any case, to allow for other theories to be fully developed and ready at hand to address such, if or when necessary. Many of which are being formulated now, as the present narrative is coming under increasing scrutiny. There are some good reasons that human fossils would not be as abundant as plant and animal fossils, regarding the flood narrative, which do not include deliberate attempts to hide such.

That certain narratives are and have been censured as far as possible, is evident for all to see in the following video addressing just such attempts regarding Creationists access to evidence for analysis. This because those they needed permission from knew they were Creationists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeeXMtbPtQE

Many "scientists" like the left, do not want those who disagree with them, to have the same opportunities they have to research and or defend their positions. This is not a far cry away from removing evidence if possible as well. More sinister things have happened. 

[Dennis1209]

For those genuinely interested in this topic, I recommend watching the many YouTube videos by Tim Alberino and L.A. Marzulli. They are not crackpots or conspiracists; they have traveled the world and documented the existence of giants (Nephilim).

They document and explain why there are so few giant bones today, a coverup, and by who.

After Noah's flood, the Bible lists the Nephilim tribes; Rephaim, Zuzim, Emim, Horim, Avim, and Anakim. I will not mention them, but the three main theories on how the Nephilim survived the flood are interesting.

I will conjecture that the post-flood giants were smaller in stature than their pre-flood ancestors for some biological reasons. The law of physics, everything degrades over time and breeding.
Giant bones have been discovered in the Americas, and I am surprised we never heard about DNA testing of any of them? Some Native American tribes have an oral history of giants menacing their ancestors, and they eventually killed them all off. We have all seen western movies where the Indian lifts his right arm and hand and says "how." Their oral tradition says this was to count and make sure there were five fingers per hand and not six.

I postulate the Nephilim started fleeing the area of Israel in the days of Joshua to survive extinction and came to the Americas.

Because of barometric conditions and a protective canopy surrounding the planet (higher O2 content, increased global atmospheric pressure, filtering radiation) before the deluge, all animal and plant life grew huge, as the fossil record records. It stands to reason that if animals and plants grew to mammoth proportions, humans had to be much larger also?  Note that is a question.
If the above is true, there were giants in those days and after that. Imagine the size of the first couple generations of Nephilim.

As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be... How was it in the days of Noe? In my opinion, Genesis 6:1-4 answers that question. Before the Lord's second coming, I take it to mean that there will be the third incursion of these Nephilim.

[Amo]

For those genuinely interested in this topic, I recommend watching the many YouTube videos by Tim Alberino and L.A. Marzulli. They are not crackpots or conspiracists; they have traveled the world and documented the existence of giants (Nephilim).

They document and explain why there are so few giant bones today, a coverup, and by who.

After Noah's flood, the Bible lists the Nephilim tribes; Rephaim, Zuzim, Emim, Horim, Avim, and Anakim. I will not mention them, but the three main theories on how the Nephilim survived the flood are interesting.

I will conjecture that the post-flood giants were smaller in stature than their pre-flood ancestors for some biological reasons. The law of physics, everything degrades over time and breeding.
Giant bones have been discovered in the Americas, and I am surprised we never heard about DNA testing of any of them? Some Native American tribes have an oral history of giants menacing their ancestors, and they eventually killed them all off. We have all seen western movies where the Indian lifts his right arm and hand and says "how." Their oral tradition says this was to count and make sure there were five fingers per hand and not six.

I postulate the Nephilim started fleeing the area of Israel in the days of Joshua to survive extinction and came to the Americas.

Because of barometric conditions and a protective canopy surrounding the planet (higher O2 content, increased global atmospheric pressure, filtering radiation) before the deluge, all animal and plant life grew huge, as the fossil record records. It stands to reason that if animals and plants grew to mammoth proportions, humans had to be much larger also?  Note that is a question.
If the above is true, there were giants in those days and after that. Imagine the size of the first couple generations of Nephilim.

As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be... How was it in the days of Noe? In my opinion, Genesis 6:1-4 answers that question. Before the Lord's second coming, I take it to mean that there will be the third incursion of these Nephilim.

I don't go for the whole Nephilim thing, as in angels having intercourse with human women. I believe the pre-flood world was very different from this present one. With much larger people, plants, and animals, with an atmosphere far better equipped to support them.

[DaveW]

I don't go for the whole Nephilim thing, as in angels having intercourse with human women. I believe the pre-flood world was very different from this present one. With much larger people, plants, and animals, with an atmosphere far better equipped to support them.

The belief in the first century (as recorded in the book of Enoch) was the Nephilim were angel/human hybrids. Our Lord never contradicted that understanding.

[Rella]

The belief in the first century (as recorded in the book of Enoch) was the Nephilim were angel/human hybrids. Our Lord never contradicted that understanding.

And as we are told that the words we read were inspired by God, I believe.

[DaveW]

And as we are told that the words we read were inspired by God, I believe.

Since Enoch is not scripture, I do not think it is necessarily "inspired."  But it was the common understanding in 1st century Judea.

I lean toward thinking that was the case - Nephilim being angel/human hybrids.  But I do not make it a matter of doctrine. It is just my opinion.

[Amo]

The belief in the first century (as recorded in the book of Enoch) was the Nephilim were angel/human hybrids. Our Lord never contradicted that understanding.

He never addressed the subject. If everything that was believed in the first century is likely true if our Lord did not specifically point it out as being wrong, we have a whole lot to learn and incorporate into our understanding. Since angels neither marry nor are given in marriage, why would they be equipped to procreate?

Mar 12:24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? 25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

Even if they could, why would God allow for such. He doesn't even allow us to see angels but upon rare occasions. Let alone interbreed with them.

[Rella]

A little side trip....

Puzzling Extinct Giants Depicted On 12,000-Year-Old Rock Paintings In The Colombian Amazon Rainforest Baffle Scientists

https://www.ancientpages.com/2022/03/12/puzzling-extinct-giants-depicted-on-12000-year-old-rock-paintings-in-the-colombian-amazon-rainforest-baffle-scientists/

[Amo]

A little side trip....

Puzzling Extinct Giants Depicted On 12,000-Year-Old Rock Paintings In The Colombian Amazon Rainforest Baffle Scientists

https://www.ancientpages.com/2022/03/12/puzzling-extinct-giants-depicted-on-12000-year-old-rock-paintings-in-the-colombian-amazon-rainforest-baffle-scientists/

Interesting. Certainly not the only rack paintings or ancient artwork which causes problems for the present widely accepted narratives.

[Amo]

https://mexicounexplained.com/ancient-dinosaur-figurines-acambaro/

Quoted article below from link above.

