Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Digest Number 1255

Expand Messages
  • Rick Osmon
    Angus McGaskil was 7 9 , born in Scotland, lived in Halifax, NS, and his skeleton is on display next to that of General Tom Thumb , who was 22 tall. Both
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 5, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Angus McGaskil was 7'9", born in Scotland, lived in Halifax, NS, and his skeleton is on display next to that of "General Tom Thumb", who was 22" tall. Both those men appeared together in P T Barnum's circus in life. McGaskil was not a "pituitary" or "medical" giant, he was just that big and born of "normal" parents. 
      Columbus' log tells of the Caribs coming out to meet the tiny fleet in ocean-going canoes longer than the Pinta and manned at a hundred per canoe. The Caribs, according to Columbus, were (paraphrased) at least a full head taller than the tallest of Columbus' sailors. 

      Alan King Moorehead, the grand daddy of "scientific" archaeology recorded several 7 footers from mounds. Funkhauser did too. The New York Times ran a story (no longer in their archives, incidentally, though it was in there 3 years ago) describing the giant, 8' 3" skeleton that was on (newly, then) display at the Peabody Museum in March 1891.

      TED Talks needs to get some new researchers.

      On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 11:31 AM, <ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

      2 New Messages

      Digest #1255
      1a
      Fwd: Tall Skeleton discussion by "Ted Sojka" tedsojka
      1b
      Re: Fwd: Tall Skeleton discussion by "Susan English" beldingenglish

      Messages

      Fri Jan 4, 2013 1:07 pm (PST) . Posted by:

      "Ted Sojka" tedsojka

      There is some more information on this topic I have been sharing with
      a researcher in Oregon who has sent some good sources for

      Begin forwarded message:

      > From: Micah Ewers contact.micah@yahoo.com>
      > Date: January 4, 2013 1:12:00 PM CST
      > To: Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com>
      > Subject: Re: Tall Skeletons
      >
      > Hi Ted,
      >
      > The bones from the French giant were found at the bottom of a bronze
      > age burial tumulus in the cemetery of Castelnau-le-Lez just north of
      > Montpellier. Prof. de Lapouge believed the giant was from the
      > Neolithic period, perhaps even earlier. easily between 5,000 and
      > 10,000 years old, probably older, because the bones are reported to
      > have been fossilized and nearly crumbled when exposed, yet were
      > taken out entire and preserved and studied for several years at
      > Montpellier University. Other giants were reported in news accounts
      > at and around Montpellier also from prehistoric cemeteries, so this
      > leads me to believe there were more than just one giant in that
      > vicinity.
      >
      > I tend to think there is a link, tentative link, between these
      > dolmen culture people and the mound and stone builders of New
      > England. That there were some giants among them may be a
      > coincidence, also it may be more than coincidence. Most skeletons
      > found in mounds were not gigantic, but quite a number were, it may
      > have been royal or warrior class like you say-- kind of like our
      > professional wrestlers, or athletes, only even bigger.
      >
      > I suspect DNA already exists on some of these large skeletons found
      > in America and Europe. Smithsonian, and national museums in Spain
      > and France probably do have some of that info.
      >
      > Cheers,
      >
      > Micah
      >
      > --- On Fri, 1/4/13, Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com> wrote:
      >
      > From: Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com>
      > Subject: Re: Tall Skeletons
      > To: "Micah Ewers" contact.micah@yahoo.com>
      > Cc: "ted sojka" tedsojka@mchsi.com>
      > Date: Friday, January 4, 2013, 8:05 AM
      >
      > Was there any cultural remains with those skeletons in France to
      > give any information on how old they might be?
      >
      > I am reminded of the fact that there is a video on line of Dennis
      > Stanford from the Smithsonian speaking about Solutrian points being
      > found off the East Coast and off shore at the mouths of what were
      > rivers, now inundated by oceans. One of the surprising finds was a
      > point with mammoth bones that was dredged up by an oyster dredge on
      > a sand bank miles off shore. One of the reasons it has taken so
      > long to find evidence of travel from East to West across the ice
      > that many years ago when the sea was 200 feet lower, is that they
      > are all covered by water. There is a nearby site still on land
      > along a riverbank that is being studied that has Solutrian type
      > points and lithic technology.
      >
      > It would be a stretch to connect the tall men of France with tall
      > men of indigenous people on this continent for any scientist, but it
      > does make one wonder. Too bad that those old accounts mention the
      > bones turning to dust when exposed to air. I wonder if the dust
      > should it be found in a new dig could be tested for DNA?
      >
      > Ted
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > On Dec 24, 2012, at 9:35 PM, Micah Ewers wrote:
      >>
      >> Hi Ted.
      >>
      >> I usually go by a half dozen pseudonyms on the internet though. lol.
      >>
      >> That's cool about the prof. from Toledo. I agree with her and Mr.
      >> Ross Hamilton's theory that these were a special warrior class, or
      >> royal class of great stature. It's possible a skeleton might
      >> lengthen a few inches in a grave, but there are so many reports of
      >> six-six, seven foot, seven - six, eight foot, even nine, I mean,
      >> that's huge. I wanna think it's all an exaggeration, but some times
      >> the femur measurements, or skull sizes are given. There are even
      >> exceptional reports of people taller than ten and eleven
      >> feet...hard as that is to fathom. The best hard scientific data I
      >> have ever found for a man over ten feet tall was the giant from
      >> Castelnau, France. I unearthed that report from archives in August
      >> of 2009, and it's now all over the net. The bones of that
      >> individual has led to the tallest height estimate (3 m, 50) I have
      >> ever come across in a peer reviewed journal, albeit it was 1890,
      >> and people didn't know as much about anatomy as they do today.
      >> Still, the measurements of the bones were all double the normal
      >> length and width; a 16 cm circ. femur mid shaft for instance. Kind
      >> of scary to think about a person even approximately that tall, and
      >> broad. There were at least a dozen other giants reported in that
      >> region in subsequent press accounts, so I don't think all of these
      >> stories were side show hoaxes.
      >>
      >> That's amazing info about the field plowed. I imagine a lot still
      >> has not been excavated. You wonder what the universities have
      >> collected over the years.
      >>
      >> I'd love to go visit out there in Iowa some time. Maybe if I can
      >> raise some money in the poor economy, I'll do it. ;) Sounds like an
      >> awesome place.
      >>
      >> Thanks for all that info. If you or your colleagues have any
      >> questions feel free and ask.
      >>
      >> Happy Holidays.
      >>
      >> Micah
      >>
      >> --- On Mon, 12/24/12, Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com> wrote:
      >

