Smithsonian destroying more evidence of alternate human evolution?

originally posted by: Marduk
Did you find a single giant bone yet ?

It's been 'hiding' in the post at the top of page 2...

Here, let me help you with those blinders so you can see clearly.

Isn't that SO much better?

I thought so...

EDIT: I'm sure it was just another one of those pesky Smithsonian Jedi mind tricks...

Evolutionary Science: [calmly, smoothly, head moving side to side; indicating no..] These aren’t the giants you’re looking for.

Citizen: [trancelike] “These aren’t the giants I’m looking for.”

Evolutionary Science: You can go about your business.

Citizen: “ I can go about my business”.

Evolutionary Science:” Move along”.

Citizen: “ Moving along, moving along.”

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: Marduk
Did you find a single giant bone yet ?

It's been 'hiding' in the post at the top of page 2...

Here, let me help you with those blinders so you can see clearly.

Isn't that SO much better?

I thought so...

Wow Evidence provided by Michael Tellinger

is that the same Michael Tellinger who was exposed as a fraudster on CNN ?




Why, yes, yes it is...

perhaps that's the same Michael Tellinger that Jason Colavito discusses here as well

Tellinger’s ideas are unsupportable even by the loose standards of ancient astronaut idiocy.

www.jasoncolavito.com...

As you say, the blinkers are out, maybe you could take them off and smell the coffee

a reply to: spookysully

I clicked on your link and the page was shut down, but I'm curious to know what your talking about. What are they keeping from us?

a reply to: Marduk

First you cited Snopes and now CNN as well?

SERIOUSLY?

I'm with Sally, NOT drinking the KoolAid...

These people, it turns out, are operating from what I called The Gullible Mind. It is a psychological processing malfunction that filters out information based on its source rather than its integrity. People who operate from The Gullible Mind tend to have misplaced trust in governments, institutions, mainstream news networks, doctors, scientists or anyone who wears the garb of apparent authority.

But how does this work inside their heads? It's an interesting process. Gullible Mind people do believe it is possible for a government (or institution) to lie; but they believe that governments, institutions and doctors choose NOT to lie even when it would serve their own self interests to do so. Follow this carefully, because this is the fascinating part. These Gullible Mind people effectively believe that even though a government official could lie about something, they would never actually do so.

The gullible mind explained

originally posted by: Murgatroid
a reply to: Marduk

First you cited Snopes and now CNN as well?

This from the guy who cites the bible and Michael Tellinger, what happened, Sitchin die or something ?

Also you happily dismissed an hour long expose into Tellinger without watching it, those blinkers must be so tight they hurt

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: HumberWarrior
Why? Why would the Smithsonian et al go to such lengths to keep archaeology that doesn't fit from the masses.

It's actually quite simple once you connect a couple of dots...

The TPTB's CEO is Lucifer.

Why do they intentionally do this you may ask? Because the archeological findings would prove the Biblical account of creation, and they can't as easily deceive the world into believing the lies we have all been taught. www.wearesmrt.com...

"The express aim of the Order was to abolish Christianty, and overturn all civil Government." ~ John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy

Ultimately, the New World Order is about replacing the rule of God with the rule of Lucifer. That's why "God" has become a dirty word.

www.henrymakow.com...

O.......k........?

They have in their possession archaeology that proves the Biblical account of creation. The whole 7 day thing?

Or do they have in their possession archaeology that proves the existence of giant humans which may very well be the Nephilim. Which may lend weight to the Biblical account (of the Nephilim) but doesn't prove the Biblical account of creation in its entirety as such.

I actually want to believe in the giants as they are present in many cultures oral and esoteric traditions. Because a race of giants feature in the Bible it doesn't necessarily follow that everything else in the Bible is true.

Remember texts have been edited, wholesale manufactured and interpreted to suit the various religious leaders agendas over the millennia.

originally posted by: Marduk
what happened, Sitchin die or something ?

I believe he did...

He had just as much credibility as the Smithsonian BTW...

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: Marduk
what happened, Sitchin die or something ?

I believe he did...

He had just as much credibility as the Smithsonian BTW...

The Smithsonian of the 1920s, which hid all the giant bones, or the modern Smithsonian ?

Yanno, I could post something which shows how fake the original claim to giant bones is, which proves there was nothing to hide, but I'd like to draw a few more of you fringe believers into making absolute statements to the contrary first, so we can all have a laugh at you later

So anything else you'd like to claim about the Smithsonian without evidence
go right ahead...

originally posted by: HumberWarrior
I actually want to believe in the giants as they are present in many cultures oral and esoteric traditions. Because a race of giants feature in the Bible it doesn't necessarily follow that everything else in the Bible is true.

Remember texts have been edited, wholesale manufactured and interpreted to suit the various religious leaders agendas over the millennia.

Says who, Snopes?

Why do you believe that the Bible was tampered with?

Manuscript evidence for the New Testament is remarkable, far surpassing that which exists for any other ancient book. And those who work with these ancient copies (called "textual critics") are convinced that they have been able to recover a Greek New Testament which is virtually identical to the original.

This evidence does not prove that the Bible is the word of God. But it does demonstrate conclusively that the Bible you have is the same which was first written by its authors. When Teabing (the Da Vinci Code's "historian") asserts, "History has never had a definitive version of the book" and claims that scholars cannot confirm the authenticity of the Bible, he's simply wrong. Is the Bible true?

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
...the manuscripts used to compile the KJV are still in the british museum. that means that these original texts are available to check on the good editors of the KJV and other version's editors. Furthermore in the case of the old testament because of the nature of hebrew every line has a checksum. it cannot be edited or typo'ed without it showing up as a checksum error and of course things like ancient fragmentary copies of isaiah show practically no divergence from our modern copies of it.