The Ancient Dinosaur Figurines of Acámbaro

In the late 1960s American detective author Erle Stanley Gardner stood before a collection of over 30,000 figurines.  He had heard about this collection many years ago and felt a deep sense of astonishment when seeing it in person at this modest house in the small rural town of Acámbaro in the state of Guanajuato, Mexico.  Gardner, the writer who came up with great titles like The Case of the Black Cat and Granny Get Your Gun, and who created such memorable characters as Perry Mason, Della Street and Lester Leith had a real life mystery in front of him.  The figurines were fantastic and seemingly out of place.  Many of them featured people of various races and some 10 per cent of them looked like our modern depictions of dinosaurs.  These dinosaurs were sometimes accompanied by humans; some of the figures had dinosaurs wrestling with people or men even riding dinosaurs.  Of course, dinosaur representations in ancient art were unheard of because humans did not coexist with these prehistoric creatures.  The creator of Perry Mason, who was considered to be the best-selling American author at the time of his death, was asked to examine the collection by a friend, the Harvard-educated anthropologist Charles Hapgood, who was one of the many voices chiming in on this controversy at the time.  Hapgood knew that Gardner's love of sleuthing did not just apply to fiction writing and Gardner's many years as a trial attorney would be helpful in solving the mystery of these anomalous figurines.

Over the years the massive collection has been proclaimed to be an elaborate hoax by people in the more traditional fields of science and has been shunned by most mainstream archaeologists.  While many have thought that the whole discussion was put to rest years ago, the Acámbaro figures have begun to generate interest again among fringe scientists, Christian "young earth" proponents, believers in alternative universe theories and those who follow the "New Chronology" writings of Russian Anatoly Fomenko which claim that written history itself has been adjusted over time to fit the agendas of the elites.  Some investigators in more traditional scientific fields have also been recently drawn to these figures once again, as the controversy has become debated online.  The figures, which for many years have been literally and figuratively "crated up" and not been available for examination are now on display for all to see at the Waldemar Julsrud Museum in Acámbaro, Guanajuato.

The story of the Acámbaro figurines begins in 1945.  A German merchant named Waldemar Julsrud was riding his horse along the edges of a mountain called El Toro just outside of town.  In a dried out riverbed he noticed an unusual part of a clay figurine sticking out of the dirt.  He began Acambaro4digging and found a number of curious igures near the riverbed.  Julsrud was already familiar with pre-Columbian ceramics as he had one of the largest collections of artifacts from the pre-Classic Chupicuaro culture then amassed.  While he wasn't selling hardware, he was digging up or acquiring pieces for his collection and over the years Julsrud became quite the amateur archaeologist.  He had never seen the types of figures that he had uncovered at the base of El Toro, so he asked one of his employees named Odilon Tinajero, if he could find more of these figurines for him.  Julsrud would pay Tinajero one peso for each figurine brought to him intact or with pieces that were easily put together.  Thus began his collection, and over a 5 to 6 year period, Julsrud gathered over 35,000 of these strange figures.

In 1947 when Julsrud published a booklet on his discoveries called Enigmas del pasado – Enigmas of the Past – the figurines began to receive international attention.  In March of 1951, Lowell Harmer, a veteran writer for the Los Angeles Times Acambaro2published an article titled:  "Mexico Finds Give Hint of Lost World: Dinosaur Statues Point to Men Who Lived in Age of Reptiles."  Harmer had visited Acámbaro earlier that year and described the sheer volume of the collection in Julsrud's house wrote that the figurines "filled the floors, the tables and the wall cabinets to overflowing."  The Times writer also wondered in his article, "How could it be a hoax?  Not even in Mexico, where money is so scarce, could anyone afford the labor of these thousands of statues at the low prices Julsrud is paying."  While seemingly convinced of the collection's authenticity, as an objective writer Harmer finished off his article by saying, "I am a writer, not an archaeologist.  It will be up to the experts to decide."  In the next few years the story was picked up by the tabloid press and made it to the magazines specializing in stories of the fanciful and the bizarre.  One article of note appeared in the February/March 1952 issue of Fate magazine titled "Did Man Tame the Dinosaur?"  A clear reference to some of the figurines showing men roping and riding the creatures.

The following year, 1953, the Mexican government got involved in the Acámbaro mystery.  It sent 4 archaeologists from the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia – also called INAH – in Mexico City to investigate.  They set up a dig site about a mile from Julsrud's original discovery location near the base of the mountain called El Toro.  They dug a test put going about 2 meters down and discovered dozens of figurines similar to Julsrud's, including dinosaurs.   INAH then issued a statement that the figurines did correspond to the pre-Classic civilization of the Chupicuaro and could date to as early as 800 BC, but not the dinosaur ones.  The scientists concluded that even though the dinosaurs were found among other similar figurines in the same archaeological strata, they couldn't possibly be anything but modern productions as human interaction with dinosaurs was impossible.  The Instituto did no further excavations and after the 1950s refused to issue permits for other archaeologists to make new excavations.

On the American side of the border an anthropological organization dedicated to preserving Native American culture, the Amerind Foundation, sent archaeologist Charles Di Peso down to examine the figurines.  Di Peso published his findings in volume 18 of the scientific journal American Antiquity in the year 1953 and in the prestigious Archaeology magazine the same year.  Those who do not believe the figurines to be part of a hoax have pointed out that Di Peso went down to Mexico with a clear bias to expose the figures as fakes and that he did not approach the problem of the figurines with an open mind.  Although having the backing of the scientific establishment, Di Peso did make claims that should be scrutinized more closely.  For example, in his American Antiquity article, Di Peso states:

"None of the specimens were marred by patination nor did they possess the surface coating of soluble salts...  The figures were broken, in most cases, where the appendages attached themselves to the body of the figurines... No parts were missing.  Furthermore, none of the broken surfaces were worn smooth.  In the entire collection of 32,000 specimens no Acambaro5shovel, mattock, or pick marks were noted."

He also stated, "Further investigation revealed that a family living in the vicinity of Acámbaro make these figurines during the winter months when their fields are idle."  In his writing Di Peso alleged that after the figures were made that they were "planted" in certain locations, and in his American Antiquity article he tells the tale of a botched excavation in which he witnessed figurines coming up out of a hole mixed with fresh backfill and even fresh manure.  In the end of his article Di Peso states, "Thus the investigation ended:  it seems almost superfluous to state that the Acámbaro figurines are not prehistoric nor were they made by a prehistoric race who lived in association with Mesozoic reptiles."

t was not long before Di Peso's articles and claims were shot full of holes.  For one, Di Peso only spent 2 days in Acámbaro and only spent 4 hours examining Julsrud's collection in his home.  Di Peso did not set up and conduct an excavation on his own.  He also did not take into consideration that Julsrud's collection included near-perfect figurines purchased from villagers as per Julsrud's own 016request.  When he began his collection, Julsrud specified that he would pay one peso for each intact figure.  There were plenty of pieces and broken figures that did not make it to the over 30,000 in Julsrud's home.

