In 1850 American archaeologist D. Carter made a sensational discovery in San Diego, CA on Texas street. His accidental discovery appeared to be that of a trace of the first Americans dating back to 80,000-90,000 years.
A considerable amount of artifacts has been studied. Unable to find heavy evidences in order to back up his theory, the archaeologist had simply been laughed at. Determined in proving his point to his skeptical colleagues, Carter decided to organize another dig in 1953.
He invited many famous scientists to witness his finds. The invitation was declined by everybody. Carter later wrote, "San Diego State University refused to view the finds which have been found in his own back yard."
Typical is the case of George Carter who claimed to have found, at an excavation in San Diego, hearths and crude stone tools at levels corresponding to the last interglacial period, some 80,000-90,000 years ago.
Even though Carter's work was endorsed by some experts such as lithic scholar John Witthoft, the establishment scoffed. San Diego State University refused to even look at the evidence in its own back yard and Harvard University publicly defamed him in a course on Fantastic Archeology.
What emerges is a picture of an arrogant and bigoted academic elite interested more in the preservation of its own prerogatives and authority than the truth.
Click and drag photo to resize. Photo of Carson, Nevada Prints. Script from The Java Script Source
Russia is no exception when it comes to this kind of activities. Majority of sensational discoveries were for the most part considered a lie. One can hardly imagine the amount of exceptional, sensational information that is being stored in today's archives. Here are some facts concerning such matters.
In 1961, two Russian scientists Okladnikov and Rogozhin discovered a large variety of tools in Siberia not far away from a town named Gorno-Altaisk located by the river Utalinka.
They concluded that their finds date back to 1,5-2 million years. Another Russian scientist Molchanov discovered absolutely identical tools on the river Lena near a village Urlak. Radiocarbon dating analyses of these finds has clearly identified a precise date: almost 2 million years.
The overall meaning of such finds appears to be of major importance, since it is thanks to them that we are able to trace the existence of the first human. They also ignite a rather controversial debate among scientists.
Every living creature leaves a trace. Certain evidences also indicate that humans existed during even earlier periods. Remains of a human skeleton vividly resembling those traits of a modern human being were found on the Pacific Coast.
Their age had been determined to be 5 million years. France and Portugal have also contributed valuable data to the everlasting search of traces of human existence.
Human remains have been found there ranging from 5 to 25 million years old. In 1979 archaeologist Fili discovered several prints of human feet imprinted on a 4 million year-old volcanic lava. The most exhaustive research has indicated that those prints belong to humans, not apes. As it is known all apes or ape-like creatures have elongated toes.
Some anthropologists, while being skeptical to dismiss Darwin-s theory of evolution, claim that those prints might have belonged to apes with clenched toes. Perhaps, this was the apes way of joking with humans. Who knows?
Another discovery of a calcified human footprint has been found in Turkmenia. Its age leads us all the way back to 150 million years, to the Mesozoic period, and ultimately to the time of dinosaurs. Can it be possible that humans inhabited this planet along with such monstrous creatures? Yes.
Russian scientists however claim that a single footprint is not enough to force rethinking of existing theories of human existence and to come up with something radically novel. But what about an entire chain of footprints found near Carson, Nevada? Those are incredibly precise and clear prints doubtlessly left by a human. Their size is gigantic. Their age is 213-248 million years.
It is not hard to conclude therefore that such a discovery cannot possibly go hand in hand with today's preconceived notions.
OTHER GIANT PEOPLE�Similar giant human footprints have been found in Arizona, near Mount Whitney in California, near White Sands, New Mexico, and other placesSimilar giant human footprints have been found in Arizona, near Mount Whitney in California, near White Sands, New Mexico, and other places. But, in addition, several other giant human footprints�and even skeletal remains�have been found.
At White Sands, New Mexico, a prehistoric giant walked across a drying lakebed, leaving sandaled feet tracks, with each track approximately 22 inches [55.8 cm] in length.
"The remains of giants were found in Java, twice the size of gorillas, and later the petrified remains of a giant were found in South Africa and reported by the world-renowned anthropologist, Robert Broom. [Based on those finds] Dr. Franz Weidenreich (1946) propounded a new theory to the effect that man�s ancestors were actually giants.
Dr. Burdick also tells about one of the unsolved mysteries of the Great White Sands National Monument near Alamogordo, New Mexico. Here is an area of about 175 acres consisting of alabaster, white as snow. It is believed that this gypsum was precipitated as arid winds dried up an inland sea.
As this muddy sediment was beginning to harden, some prehistoric giant apparently walked across the drying lakebed, leaving a series of tracks made by sandaled feet. There are 13 human tracks, each track approximately 22 inches [55.8] long and from 8 to 10 inches [20.32-25.4 cm] wide. The stride is from four to five feet [121.9-152.4 cm]."�H.R. Siegler Evolution or Degeneration: Which? (1972), p. 83. Ancient Man
Many scientists have proved the existence of remains of human-like creatures. Such finds constitute that giant people might have easily been our ancestors existing during the same era with gigantic creatures.
A time will come when we will finally accept a possibility of the existence of giants on this planet. Anatolii Vasilev, "Kontinent" , PRAVDA
Of Interest here is not so much the height of the then current inhabitants of the Island, who are believed to have been tall but were probably not giants. However, there were as we�ve seen in other places quite a few stories about finding extremely large skeletons of previous inhabitants.
The first europeans to sail along the patagonian costs were Ferdinand of Magallanes and his crew in 1520. Their first meeting with the aborigins (Tehuelches) was recorded by Antonio Pigafetta, the chronicler of the expedition, in a by now famous passage:
"One day, when no one was expecting it, we saw a giant, completely naked, by the sea. He danced and jumped and, singing, spread sand and dust over his head...He was so tall that the tallest among us reached only to his waist. He was truly well built...The captain named these kind of people Pataghoni. They have no houses but huts, like the Egyptians.
They live on raw meat and eat a kind of sweet root which they call capac. The two giants we had on board ship ate their way through a large basket of biscuits, and ate rats without skinning them. They used to drink a half bucket of water at once.
Photo: Left On the picture on the left you can see the "giants" depicted in the tip of South America on a map of 1562 . It is a common belief that the name Patagons alluded to the apparently outstanding foot size of the Tehuelches.
Center is an engraving from the cover of �A Voyage round the World, in his Majesty's ship the Dolphin, commanded by the Hon. Comm. Byron, 1767� and reads: "A sailor giving a Patagonian woman a piece of bread for her baby.
On the right is a detail from another engraving of the period and shows soldiers unearthing a giant skeleton and slaying a large lion.
Of Interest here is not so much the height of the then current inhabitants of the Island, who are believed to have been tall but were probably not giants. However, there were as we�ve seen in other places quite a few stories about finding extremely large skeletons of previous inhabitants.
