It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: nfflhome
Being from Texas I clicked on one of the pics in the OP and then went on to try to verify.
I found the article reprinted and posted at another site. They contacted the University of Texas
who admitted the find was true and that the remains had been brought back to Austin.
Guess what, they go on to admit that the skull is missing.
“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).”
Carolyn Spock
Head of Records
Texas Archeological Research Laboratory
The University of Texas at Austin
1 University Station, R7500
Austin TX 78712-0714
greaterancestors.com...
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Elementalist
We have fossils of those large dinosaurs. We even have fossils of small dinosaurs (ostrich-sized and chicken-sized) from that period, too. We even have fossils of small mammals that lived during that time (mouse-like mammals and weasel-sized mammals)...
...but we don't have any large humanoid fossils from that time. Why not?
originally posted by: nfflhome
Being from Texas I clicked on one of the pics in the OP and then went on to try to verify.
I found the article reprinted and posted at another site. They contacted the University of Texas
who admitted the find was true and that the remains had been brought back to Austin.
Guess what, they go on to admit that the skull is missing.
“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).”
Carolyn Spock
Head of Records
Texas Archeological Research Laboratory
The University of Texas at Austin
1 University Station, R7500
Austin TX 78712-0714
greaterancestors.com...
“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.”
originally posted by: randyvs
originally posted by: nfflhome
Being from Texas I clicked on one of the pics in the OP and then went on to try to verify.
I found the article reprinted and posted at another site. They contacted the University of Texas
who admitted the find was true and that the remains had been brought back to Austin.
Guess what, they go on to admit that the skull is missing.
“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).”
Carolyn Spock
Head of Records
Texas Archeological Research Laboratory
The University of Texas at Austin
1 University Station, R7500
Austin TX 78712-0714
greaterancestors.com...
That is one hell of a daming post! And very awesome IMO!
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."
I hope this provides sufficient information.
Carolyn
It would appear that the post-cranial material wasn't out of the ordinary, though definitely robust. No extra digits were noted in Duffen's field form for the burial, though he does say that the "skull seems large" and that he "looks like a large individual to begin with." Goldstein mentions the lack of "knobbing" in the hand bones in his description; I'm sure extra fingers would have been noted.
The unusual can certainly be blown out of proportion; the last paragraph in the newspaper article stating that finds "in Texas are beginning to give weight to the theory that man lived in Texas 40,000 to 45,000 years ago" is fantastical even today.
originally posted by: EndOfDays77
This theory is provable with science
originally posted by: EndOfDays77These are my opinions in a nutshell I'll go where the evidence flows.
originally posted by: micpsi
Because such fossils would have been quickly removed and buried in the vaults of national museums because they disprove the Darwinian myth of the Earth's history.
Just as all giant skeletons were quickly moved from public view during the 19th century.
originally posted by: blacktie
its very likely everything we see and know about today has been around before in larger and smaller sizes
this time "we" are the big cheeses not the dinosaurs and yes we might have shared the planet at one time
originally posted by: aorAki
I'm not surprised The Guardian pokes fun at ATS.
SMH
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Elementalist
We have fossils of those large dinosaurs. We even have fossils of small dinosaurs (ostrich-sized and chicken-sized) from that period, too. We even have fossils of small mammals that lived during that time (mouse-like mammals and weasel-sized mammals)...
...but we don't have any large humanoid fossils from that time. Why not?
Yes, and I try to 'deny ignorance'. I may not always succeed, and I certainly have my failings, but it is something I generally strive for. I certainly cannot speak for all members....
originally posted by: BlessedLore
Op, thank you for the post and link, it was refreshing to see all the ancient world stonework detailing the slave life to the giants pre-flood on the egypt and older ones. Most I knew about, but the multiple sailor accounts on the link were new to me and quite refreshing. I pray God keep you strong and continue to bless you in all ways and watch over us all his elect and guide us in his ways that we may be a blessing to many in the coming times in Jesus name I pray Amen.
originally posted by: randyvs
I to would like to thank the OP for eye opener.