The Di Peso articles caught the eye of Charles Hapgood, the Harvard-trained archaeologist and friend of Perry Mason creator Erle Stanley Gardner.  Hapgood had years of experience and the academic credentials to analyze the Julsrud collection and in 1954 he spent a considerable amount of time in Acámbaro.  Hapgood refuted most of Di Peso's claims point by point.  Di Peso claimed that there were no missing pieces.  Hapgood found boxes and boxes of parts that could not be put together.  Di Peso claimed that there was no discoloring or encrusted dirt on the figures.  Hapgood observed that dirt and patination were evident on the figures in spite of Julsrud's requirement for cleaned, intact figurines to earn the one 011peso reward.  Di Peso alleged that there were no pick marks from shoveling on any of the figurines.  Hapgood documented the opposite.  One of the big elements of the hoax proposed by Di Peso was his observation that one of the excavations he witnessed was bringing up fresh dirt from a recent backfill.  Hapgood had an answer for this, too.  In documenting the excavation procedure, Hapgood wrote, "An important point that came out was that when the digger stopped work in the middle of excavating a cache, he filled in the hole, to protect it from the many small boys of the neighborhood.  This may have a bearing on the accusations of fraud..."  The final point dispelled by Hapgood was that the villagers were making the figurines during their "off time" in the winter.  The sheer number of figures, both intact and partial, would take many families an incredible amount of time to produce.  In the next decade, Erle Stanley Gardner would add to this sentiment in his 1969 book about Acámbaro called The Host with the Big Hat.  He writes, "I don't believe that it would have been at all possible for any group of people to have made these figures, to have paid for the burro-load of wood necessary to 'fire' them, take them out and bury them, wait for the ground to resume its natural hardness which would take from one to ten years, and then 'discover' these figures and dig them up—all for a gross price of twelve cents per figure."  Gardner also concluded "It is absolutely, positively out of the question to think that these artifacts which we saw could have been planted."

As a scientist, Charles Hapgood knew of the need for concrete dating of the pieces using the most up-to-date methods.  In 1968 he submitted three samples to Isotopes Incorporated of New Jersey for radiocarbon dating.  The first sample came back as three thousand five hundred and ninety years old, plus or minus 100 years.  The second sample came up as six thousand four hundred and eighty years old, plus or minus one hundred and seventy years.  The third sample came up with a date of three thousand and sixty years old, plus or minus one hundred and twenty years.

To be thorough, Hapgood also submitted four samples to the University of Pennsylvania Museum for thermoluminescent dating, a more accurate way to date pottery.  All four samples came up with a date of 2,500 BC, plus or minus one hundred and ninety years.  Dr. Froelich Rainey, realizing the importance of accuracy in the dating of these pieces did 18 runs on each of the 4 samples and came up with the same results.

The last attempt to date the figures occurred in 1976.  Gary Carriveau and Mark Han also used the thermoluminescent dating technique on 20 of the figures.  All of the samples failed the "plateau test" which indicated that dates obtained from these figurines using high-temperature thermoluminescent dating were not reliable and lacked significance.  Based on the signal regeneration found in some of the samples, the Carriveau-Han team estimated that the figurines were fired sometime in the late 1930s or early 1940s.

So, are these dinosaur figurines authentic archaeological finds of great importance, or are they part of an elaborate hoax?  One must ask if this were a hoax, who would benefit from it?  Waldemar Julsrud made no money from the sales of the figurines or from tourism connected to his collection.  No archaeologists have made names or reputations for themselves because of the dinosaurs of Acámbaro.  The Mexican government wants to ignore these figures and prohibits any excavations in the area.  Why do they not want more investigation into these figures?  As with everything presented on Mexico Unexplained, I encourage you to do your own investigation.  Maybe you can finally solve the enigma of the dinosaurs of Acámbaro.

[DaveW]

A little side trip....
Puzzling Extinct Giants Depicted On 12,000-Year-Old Rock Paintings In The Colombian Amazon Rainforest Baffle Scientists
https://www.ancientpages.com/2022/03/12/puzzling-extinct-giants-depicted-on-12000-year-old-rock-paintings-in-the-colombian-amazon-rainforest-baffle-scientists/

The first actual evidence I heard of was giant skulls and leg bones found in a cave in Peru, not that far from where you mention.

[Rella]

The first actual evidence I heard of was giant skulls and leg bones found in a cave in Peru, not that far from where you mention.

Cool.

Now, are they still in existence or on display somewhere?

[DaveW]

Cool.
Now, are they still in existence or on display somewhere?

I have no idea.

[Jaime]

https://www.google.com/search?q=giant%20human%20bones%20on%20display%20in%20Peru&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CYbb5kzqSuxPYaAsH1lSsaGNsgIMCgIIABABOgQIABAA&hl=en-US&sa=X&ved=0CBIQuIIBahcKEwi479Ww48b2AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBw&biw=414&bih=715#imgrc=_i9dDUUQOWfeVM

I'm on board

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

https://www.google.com/search?q=giant%20human%20bones%20on%20display%20in%20Peru&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CYbb5kzqSuxPYaAsH1lSsaGNsgIMCgIIABABOgQIABAA&hl=en-US&sa=X&ved=0CBIQuIIBahcKEwi479Ww48b2AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBw&biw=414&bih=715#imgrc=_i9dDUUQOWfeVM

I'm on board

Not so sure.... the first photo that came up on that link is a photoshop from a contest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worth1000

[Jaime]

I wouldn't doubt some are, but not likely all of them.

[Amo]

No doubt there are more fakes now, than the real thing. Of course, this is what I would do as well, if I wanted to cast doubt upon such. Not to mention other less devious intentions. It is certainly very easy to do such today. I would say anything more than two to three times larger than we are at present, is probably fake.  I don't think the many actual giant animals they have found from the past which still exist today in much smaller form, were much bigger than two to three times their present size. This, I think would be a good indication of what to expect in humans as well.

[Amo]

https://www.reddit.com/r/FossilHunting/comments/6b8lp5/fossilized_giant_human_knee_bone_this_guy_would/

Interesting.

Quoted post at link above.

Honestly, It's way to big to be human. The person would be somewhere around 12' feet tall, probably taller. This has been in my family for 30 years or so. I've been researching it off and on for t 20 years. I can't find anything in the fossil record that looks like it. On one occasion just doing an internet search, I finally found something that looked just like it. I click on it to see what animal it's from, and it was human. I've taken it to professionals and they have no idea. I take it to my chiropractor and she says, wow I wouldn't want to adjust whoever that knee belongs to. So yeah, it looks just like a human knee bone, just to big.

[Choir Loft]

https://hubpages.com/education/American-History-Censored-Mound-Builders-Giants-of-Antiquity-and-Hollow-Earth

Not so concerned with the hollow earth part or not. Do you think there has been a cover up or not?

One does not need to cover up something that never existed.

There is no proof at all that any advanced society developed in North America prior to the arrival of European settlers.   The natives were primarily hunter-gatherers with extremely primitive tools and simplistic religion.  The ability to read and write was never developed and as a result the only records passed down through the years were oral.  Civilizations in Central and South America were much more advanced and organized than any group in North America.

