Giants existed -NYTIMES PROOF

Excellent info. Thanks for posting.

How/where did you find these articles?

I was investigating the case to write an article in my blog and found this info, theres a lot of places that talk about it, see this also if you have interest in this field:

BUMP THE TRUTH!!!

The truth deserves 3 stars, ahahahah, shame on you human race, shame on you...

the pc crowd and tptb wish they could make that go away. lol

C`mon guys, can you?

BUMP!!!

1.) Giants existing wouldn't disprove Evolution at all. Evolution explains diversity. Only uneducated idiots confuse Evolution with either Abiogenesis or Atheism.

2.) Those reports are from an era where "community reports" by local eccentrics where taken at face value because they intrigued a gullible public. These reports have all since been debunked because there are no such skeletons found in any such museum. Another perfect example of this was the so-called Roswell crash that turned out to be nothing more than Project Mogul, not an alien spacecraft.

agreed...it is like Jew holocaust whining

[link to balder.org]

Agreed...to a point.

1) No?
So how would you explain them in the evolution chart?

2) Says who?
you?
And who are you?
More than the NYTimes and the discovery channel?

And by the way, did you know that the matematical probability of your beloved theory is less than 0,1%?

So who is the idiot?

Last Edited by 3373 on 01/14/2014 07:00 AM

And you cant find the skeletons because goverments hide the truth to fools that believe in a theory that doesnt have proofs to validate its claims!

Show me proof of any species that change to another species?
Yeah, thats right there`s not even one, but in this case evolutionists dont care the museum cant show them proof...

Last Edited by 3373 on 01/14/2014 06:51 AM

Only liberals swallow the theory of evolution because they have a lower level of intelligence. If the had any brains at all they would see that one organism can not change into another anymore than my Ford Ranger can change into a Chevy Silverado.

Articles like this are great proof that evolution was nothing more than something the liberals invented to discount creation.

Agreed. They use the excuse that over millions of years the organisms changed. LOL!

Let me make an analogy here. If you walk into an automotive wrecking yard and see vehicles there from the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's, and 2010's, there is obvious evolution of automotive technology. However, the evolution happened due to the design and planning of engineers. The cars didn't change from one design to another by themselves. The same holds true for humans. If the fossil record is true, it was because someone designed and planned those creatures.

The truth is hidden away to project the powers that be explanation of life , we evolved from monkeys and there is no God . The atheists will ignore all these evidences because it creates a moral dilemma for them , The bible intrude , so God exists and we have rules to live by , with many that means no pounding their boyfriends in the kiesta , that would be ass for you dimwits

Chickens of several meters ?

Chickens sticking uncomfertable out of every opening...oh whited out.

Giants are true!

there is more truth to it, op, namely the first two world wars were fought in order to cover it!

OK, heres another newspaper article from 1940, here you can see that this was CONFIRMED BY UNIVERSITY RECORDS:

[link to greaterancestors.com]

SO WHY THE COVERUP?

WAKE UP !!!

From the above link (my emphasis):

[snip]

The universities response: . . . .

“The particular specimen that you ask about, the large skull found at the Morhiss site in 1939, is noted in our paperwork as missing from the collection (and has been for some time, not appearing in inventories undertaken since the collection arrived at TARL).”

Physical anthropologist Marcus S. Goldstein says in his manuscript, “A couple of unusual crania were unearthed at Morhiss Mound in Victoria County. One of these, although much mended and its base quite warped, is nevertheless obviously a skull of extraordinary size, in many respects larger than any yet reported. The bones of this individual do not indicate excessive stature, but they are remarkably robust and plainly point to a very muscular man. The possibility of abnormality, perhaps an endocrine disturbance, arose immediately, but the largeness of the skull seems to be symmetrical, the hand bones do not show the ‘knobbing’ typical of acromegaly, and stature was evidently in no wise unusual. Moreover, other crania from the same site approximate the skull in question. Hence, it is my opinion that this exceptionally large skull was not the result of endocrine pathology.”

So, it seems to me as though the skull was a specific abnormality that did not extend to the rest of the frame.

go on

So see my emphasis above in you quote:
Lets see:
-EXCEPTIONALLY LARGE SKULL with EXTRAODINARY SIZE-CHEK
-NOT RESULT OF ENDOCRINE PATHOLOGY -CHECK

But he also says:

-The bones of this individual do not indicate excessive stature

yeah except the skull...TOTTAL CONTRADICTION!

SO HOW IS NOT A GIANT?
A large skull with no enDocrine pathology but with a small body, right?

- CRANIA MISSING FROM THE COLLECTION- CHECK, HOW CONVINIENT...

TOTTAL COVER UP!!!

Last Edited by 3373 on 01/14/2014 09:28 AM

anyone who didnt already know this is a fool. the evidence has been around us the whole time, they just hide it like everything else.

Great finds!

This does not agree with the biblical creation stories, please report to the nearest stake for a burning. (/end sarcasm)

5 Stars for you

Genesis 6

Last Edited by 3373 on 01/14/2014 09:30 AM

Bigfoots.