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 SLAYER69
reply to post by Hanslune
Now I'm not saying they are "Giants" nor do I agree with the below linked thread premise but it does address a "height" difference. If these crossbreed/hybrids were taller than average for the period [more so than the rest of the people in the region] it would have been reflected in their art IMO [In theory]. There is no way of knowing how "short" the shorter people were. They could have been on average 5'+.
Ancient forearm bone from Tall Man found at archaeological site in Okinawa:
Researchers have unearthed an ancient forearm bone from the Mabuni Hantabaru archeological site in Itoman, Okinawa Prefecture, believed to be from a Jomon period male roughly 169 centimeters tall -- much taller than the average for the period.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/10ac8d91caf6.jpg[/atsimg]
Also wasn't Lord Pakal said to be rather tall compared to the average height of the people?
He is often referenced as such. But I've never found [Maybe you could help me out here] found out exactly how tall he really was. Again, I'm not saying he was a "Giant" just taller than average for the period. Also he shows many facial attributes that were discussed in the OP.
Here is an example of his mummy and mask.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/53f9e4a579fd.jpg[/atsimg]
keeping with the premise of this thread they had a rather unique way of portraying themselves. Again, Sloping forehead, Slight brow ridge, Larger than average nose and a weak chin etc.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a2d1071a166e.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c48a0183cb8b.jpg[/atsimg]
So from looking at it from this perspective they needn't have been "Giants" per say, just taller than the average person couple with increase in strength. Neanderthal on average was shorter than modern man.edit on 1-9-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by steveknows
That's all recorded history.
What we are contemplating are a possible "prehistoric" remnant memory or a possible remnant population.
edit on 9-9-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Droogie
Slayer69
Your theory seems to somewhat be supported by a University of Arizona geneticist Michael Hammer et.al. They say that there is DNA evidence of "archaic" humans interbreeding with anatomically modern humans somewhere in Africa during the last 20-60 thousand years. Furthermore, they transferred small amounts of genetic material to their offspring who are alive today.
If you'd like to read more about it, I'll provide a couple of articles for you:
Ancient humans were mixing it up
Evolution's past is modern human's present
I hope you find it helpful.
Originally posted by rigel4
edit on 9-9-2011 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SLAYER69
Yeah or that too.
Originally posted by benrl
I was just watching a special today on the great apes, it was talking about their strength, how one could flip a family sedan.
My first thought was "man what could humans accomplish if we where that strong"
and then I saw this thread today, never considered that maybe it wasn't homo sapiens building all the big monuments in the past.
Ive always thought that 250,000 years of modern man, and who knows how many more variants in the past, that we are the first to get organized? never made sense to me.
S&Fedit on 13-9-2011 by benrl because: (no reason given)