The only proof of hollowness is in the mental capacity of those who espouse a hollow earth.  Once again there is no substantial proof of any of it - not even a good story. 

Fools will continue to believe fantasy even as they deny the logic of truth.  Proof is needed.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Rella]

Choir Loft

One does not need to cover up something that never existed.

There is no proof at all that any advanced society developed in North America prior to the arrival of European settlers.   The natives were primarily hunter-gatherers with extremely primitive tools and simplistic religion.  The ability to read and write was never developed and as a result the only records passed down through the years were oral.  Civilizations in Central and South America were much more advanced and organized than any group in North America.

The only proof of hollowness is in the mental capacity of those who espouse a hollow earth.  Once again there is no substantial proof of any of it - not even a good story. 

Fools will continue to believe fantasy even as they deny the logic of truth.  Proof is needed.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

Come off it.............

We concentrate on the North American part of "everything" because that is where we live and we should question everythy claim that is out there.....

BUT you say ..........

One does not need to cover up something that never existed.

I ask... Anywhere?

Careful how you answe because it is your God and mine who instructed Moses to write about Giants......

The footnotes of the following link should not be missed

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/giants-in-the-bible/

This article surveys all of the individuals and people groups described as giants in Scripture. Next, some ancient records and archaeological data that corroborate some of the biblical data will be examined. The article concludes with a study of how big these people could have been based on what we currently understand about genetics and biology.

Old Testament Giants
One of the earliest mentions of giants in the Bible is found in Genesis 14.

In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him came and attacked the Rephaim in Ashteroth Karnaim, the Zuzim in Ham, the Emim in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in their mountain of Seir . . . . Then they turned back and came to En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh), and attacked all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites who dwelt in Hazezon Tamar (Genesis 14:5–7, emphasis added).

Genesis 14 does not reveal that the Rephaim, Zuzim, Emim, or Amorites were giants, but this information can be found in other places.

The Amorites
The Amorites are mentioned more than 80 times in Scripture, and early on, some were allied with Abraham (Genesis 14:13). They were descendants of Noah's grandson Canaan (Genesis 10:15–16). Although the Bible does not provide this information, the Jewish general-turned-historian Josephus gives the name of their ancestor as Amorreus.1 While the Amorites are mentioned in the same contexts as other giants a few times, they are specifically described as giants in the Minor Prophets.

Yet it was I who destroyed the Amorite before them, whose height was like the height of the cedars, and he was as strong as the oaks; yet I destroyed his fruit above and his roots beneath. Also it was I who brought you up from the land of Egypt, and led you forty years through the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite (Amos 2:9–10).

Through Amos, God clearly stated that the Amorites were generally very tall and strong. Some may downplay the description of the Amorites in this passage, since these verses employ figurative language, but there are some good reasons to take this passage in a straightforward manner.2

The idea that the Amorites were giants is supported by the report of the spies whom Moses sent through the land of Canaan. The Amorites were one of the people groups they saw (Numbers 13:29), and they claimed that "all the people whom we saw in it are men of great stature" (Numbers 13:32). It is telling that in their response, Joshua and Caleb did not challenge the size of the land's inhabitants (Numbers 14:6–9).3

The Emim
Deuteronomy 2 reveals that the Emim, which likely means "terrors," were giants:

The Emim had dwelt there in times past, a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anakim. They were also regarded as giants [Hebrew rephaim], like the Anakim, but the Moabites call them Emim (Deuteronomy 2:10–11).

Moses told the people that the Emim used to live in the territory that God had given to the descendants of Lot's son Moab (Genesis 19:37).

The Zuzim (Zamzummim)
The Zamzummim (almost certainly the same as Zuzim in Genesis 14:5) were also called giants and listed in the same chapter as the Emim:

[The land of Ammon] was also regarded as a land of giants [Hebrew rephaim]; giants [rephaim] formerly dwelt there. But the Ammonites call them Zamzummim, a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anakim. But the Lord destroyed them before them, and they dispossessed them and dwelt in their place (Deuteronomy 2:20–21).

These verses explain that a group of giants known as Zamzummim had lived in the land of Ammon, "a land of giants." God destroyed the Zamzummim so that the descendants of Lot's son Ben-Ammi (the Ammonites) could live in the land (Genesis 19:38).4

According to Genesis 14:5, the Zuzim were in the land of Ham. This may be in reference to Noah's son, Ham, since they descended from him. But it is more likely a reference to the Hamathites, who were descendants of Canaan, Ham's son. While the Zuzim and Zamzummim may have been different people groups, there are enough similarities in name, description, and geographical location to infer that they were variant names for the same group.

Rephaim
The most common term used to describe giants in the Bible is rephaim (e.g., Deuteronomy 3:11, 13). It may refer to a certain people group,5 or it may be a term that simply means giants. The singular form, raphah, also appears several times (e.g., 2 Samuel 21:16, 18, 20).6

The third chapter of Deuteronomy contains an interesting account of the victory of the Israelites over Sihon, the king of the Amorites, and Og, the king of Bashan.7 It is here that we learn an intriguing detail about Og:

For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of the giants [rephaim]. Indeed his bedstead was an iron bedstead. (Is it not in Rabbah of the people of Ammon?) Nine cubits is its length and four cubits its width, according to the standard cubit (Deuteronomy 3:11).

Some translations use the word sarcophagus (NEB) or coffin (TEV, CEV) in place of bedstead, for the Hebrew word עֶרֶשׂ (eres). The majority of English Bibles render this term as bed or bedstead, which makes sense since eres means couch, divan, bed, or bedstead. Also, it would be indeed strange to translate it as sarcophagus since these were made of stone or marble, and Og's "bedstead" was made of iron.8

Whether Moses referred to Og's bed or coffin is not particularly relevant to the discussion at hand. However, the size of this object is noteworthy. We are told that it was nine cubits long and four cubits in width "according to the standard cubit." Since the standard cubit is approximately 18 inches long, then Og's bed or coffin was about 13.5 feet long and 6 feet wide. To put this in perspective, if stood up on end, the height of this bed would have been exactly twice as tall as a person who is 6 foot 9 inches tall. Of course, he may not have been as large as his bed. Some authors have attempted to downplay the significance of these dimensions, but the Bible clearly identifies Og as a giant.

The Nephilim
The earliest mention in giants in the Bible is just prior to the Flood account.

