Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BorisBoris

Are giant human skeletons real?

Recommended Posts

Looks like your link requires a subscription to read the article.  Here's an alternate resource:

https://www.ancient-code.com/the-greatest-smithsonian-cover-up-the-giant-skeletons-of-wisconsin/

I've seen versions of this story over the years and I don't know if it's just another fictional conspiracy theory or not.  Hard to imagine the motivation for such a coverup, except I suppose selling newspapers.

Edited by Huckleberry of Yore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the date of that article 2/11/1902?  Any new information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

Looks like your link requires a subscription to read the article.  Here's an alternate resource:

https://www.ancient-code.com/the-greatest-smithsonian-cover-up-the-giant-skeletons-of-wisconsin/

I've seen versions of this story over the years and I don't know if it's just another fictional conspiracy theory or not.  Hard to imagine the motivation for such a coverup, except I suppose selling newspapers.

From that link: "Graham Hancock explains it pretty well in his book..."

So, complete unadulterated nonsense then. 

Quote

False

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/giant-human-skeleton-photographs/

 

Quote

The National Geographic Society has not discovered ancient giant humans, despite rampant reports and pictures.

The hoax began with a doctored photo and later found a receptive online audience

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/skeleton-giant-photo-hoax/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Strange said:

So, complete unadulterated nonsense then. 

Probably.  I thought it unfortunate the author deviated into specifics of crane technology, but I provided link so that you can read the arguably unrelated NYT article referenced by the OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

Probably.  I thought it unfortunate the author deviated into specifics of crane technology, but I provided link so that you can read the arguably unrelated NYT article referenced by the OP.

It is a bit bizarre of the NYT to put a 1902 article behind a paywall. I wonder if they still have copyright on it?

23 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

That's the point I think.  Discoveries of giant skeletons were made prior to the 20's or so and have been scrubbed by a conspiracy.

It is incredible that the conspiracy is so powerful, and runs so deep, that all the evidence has been destroyed or concealed and yet a few sad guys on Youtube know all about it. Fascinating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Strange said:

It is a bit bizarre of the NYT to put a 1902 article behind a paywall. I wonder if they still have copyright on it?

Not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure the answer is no.  Consequently, I believe you can acquire an original copy and republish it to you heart's content.  But apparently the NYT has gone to the trouble of scanning their old editions and put them up for subscription based viewing. 

A bit off topic:

Coincidentally years ago I had the idea of scanning old papers and putting them on a website, even purchased some old out-of-copyright NYTs and some Civil War era editions.  I had trouble with OCR software and abandoned the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Strange said:

is a bit bizarre of the NYT to put a 1902 article behind a paywall. I wonder if they still have copyright on it?

NYT is paywalling everything on their portal, whether or not it’s copyrighted. Is the only way they can survive in new media environment. Want to read stuff on our page? You need to become a member (though they do offer temporary memberships for free, so payment isn’t necessarily a constraint for those lacking funds for fees)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one Russian research, they found skeletons in Egypt and Syria 2005. http://www.guillaume-delaage.com/en/the-giants-and-the-origin-of-mankind-part-1-history/

Professor Muldashev is famous ophtalmologist (translate https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%B2,_%D0%AD%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82_%D0%A0%D0%B8%D1%84%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87) and also interested in archaeology/esotericism

Edited by BorisBoris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BorisBoris said:

Here is one Russian research, they found skeletons in Egypt and Syria

Why are the only references to this on the blogs of conspiracy theorists?

No scientific reports? No actual skeletons? Just faked photos and made up stories.

Come on, you are not falling for this, are you?

3 minutes ago, BorisBoris said:

Professor Muldashev is famous ophtalmologist

That's what we need: an ophthalmologist. None of these so-called "archeologists".

4 minutes ago, BorisBoris said:

and also interested in ... esotericism

Well, there you go then. Any remaining plausibility don the drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made the mistake of following those two links and don't recommend them.  Still, I don't see snopes or anyone else following up on the legitimacy or the claims in the NYT 1902 article.  I found nothing relevant by searching, so for now I presume subsequent investigation revealed a hoax or maybe the bones turned out to be non-human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BorisBoris said:

This is Abel's Tomb in Damascus, 6m long 

Apart from the fact that YouTube is not a reliable source of information(*), why would the existence of a large sarcophagus be evidence of anything? It is probably empty, especially as it is claimed to contain the remains of someone who only exists in myth.

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

Although I have doubts about Wikipedia, at least it has references for its sources.

 

(*) Especially a Russian news channel (not noted for their honesty). And especially one sponsored by the Russian government (the less said, the better).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BorisBoris said:

And what about this? 

It is in the Daily Mail. I am not even going to bother reading it. You might as well use The Simpsons or Spongebob Squarepants as a news source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're being a bit harsh, Strange.
The Daily Mail is the only credible news source for anything Harry/Meghan or Kim/Kanye related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.