      Fri Jan 4, 2013 2:01 pm (PST) . Posted by:

      "Susan English" beldingenglish

      Ted, all three pieces of correspondence by Micah Ewers and yourself within your last Post were very interesting. I am glad you shared this discussion with Ancient Waterways members.

      I too always wondered if the reportedly many evidences of 'giant&#39; human bones turning to dust are still stored somewhere and could be carbon-dated.

      Conversing on the phone with AWS member Jim Scherz recently, I mentioned the current "TEDx: Jim Vieira on Stone Builders, Mound Builders and the Giants of Ancient America" matter.
      Dr. Scherz reminded me again there was evidence uncovered and much data written of giants among the ancient Mountbuilders of the Wisconsin, Mississippi Riverways. We have old Posts here that members sent long ago that support this. Should not be difficult to Search our site for (though archives apparently no longer exist at YahooGroups prior to three or four years ago).
      Otherwise, s/b easily retrievable if the Posts' Subject headings were specific. As your last "Tall skeleton discussion" Post was, Ted.

      I emailed Ancient American editor, Larry Gallant in reply to his recent group post that I hope you, Ted, and others here...hopefully Micah Ewers included, will find time and engage in a little voluntary fieldwork (or investigate old historic texts) within their areas of residency or travel.

      The Minnesota DNR newsletter I shared with this group earlier in the month about bones unearthed a decade or so ago of giant saber tooth cats and beavers the size of bears reportedly 13000-26000 years old found in S. Minnesota's glacial drift area.... Whether these creatures developed over time d/t climate, oxygen content, or other factors...why does anyone even balk at the idea that human beings living within the same time, space, and conditions in that area could also be of what we contemporaries call superhuman, giant stature?