There were giants [nephilim] on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown (Genesis 6:4).9

The word translated as "giants" in this verse is the Hebrew word nephilim, and many Bible versions simply transliterate it as such. There has been much debate over the meaning of this word. Some believe it comes from the Hebrew verb naphal, while others claim that it is from the Aramaic noun naphil.10 These individuals are described in Hebrew as gibborim ("mighty men").11

The nephilim were mentioned again when the spies returned from their exploratory mission of the land of Canaan. These men reported that Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai (descendants of Anak, progenitor of the Anakim) dwelt in Hebron. They also stated, "the people who dwell in the land are strong; the cities are fortified and very large; moreover we saw the descendants of Anak there" (Numbers 13:28). The chapter concludes with ten of the spies giving "a bad report" trying to convince the Israelites that they could not conquer the land:

The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great size. There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight" (Numbers 13:32—33, NASB).12

The Anakim
The Anakim were mentioned in several of these passages. They were perhaps the best known of the giants dwelling in the land of Canaan at the time of the Exodus. As stated in the verse above, they were part of the nephilim. If nephilim simply refers to giants in general, then the Anakim are just said to be giants in Numbers 13:33, which is consistent with their description in this passage. So the Amorites and other giant people would also be nephilim. If nephilim refers to a particular giant tribe, then the Anakim were part of this line.

Numbers 13:22 states that Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai were descendants of Anak, who was obviously the namesake of the Anakim. Both the Emim and Zamzummim were compared to the Anakim, as they were both "a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anakim" (Deuteronomy 2:10, 21; 9:2).

Anak was the son of Arba (Joshua 15:13). Little is known about Arba, and his ancestry is not provided. However, he was apparently somewhat legendary as indicated by the parenthetical statements in the text when his name appears. The city of Hebron, where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob settled and were buried was also called Kiriath Arba.13 We are told that "Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim" (Joshua 14:15), and "the father of Anak" (Joshua 15:13; 21:11).14 Kirjath Arba was also called "Mamre" in Genesis 35:27. Mamre was an Amorite, who was an ally of Abram (Genesis 14:13). This man owned some trees by which Abram settled, and at some point, part of Hebron became synonymous with his name.

Joshua fought several battles with the Anakim and the Amorites. Eventually, he "cut off the Anakim from the mountains: from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel; Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities. None of the Anakim were left in the land of the children of Israel; they remained only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod" (Joshua 11:21–22). These actions set the stage for the famous account of Goliath in 1 Samuel.

Goliath
Of course, the most renowned giant was the mighty Philistine slain by David. Here is how he is described in Scripture.

And a champion went out from the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, from Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. He had a bronze helmet on his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail, and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of bronze. And he had bronze armor on his legs and a bronze javelin between his shoulders. Now the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam, and his iron spearhead weighed six hundred shekels; and a shield-bearer went before him (1 Samuel 17:4–7).

Notice that Goliath was from Gath, which happened to be one of the three places where Anakim remained, according to Joshua 11:21–22. So although he is not called one in 1 Samuel 17, it is possible that Goliath was a descendant of the Anakim who mixed with the Philistine population in that area.15

There is some debate about Goliath's height due to the textual variants in ancient manuscripts. Most English translations follow the Masoretic text in listing his height at "six cubits and a span" (approximately 9'9"). However, the NET Bible puts Goliath at "close to seven feet tall." The reason for the discrepancy is that the Masoretic Text differs from some ancient texts, including the Septuagint and an ancient manuscript found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, labeled 4QSama, which list Goliath's height as four cubits and a span (approximately 6'9").

Many modern scholars believe there is stronger textual support for the shorter Goliath.16 But while he is not specifically called a giant in this passage, 2 Samuel 21:15–22 seems to identify Goliath as the "giant" (raphah) from Gath. There are other details provided that make the "six cubits and a span" the more likely figure. For example, the sheer weight of his armaments required that he must have been of enormous size and strength. His coat of mail weighed about 125 pounds and just the tip of his spear was 15 pounds. This does not even take into account his helmet, armor on his legs, javelin, or sword.17 Also, I personally find it hard to believe that every member of Israel's army would have been terrified of someone who was my height (6'9").18

There are many other details about the account of David and Goliath that are often overlooked. Most people assume David was a short young man when he fought against the giant, but the Bible is very clear that David was considered "a mighty man of valor, [and] a man of war" (1 Samuel 16:18) prior to fighting Goliath.

Other Giants in the Bible
The Bible mentions four more Philistine giants, who were relatives of Goliath from the region of Gath. 2 Samuel 21:15–22 provides a more detailed account of these giants than the record of 1 Chronicles 20:4–8, but the latter passage does provide some extra information that helps us make sense of the passage. The additional details from 1 Chronicles are provided in brackets.

When the Philistines were at war again with Israel, David and his servants with him went down and fought against the Philistines; and David grew faint. Then Ishbi-Benob, who was one of the sons of the giant, the weight of whose bronze spear was three hundred shekels, who was bearing a new sword, thought he could kill David. But Abishai the son of Zeruiah came to his aid, and struck the Philistine and killed him. Then the men of David swore to him, saying, "You shall go out no more with us to battle, lest you quench the lamp of Israel."

Now it happened afterward that there was again a battle with the Philistines at Gob [or "Gezer"].19 Then Sibbechai the Hushathite killed Saph [or "Sippai"], who was one of the sons of the giant. Again there was war at Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-Oregim [or "Jair"] the Bethlehemite killed ["Lahmi"] the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

Yet again there was war at Gath, where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was born to the giant. So when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea, David's brother, killed him.

These four were born to the giant in Gath, and fell by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants (2 Samuel 21:15–22).

David's mighty men killed giants named Ishbi-Benob, Saph (Sippai), and Lahmi, as well as an unnamed giant with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot.20 Each of these men could have descended from the remnant of Anakim that survived in the region of Gath, Gaza, and Ashdod (Joshua 11:22).

An Egyptian Giant?
One of David's mighty men, Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, defeated a large Egyptian man:

And he killed an Egyptian, a man of great height, five cubits tall. In the Egyptian's hand there was a spear like a weaver's beam; and he went down to him with a staff, wrested the spear out of the Egyptian's hand, and killed him with his own spear (1 Chronicles 11:23, italics in original).

Although he is often considered a giant, the Bible does not specifically identify this man as one, nor does it place this account with the exploits of David's other men who slayed giants, but it does provide his height as being "five cubits" (approximately 7' 6"). The KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, and others insert the word "great" before "height" or "stature," but "great" does not appear in the Hebrew. This may have been done for stylistic and readability purposes or because his height is provided later in the verse. Young's Literal Translation renders this verse in an almost perfect word-for-word match of the Hebrew: "And he hath smitten the man, the Egyptian—a man of measure, five by the cubit—and in the hand of the Egyptian is a spear like a beam of weavers" (1 Chronicles 11:23, italics in original).

In the parallel account given in 2 Samuel 23:21 the Egyptian is called "a spectacular man" in the NKJV and "an impressive man" in the NASB. While modern man may think of a 7'6" man as a giant, it is intriguing that the Bible does not identify him as such. Perhaps this is a clue that those who are identified as giants were larger than the Egyptian slain by Benaiah. Another explanation for this omission is that many of the giants were called by their particular tribes (Anakim, Emim, etc.), but the tall Egyptian is not said to belong to any of these giant groups. If that is the case, it is curious why the biblical writers would not simply use a generic term for "giant," such as rapha.