Originally posted by stupid girl
The Bible everyone reads now is not edited by the "illuminati". That is a major FAIL. The Masoretic Text is true to the original Hebrew. And we have copious texts in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew of the New Testament. In fact, it is probably the most verified composite of ancient text in the history of mankind. When you have a gazillion copies of the same damn thing written, translated & copied over the course of hundreds of years, that makes it fairly easy to glean a base-sourced original context.

The "illuminati" as you say, didn't get their grubby paws into the mix until the 4th century AD when the Vulgate was done. Unless you count all their gnostic efforts in the first few centuries up to that point.

a reply to: Marduk

So you think hundreds of news papers reporting the findings at the time just straight, flat out lied to the public for no reason?????? I don't think so, so therefore the claim has validity.

a reply to: Marduk

Sitchin die or something ?

I'm about to believe in time travel, what year are you posting from?

originally posted by: NaughtyLibrarian
a reply to: Marduk

So you think hundreds of news papers reporting the findings at the time just straight, flat out lied to the public for no reason?????? I don't think so, so therefore the claim has validity.

So the sensationalist mainstream media of the day was valid but CNN is not?

This is the original news article from the excavation of your "Giants", you'll note though, that the word giant doesn't feature anywhere in it...

There's a pretty good scientific explanation of all the details here
www.andywhiteanthropology.com...

But I wouldn't expect you giant believers to read it, its evidence after all

originally posted by: DelMarvel
So the sensationalist mainstream media of the day was valid but CNN is not?

In order for the agenda behind the MSM to work, it MUST contain some elements of truth, just like any other disinformation operation.

Good disinfo agents ALWAYS mix good info in with the bad.

The most effective deception is truth combined with a lie.

Disinformation and rat poison are a lot alike that way.

To be effective, they both must look, taste, and smell like the real thing and contain some elements of truth.

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: DelMarvel
So the sensationalist mainstream media of the day was valid but CNN is not?

In order to be effective, any disinformation operation MUST contain elements of truth.

Also, In order for the agenda behind the MSM to work, it MUST contain some elements of truth, just like any other disinformation operation.

Good disinfo agents ALWAYS mix good info in with the bad.

The most effective deception is truth combined with a lie.

Disinformation and rat poison are a lot alike that way.

To be effective, they both must look, taste, and smell like the real thing and contain some elements of truth.

so you're positing that there are disinfo agents trying to cover up an archaeological dig from 90 years ago...
I thought I was paranoid

photography is not a new ability and photos have been published many times in newspapers and magazines about giants, hidden-secret underground "caverns", undersea domed objects etc , dont call everything 'different' a hoax by todays media

originally posted by: Marduk
so you're positing that there are disinfo agents trying to cover up an archaeological dig from 90 years ago...
I thought I was paranoid

Considering the fact that you have been believing what the MSM says for at least 10 years, that's completely understandable.

Most of us don't have that much faith.

I firmly believe that the people behind this mess are traceable all the way back to the Babylonian era.

Many believe that they can be traced clear back to the garden.

The Illuminati hierarchy is a VERY covert satanic cult which completely dominates the mainstream complex.

They have been at this for a very long time and have become extremely proficient at covering up their tracks.

"The illuminati started long before 1776, It has it's roots in the mystery religions which the knights templar perpetuated. In Nimrod's time, Semiramus brought back the mystery religions which were from before the time of Noah. The Illuminati was just a different name by which these same entities exsisted. They can change their name a thousand times, but the same entities run it."

Illuminati Roots

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: Marduk
so you're positing that there are disinfo agents trying to cover up an archaeological dig from 90 years ago...
I thought I was paranoid

Considering the fact that you have been believing what the MSM says for at least 10 years, that's completely understandable.

Most of us don't have that much faith.

I firmly believe that the people behind this mess are traceable all the way back to the Babylonian era.

Many believe that they can be traced clear back to the garden.

The Illuminati hierarchy is a VERY covert satanic cult which completely dominates the mainstream complex.

They have been at this for a very long time and have become extremely proficient at covering up their tracks.

"The illuminati started long before 1776, It has it's roots in the mystery religions which the knights templar perpetuated. In Nimrod's time, Semiramus brought back the mystery religions which were from before the time of Noah. The Illuminati was just a different name by which these same entities exsisted. They can change their name a thousand times, but the same entities run it."

Illuminati Roots

Its odd, as I have been studying Mesopotamia for about 20 years, what were the illuminati called back then, perhaps I've heard of them ?

btw, you do realise that the OP which you are supporting with your conspiracy theory has been proven completely fake right ?

originally posted by: Marduk
btw, you do realise that the OP which you are supporting with your conspiracy theory has been proven completely fake right ?

Let me guess, Snopes?

originally posted by: Marduk
Its odd, as I have been studying Mesopotamia for about 20 years, what were the illuminati called back then, perhaps I've heard of them ?

They were referred to in ancient times as the Brotherhood of the Snake, AKA the Brotherhood of the Dragon...

To prevent a derail, see here for more:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

There are 2 giants on display somewhere in South America. They were a king and queen. As far as snopes, I caught them in a lie years ago and will never trust them again. My elderly father is a genius scientist, retired. It is my understanding that if there are giants in the equation, Darwins theory is atomatically false for some reason. If we are just advanced animals and not spiritual beings in flesh bodies, then there is no God, and thus no God given rights. Therefore Darwinisim must be proven to be correct at all costs, as there has been times, and will be time again when large scale of these animals must be slaughtered, and the population brought under control, to save the planet. The guide stones will direct you to the correct number.

It is about control. It is about money. It always has been.