      Susan English -- sent from my iPad

      On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com> wrote:

      > There is some more information on this topic I have been sharing with a researcher in Oregon who has sent some good sources for
      >
      >
      > Begin forwarded message:
      >
      >> From: Micah Ewers contact.micah@yahoo.com>
      >> Date: January 4, 2013 1:12:00 PM CST
      >> To: Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com>
      >> Subject: Re: Tall Skeletons
      >>
      >> Hi Ted,
      >>
      >> The bones from the French giant were found at the bottom of a bronze age burial tumulus in the cemetery of Castelnau-le-Lez just north of Montpellier. Prof. de Lapouge believed the giant was from the Neolithic period, perhaps even earlier. easily between 5,000 and 10,000 years old, probably older, because the bones are reported to have been fossilized and nearly crumbled when exposed, yet were taken out entire and preserved and studied for several years at Montpellier University. Other giants were reported in news accounts at and around Montpellier also from prehistoric cemeteries, so this leads me to believe there were more than just one giant in that vicinity.
      >>
      >> I tend to think there is a link, tentative link, between these dolmen culture people and the mound and stone builders of New England. That there were some giants among them may be a coincidence, also it may be more than coincidence. Most skeletons found in mounds were not gigantic, but quite a number were, it may have been royal or warrior class like you say-- kind of like our professional wrestlers, or athletes, only even bigger.
      >>
      >> I suspect DNA already exists on some of these large skeletons found in America and Europe. Smithsonian, and national museums in Spain and France probably do have some of that info.
      >>
      >> Cheers,
      >>
      >> Micah
      >>
      >> --- On Fri, 1/4/13, Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com> wrote:
      >>
      >> From: Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com>
      >> Subject: Re: Tall Skeletons
      >> To: "Micah Ewers" contact.micah@yahoo.com>
      >> Cc: "ted sojka" tedsojka@mchsi.com>
      >> Date: Friday, January 4, 2013, 8:05 AM
      >>
      >> Was there any cultural remains with those skeletons in France to give any information on how old they might be?
      >>
      >> I am reminded of the fact that there is a video on line of Dennis Stanford from the Smithsonian speaking about Solutrian points being found off the East Coast and off shore at the mouths of what were rivers, now inundated by oceans. One of the surprising finds was a point with mammoth bones that was dredged up by an oyster dredge on a sand bank miles off shore. One of the reasons it has taken so long to find evidence of travel from East to West across the ice that many years ago when the sea was 200 feet lower, is that they are all covered by water. There is a nearby site still on land along a riverbank that is being studied that has Solutrian type points and lithic technology.
      >>
      >> It would be a stretch to connect the tall men of France with tall men of indigenous people on this continent for any scientist, but it does make one wonder. Too bad that those old accounts mention the bones turning to dust when exposed to air. I wonder if the dust should it be found in a new dig could be tested for DNA?
      >>
      >> Ted
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> On Dec 24, 2012, at 9:35 PM, Micah Ewers wrote:
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> Hi Ted.
      >>>
      >>> I usually go by a half dozen pseudonyms on the internet though. lol.
      >>>
      >>> That's cool about the prof. from Toledo. I agree with her and Mr. Ross Hamilton's theory that these were a special warrior class, or royal class of great stature. It's possible a skeleton might lengthen a few inches in a grave, but there are so many reports of six-six, seven foot, seven - six, eight foot, even nine, I mean, that's huge. I wanna think it's all an exaggeration, but some times the femur measurements, or skull sizes are given. There are even exceptional reports of people taller than ten and eleven feet...hard as that is to fathom. The best hard scientific data I have ever found for a man over ten feet tall was the giant from Castelnau, France. I unearthed that report from archives in August of 2009, and it's now all over the net. The bones of that individual has led to the tallest height estimate (3 m, 50) I have ever come across in a peer reviewed journal, albeit it was 1890, and people didn't know as much about anatomy as they do today. Still, the measurements of the bones were all double the normal length and width; a 16 cm circ. femur mid shaft for instance. Kind of scary to think about a person even approximately that tall, and broad. There were at least a dozen other giants reported in that region in subsequent press accounts, so I don't think all of these stories were side show hoaxes.
      >>>
      >>> That's amazing info about the field plowed. I imagine a lot still has not been excavated. You wonder what the universities have collected over the years.
      >>>
      >>> I'd love to go visit out there in Iowa some time. Maybe if I can raise some money in the poor economy, I'll do it. ;) Sounds like an awesome place.
      >>>
      >>> Thanks for all that info. If you or your colleagues have any questions feel free and ask.
      >>>
      >>> Happy Holidays.
      >>>
      >>> Micah
      >>>
      >>> --- On Mon, 12/24/12, Ted Sojka tedsojka@mchsi.com> wrote:
      >
      >
      We are making changes based on your feedback, Thank you !
      The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.