Following these accounts in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles, the giants fade from the pages of Scripture (other than the retrospective mention of the Amorites as giants in Amos 2:9).

Extra-biblical References to Giants
Scores of giant skeletons have been allegedly unearthed in the past couple of centuries. These claims were especially popular in the nineteenth century. So far, no concrete evidence of these claims has been brought forth. Although some claim the evidence was ignored, destroyed, or hidden by places like the Smithsonian, it seems more likely that the vast majority of these reports were hoaxes created for various reasons.

So far, no concrete evidence of these claims has been brought forth.
Several websites display pictures of people standing next to or holding a giant human femur, but these bones are sculptures, allegedly replicas of a real bone found in Turkey or Greece. Once again, there are fantastic claims, but little or no hard evidence to support them.

As far as I know, no one has discovered fossil evidence of giant humans. But then again, human fossils are quite rare altogether, since humans are more capable of avoiding rapid burial in sediment and other conditions that could lead to fossilization of their remains. What is indeed significant is that many giant versions of other creatures existed in the past or still exist today. To name just a few, these include the following:

spiders (e.g., the bird-eating spider, up to 12-inch leg span)
moths (e.g., the Atlas moth, with a wing span of 11 inches)
centipedes (up to 13 inches long)
snails (e.g., the African giant snail, up to 15½ inches long)
frogs (e.g. Beelzebufo, 16 inches high)
dragonflies (e.g., Meganeura, with a wing span of more than 2½ feet)
rats (e.g., Josephoartigasia, with a conservatively estimated body mass of 750 pounds)
beavers (e.g., Trogontherium, about 7½ feet long)
scorpions (e.g., the sea scorpion Jaekelopterus, estimated at more than 8 feet long)
crabs (e.g., the giant spider crab, with a claw span more than 12 feet)
armadillos (e.g., Glyptodon, up to 13 feet long)
turtles (e.g., Archelon, up to 16 feet long)
fish (e.g., Xiphactinus, 19 feet long)
sloths (e.g., Megatherium, which stood about 20 feet)
worms (e.g., the giant earthworm, up to 22 feet long)
sea cows (e.g., Hydrodamalis, 25 feet or more in length)
crocodiles (e.g., Sarcosuchus, up to 40 feet long)
snakes (e.g., Titanoboa, over 42 feet long)
crustaceans (e.g., supergiant amphipods 10 times larger than those previously discovered)
squid (e.g., Mesonychoteuthis, 50 feet or more in length)
sharks (e.g., Rhincodon, up to 65 feet long)
octopuses with 100 foot long tentacles.21
The fact that scientists have discovered animals with body sizes far greater than those observed today suggests, at least in theory, the possibility of there having also been giant humans in the past, as recorded in the Bible.

Many modern scholars scoff at the idea that there could have been giant warriors in excess of seven and a half feet tall. Consequently, the biblical dimensions of these people have often been downplayed or ignored. However, the biblical data about these people can be trusted because it is in the Word of God. Furthermore, other ancient sources describe giants, and the Anakim are even mentioned as dwelling in the land of Canaan.

Egypt
During the twelfth dynasty of ancient Egypt, traditionally dated from the twentieth to nineteenth centuries B.C.,22 the Egyptians practiced something akin to the modern use of voodoo dolls. A potter would make a clay figurine of an enemy they feared. The figurine had its arms behind its back and the name of the group or its leaders would be written upon it. Sometimes a bowl or block of clay was used for listing the enemies. The figurine or bowl was then smashed in a symbolic way of cursing the enemies so that they could be defeated.

Archaeologists have reconstructed many of these Execration texts (also called Proscription Lists), and some very interesting details have been found concerning the Anakim. This is an example of a text which mentions them:

The Ruler of Iy'anaq, Erum, and all the retainers who are with him; the Ruler of Iy'anaq, Abi-yamimu and all the retainers who are with him; the Ruler of Iy'anaq 'Akirum and the retainers who are with him (emphasis added).23

It should be noted that anaq (i.e., with a q in place of the k) is a common transliteration of the Hebrew word for Anak, עְַנָק (Numbers 13:33).

Another Execration text places the Anakim in the land of Canaan and even mentions the city of Jerusalem.24 The ancient Egyptians also called the inhabitants of the land of Canaan "Shasu." A later text entitled The Craft of the Scribe (c. 1250 BC), which was used to train Egyptian scribes, discusses a Canaanite mountain pass during a past battle.

The face of the pass is dangerous with Shasu, hidden under the bushes. Some of them are 4 or 5 cubits, nose to foot, with wild faces.25

Egyptian cubits were longer than the Hebrew common cubit. At 20.65 inches per Egyptian cubit, the Shasu mentioned in this letter would have measured between 6'10" and 8'7." This description shows that the traditional measurement of Goliath is not as outlandish as many critics believe.

Other Ancient Reports
Nearly every place around the world has legends of giants dwelling in the land. Certainly, one must exercise caution when reading these stories on the Internet since so much of the information online is contrary to the Word of God. For example, a few years ago, pictures of giant skeletons started to appear on websites, but they were clearly doctored (apparently part of a graphic design contest).

Greek and Roman mythology mentions the Titans, Kyklopes (Cyclops), and several other giants.26 Norse mythology contains stories of the Frost giants of Jötunheim. But these records are not limited to European mythologies or only to the ancient past. African and Asian peoples also have legends of giants, as do Native Americans.

For example, in his autobiography, "Buffalo" Bill Cody wrote the following words about a legend recounted to him by members of the Sioux tribe.

It was taught by the wise men of this tribe that the earth was originally peopled by giants, who were fully three times the size of modern men. They were so swift and powerful that they could run alongside a buffalo, take the animal under one arm, and tear off a leg, and eat it as they ran. So vainglorious were they because of their own size and strength that they denied the existence of a Creator. When it lighted, they proclaimed their superiority to the lightning; when it thundered, they laughed.

This displeased the Great Spirit, and to rebuke their arrogance he sent a great rain upon the earth. The valleys filled with water, and the giants retreated to the hills. The water crept up the hills, and the giants sought safety on the highest mountains. Still the rain continued, the waters rose, and the giants, having no other refuge, were drowned.27

Undoubtedly, many of these stories contain exaggerations of the giants' prodigious height and strength. But is it reasonable to automatically reject every one of these traditions, or, like tales of dragons, is there possibly some truth behind the legends, as is often the case? It is interesting that much of giant lore includes descriptions of a flood sent by God (or the gods) to destroy these wicked people. Could it be that while the Bible contains the true history of our past, these groups are simply repeating their own distorted versions of world history prior to and perhaps after the dispersion at Babel?28

Modern Giants
So were all of these giants just people who developed gigantism? Although gigantism may account for some of the ancient giants, this proposed solution falls short of explaining many of the biblical accounts.

Modern gigantism is often caused by abnormalities that lead to excessive production of growth hormone.29 It is highly unlikely that Goliath, the nephilim, Anakim, or most of the other Old Testament giants suffered from such a condition since they were often described as warriors or "mighty men," while modern "giants" are usually awkward, uncoordinated, and endure several physical ailments. There have been some rare cases where the person could accurately be described as a "mighty man."30

Furthermore, modern gigantism is not hereditary, whereas the Bible often describes giants as being the offspring of other giants (e.g., Deuteronomy 9:2; 1 Chronicles 20:6). So the groups known as giants were not simply made up of individuals with the modern form of gigantism.

Giants In The Bible: How Tall Were They?
So just how tall were the various groups of giants in the Bible? Given the discrepancy in the ancient texts about Goliath's height, it is difficult to base our estimate on his dimensions. The Egyptian killed by Benaiah was at least 7'6" (perhaps taller if the common cubit was not being used), but he is not called a giant. The Egyptian document, The Craft of the Scribe, placed the Shasu (Anakim?) between 6'10" and 8'7". They had to be large enough for the Israelites to claim that they looked like grasshoppers in the sight of the giants and for God to compare the height of the Amorites to cedars.

There are two main lines of thought on this subject. One idea looks at the modern understanding of human growth. Our stature is primarily affected by our DNA with some influence from environmental factors, but we seem to be limited by the "square-cube" law.31 For example, let's use my dimensions to see what would happen if I was scaled up to twice my height. This will give us a good example since I am 6'9", and some have argued that King Og of Bashan was as tall as his bed was long (13'6"), which is exactly twice my height. So if we were to double my height, then we would also need to increase my width and depth proportionally to compensate.

This means that, along with my height, both my width and depth would double, so we would need to multiply my weight (about 250 pounds) by a factor of eight. So a person of my proportions at 13'6" would weigh 2000 pounds! Not only is it difficult for us to imagine a person so large, but also when considering the compressive strength of bone,32 we would conclude that Og's skeletal system would be under tremendous stress, and he would be much more likely to suffer broken bones than a normal-sized person, not to mention the dangerous stress placed on his body's other systems.33

meganeuraThe second view is based on three points mentioned above. First, would a 5'6" individual really feel like a "grasshopper" compared to someone who is 7–8 feet tall? Admittedly, this is somewhat subjective, but the contrast seems to require a taller giant. Next, as pointed out in the second footnote, there is a strong comparison of the height and strength of the Amorites to the cedar and oak trees in Amos 2:9. Third, the evidence of other creatures in the fossil record that are far greater than twice the size of their modern counterparts provides support to the idea that the limits imposed by the square-cube law may not be as strict as we imagine them to be. For example, the meganeura is an extinct dragonfly, whose wingspan was greater than 30 inches. The Wikipedia entry (Wikimedia Commons image, right) on this creature states the following:

Controversy has prevailed as to how insects of the Carboniferous period were able to grow so large. The way oxygen is diffused through the insect's body via its tracheal breathing system puts an upper limit on body size, which prehistoric insects seem to have well exceeded.34

While I don't believe in "prehistoric" creatures (since man has been on earth since Day Six, and God has revealed what happened during the first five days in a historical account), the meganeura shows that the size limits of living organisms may be greater than expected. Those holding the second view do not have a problem with the biblical giants exceeding nine feet in height.

Furthermore, it should be pointed out that the square-cube law is accurate when applied to building materials, but it doesn't seem to perfectly relate to biological organisms, although it probably provides some "ballpark" limits. For example, the average house cat is about 30 inches long (head to tail), 9–10 inches tall, and weighs about 11 pounds, while tigers reach 12 feet in length (head to tail), 3 feet in height, and weighs about 500 pounds.35 If we were going to estimate the weight of a 10-foot long, 3-foot tall cat using the square-cube law, based on the dimensions of the average house cat, then the numbers would not match what we see in reality. According to this rule, when we quadruple the length (2.5 feet to 10 feet), then we would need to multiply the weight by 64 (4 x 4 x 4), which means we would expect the weight to be approximately 700 pounds. This is significantly higher than the weight of a tiger of this size.36

This example shows that tigers and house cats do not share the exact same proportions, but this is exactly the point. Both animals belong to the created cat "kind," and the much larger varieties (lions, tigers, etc.) are not perfectly "scaled up" compared to the smaller varieties. If this were the case with giant humans, then perhaps a 13'6" Og isn't out of the realm of possibility, but the notion that some biblical giants were 20–30 feet tall or greater is probably a "stretch."

Conclusion
So which view is accurate? I honestly do not know, but the square-cube law seems to provide some upper limits, so it is unlikely that they reached 20–30 feet or more. However, I do know the Bible clearly teaches that giants existed in the past. Many of them lived in and around the land of Canaan, and Joshua was involved in several battles with them. David and his mighty men killed some Philistine giants. The Egyptians knew about the Anakim and feared them. Finally, cultures from around the world have legends that are often remarkably similar to biblical accounts, including the existence of giants.

The accounts of giants in the Bible are more than just "tall" tales. These enormous people truly existed, and no amount of scoffing or rationalizing by skeptics will change that fact.[/b][/color]

[/size]

[The Barbarian]

The size of a human (or anything strutured like a human) is limited by one fact:
The strength of a bone increases as the square of its length, but the mass increases by the cube of its length.

If there were 12 foot tall anthropoid beings with the abilities of normal humans, they would look as different from us as an elephant differs from a horse.    None of the claimed skeletons come close to that.

[Amo]

The size of a human (or anything strutured like a human) is limited by one fact:
The strength of a bone increases as the square of its length, but the mass increases by the cube of its length.

If there were 12 foot tall anthropoid beings with the abilities of normal humans, they would look as different from us as an elephant differs from a horse.    None of the claimed skeletons come close to that.

Says Barbarian, the self proclaimed god as it were of science, whom we all learn from whenever he speaks. Gee, what about all the giant animals of the past they have found, which look very well close enough to their present much smaller descendants, to be identified as one of them? How does that fit into your above scenario?

https://www.livescience.com/62047-photos-ancient-giant-animals.html

Article at above link includes giant sharks, Ground sloth, Giant cheetah, Short-faced bear, Giant otter, Enormous penguin, Giant kangaroo, Giant dragonfly, Huge ape, and Spike-tooth salmon. If they can look relatively the same, why couldn't we? The above list is most certainly not exhaustive, as I myself have posted many such articles about other animals as well on these boards. 

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/giants-in-the-bible/

Anything from answersingenesis.org can pretty much be dismissed out of hand.  What's the opposite of credibility?  That's what they got.

[Rella]

Anything from answersingenesis.org can pretty much be dismissed out of hand.  What's the opposite of credibility?  That's what they got.

Then try this  one on for size.

It is in a museum.

Huge 36-Million-Year-Old Skull Of Fearsome Marine Monster Discovered In Peru

https://www.ancientpages.com/2022/03/21/huge-36-million-year-old-skull-of-fearsome-marine-monster-discovered-in-peru/

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Then try this  one on for size.

It is in a museum.

Huge 36-Million-Year-Old Skull Of Fearsome Marine Monster Discovered In Peru

It's a skull from an ancient proto-whale.  Kinda cool, but what does it have to do with the existence of human giants?   

[Amo]

Anything from answersingenesis.org can pretty much be dismissed out of hand.  What's the opposite of credibility?  That's what they got.

At least you are somewhat consistent from the "scientific" side of things. Anyone who actually believes the testimony of scripture as it plainly states concerning creation, the flood, and giants has no credibility with you. This is your testimony, is it not?

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Therefore the above scripture is not true either, is it. How can it be? If people who believe what scripture itself simply states, cannot be considered credible, how can the above scripture be considered credible? How many other scriptures therefore must be considered faulty also, which back up said plain testimony? This is the slippery slope of human pride, which constantly seeks to conform God's word to their own ideas and speculations , rather than the other way around. None of these scriptures can mean just what they say, because fallen humanity has determined otherwise. Yet those who have determined otherwise cannot explain the scriptures according to what they believe, therefore the scriptures are either incorrect, or just remain in obscurity. This is the exact opposite testimony scripture provides in the above quoted verses. So be it.

Nevertheless, I ask again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Please do explain the scriptures in accordance with deep time evolution, no flood or one only localized, anode course no giants. What do all the scriptures which testify of these things really mean oh wise ones? Or are they simply fables and lies? Please do tell. Surely if you are so adamantly positive that these scriptures cannot mean what they simply state, you can also explain what they do mean, can't you? Is it not a strange thing, that these wise ones can figure out deep scenarios regarding the past to the tune of billions of years, but have no idea what some of the simplest statements of God's word really mean? Yes it is.

1Co 2:6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Those who claim Creationists cannot be considered part of their evolutionary naturalist "sciences" are somewhat correct. For such cannot discern the things of the spirit, which of course all scriptures are, they are foolishness to them. Are they not? Do they not speak of the creation account being literal, the flood, giants, and other miraculous events as though they are foolishness which is not to be believed as stated? Yes they do, right here on these boards. It should be no surprise that those of the faith of the "natural sciences" cannot discern the spiritual revelations of God's word, which can only be spiritually discerned and understood.

https://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com

Quotes below from link above, emphasis is mine.

Darwin's Theory Of Evolution

Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection

While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time...............

Yes, natural, natural, natural. Not the things of the spirit, but the things of this natural world, according to imaginations and speculations of this natural world, as opposed to those of the Spirit of God and His WORD.

https://www.csueastbay.edu/philosophy/reflections/2004/contents/cindy-chen.html

CHARLES DARWIN: NATURALIST, REVOLUTIONARY, AND FATHER OF EVOLUTION

In studying the history of science, biology is often a matter of special examination. And in investigating the course of this field one major subject of concentration, aside from looking at the greatest contributions made into this area and the scientists that made them, is the history of evolutionary thought. To this matter one will almost always become familiar with Charles Darwin, perhaps the greatest of all contributors. As a naturalist, Darwin was not only responsible for the theory of evolution as we know it today, but also the foundation that biological sciences are based on. His theory of natural selection as a mechanism for change over time in all species of life brought him a lifetime of praise and admiration, in addition to a great deal of criticism. Darwin's theory was met with disapproval in two major areas, the scientific and the social. Most scientists during that era had grown comfortable with the reductionist approach of all events and models being fixed and deterministic, thus Darwin's theory was rejected because it seemed to rely only on chance events and not on pure physical laws. Hence, regardless of whether the characteristics were being favored or not, no one believed that certain "preferred" traits would have a higher possibility of being selected to be inherited more frequently than other "unfavorable" ones. Darwin was also given much criticism in the social realm. Having been opposed to the theory of special creation or creation by design, which was widely accepted during 19th century Britain, Darwin's thoughts were seen as anti-religious and the cause of great debates. In all, to comprehend the complete work of Darwin it is essential to know not only his scientific achievements, but social influences as well........................

Darwin and evolutionists are of the naturalist faith, the natural man, of natural humanity. God's own are of the spiritual faith, and strive to be of spiritual humanity.

1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly

[DaveW]

My granddad summed up Darwin's theory of evolution this way:

Men sprung from monkeys and most of them forgot to spring.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

At least you are somewhat consistent from the "scientific" side of things. Anyone who actually believes the testimony of scripture as it plainly states concerning creation, the flood, and giants has no credibility with you. This is your testimony, is it not?

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

This is as much of your post as I read.  I skimmed a little, and it seems you're still fighting those strawmen.

Once again, I don't care about evolution.  I haven't supported it (or any other scientific theory) once in this thread.  My opinion of Darwin is very low, though that's actually because of his racism.

I only care what Scripture says.  It says God forms things slowly over time, subduing chaos and bringing order bit by bit.  It doesn't say God is a genie who poofs things into existence.

Old Earth does not equal evolution.

Jarrod

[Jaime]

Old earth is the explanation attempt of the inexplicable when juggling the Bible. A long enough time, who knows what could happen, type thing. I don't read the Bible as confirmation of God forming things slowly over time. Anymore than I read the Bible to say that God dried up the Red Sea over eons of time so the Israelites could cross the uncrossable. Chaos to Shalom, absolutely! Over and over again, kind of in more abrupt means than all that gradually.

I have no issue with giant humans. Especially as to scriptures. Without scriptures, it would be mere speculation at best. Kinda like the virgin birth. Without scriptures, it would be ascribed as a myth by non-scripture believers, as we all have heard about or experienced with others.

[Rella]

It's a skull from an ancient proto-whale.  Kinda cool, but what does it have to do with the existence of human giants?   

Nothing, but is certain that if there were any remains from a giant human it is always a scam or con. And was amusing to me that this popped up as this subject is again making its rounds.

The bible talks of giants, and then that idea is ALWAYS knocked down to them just being a little large compared to man as we know him..... Guiness records has The tallest man in medical history for whom there is irrefutable evidence is Robert Pershing Wadlow (USA) (born 6:30 a.m. at Alton, Illinois, USA on 22 February 1918), who when last measured on 27 June 1940, was found to be 2.72 m (8 ft 11.1 in) tall.

But just to churn things up a bit....

There were at one time.... either very old or recently old....  very large animals.

Every once in a while someone will stumble across a skeleton of such and sometimes one will be displayed... ( or parts there of with a mock up of what it would have looked like.)

Those are facts that cannot be denied... only the timing in history of such depending on ones beliefs.

Leaving Adam out of the mix... (I know you will say we cant, but humor me.... for he had to mind the store in the garden of Eden... until he got kicked out) when Genesis starts out saying

Gen 1: 26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 

Gen 3:28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Would this encompass the "dinosaurs" or not? Or are you of the opinion that man who was to have dominion over all things on earth was made after the dinosaur age, and therefore after they had died out?