While many still “struggle” to accept that “modern” (non-primitive) humans existed 12 000 years ago, at the time of Atlantis, there are others who have found that we may have existed for hundreds of thousands of years. Or millions of years. And even hundreds of millions of years. What follows are just a few examples of evidence along these lines.
This petrified footprint (image below) is estimated at 290 Million years old. It’s not significantly different from the footprint of a modern human. It was first publicized in Vol. 23, July 1992 of The Smithsonian and discovered in 1987 by paleontologist Jerry MacDonald in Permian limestone (“Permian” refers to the period approximately 250 Million to 290 Million years ago) on what some call the “Zapata track” in New Mexico (in the Robledo Mountains north of El Paso), alongside the fossil footprints of Dinosaur-like beings and other animals.
This is one of many thousands artifacts that pose a “problem” to those who have taught us that humans “appeared” much more recently. In grade school, I learned that the first humans “appeared” around 100 000 years ago, having “slowly evolved” from apes. Of course, meanwhile, here in the year 2014, it is “known” that “the first humans appeared” at least 2.5. Million years ago because stone tools of that age have been found in the Gona, area of Ethiopia. From 100 000 years to 2.5. Million years is quite a jump in only a few scientific decades! So who is to say that another jump…say to 290 Million years before our time, cannot be made?
Of course even as a youngster in school none of this impressed me that much. My understanding was always that humans have been involved in a cosmic opera for Trillions of years if not longer. From the spiritual/consciousness standpoint, these “fantastic” time-spans are not that big after all.
To solve this “problem”, “the authorities” have suggested that this is not a human footprint at all, but that of an unknown animal. That could be a good explanation – had not other super-ancient footprints and man-made artifacts been found. Of course one could also say “maybe the ultra-ancients were not humans but aliens!” but that merely transposes the issue. It would still indicate the existence of something other than only dinosaurs or whatever they claim existed back then.
The same track-site contains other unexplained anomalies, such as an unidentified three-toed animal as well as bear tracks (Mammals supposedly didnt exist in the Permian period either).
Humans existed alongside “Dinosaurs”
Below is a picture of one side of the Narmer Palette, an Egyptian archaeological find dated to 3100 B.C. The “problem” is that it shows Dinosaurs alongside humans. But conventional views say that humans appeared more than 60 Million years after the last Dinosaurs became extinct. For this reason it has been labelled “mythological” (as in “fictitious”)…except for the depictions of King Narmer, on the other side of the tablet which have been labeled “factual”. This is how we cherry pick what matches our preconceptions and ignore what doesn’t. The creatures are awkwardly called “Serpotards” (crosses of Serpents and Leopards) instead of simply Dragons or at least Dinosaurs. Similar beings have been found in Mesopotamian icongraphy and in fact all over the world, along with stories of humans alongside serpents, dragons and other huge creatures…and yet we are asked to believe that these are all fictitious or that Dinosaurs and humans never co-existed.
In fact, this is a good of a place as any to state that I don’t actually believe in “Dinosaurs”. Based on this research I have instead concluded that all fossils and remains of gigantic creatures that have been found around the world are from the “mythological creatures” that have been described by our ancestors from time immemorial. The invention of “Dinosaurs” that were supposed to have existed long before humans is, in my view, merely an obfuscation designed to bypass what the ancients have been telling us repeatedly and consistently for thousands of years and what they have shown us in cave-paintings, on tablets, in temples and on walls.
Denisovans – none dare call them Giants
When archaeology discovers things that do not match the “official version” of things,there seems to be a tendency to downplay or obfuscate the findings. Why? Is it because of some vast cover-up? Maybe. Or maybe its just due to cognitive dissonance.
One recent example can be found at the Atapuerca Archaeological Site in Spain where skeletons and skulls of modern looking humans have been found (alongside Neanderthal-type humans). One skull, dated to be 530 000 years old was oversized, almost alien looking. When the big skulls are found (and they frequently are), it is attributed to an “illness” called craniosynostosis (when I was younger it was usually attributed to “skull lengthening rituals” and “artifical cranial deformation”) but this nonsense explanation seems to have gone out of fashion). Considering how many of these skulls have been found in the last centuries, must we must conclude that a lot of ancients were “suffering from craniosynostosis”? Or is there another, better explanation? Are we instead dealing with an unknown ancestor of ours or maybe even non-terrestrial people?
DNA sequenced at the site has found that some of these people were not Neanderthals but what is now called Denisova hominins. The “Denisovans” is a name and label applied to what would normally have to be called Giants. But academics, to avoid using the term, never call them Giants – because that would mean admitting and validating what people like us (“fringe researchers”) have been saying all along. From the semi-official, heavily edited Internet Encyclopedia (bolding mine):
Denisovans or Denisova hominins are a Paleolithic-era species of the genus Homo or subspecies of Homo sapiens. In March 2010, scientists announced the discovery of a finger bone fragment of a juvenile female who lived about 41,000 years ago, found in the remote Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains in Siberia, a cave which has also been inhabited by Neanderthals and modern humans. Two teeth and a toe bone belonging to different members of the same population have since been reported.
Analysis of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of the finger bone showed it to be genetically distinct from the mtDNAs of Neanderthals and modern humans. Subsequent study of the nuclear genome from this specimen suggests that this group shares a common origin with Neanderthals, that they ranged from Siberia to Southeast Asia, and that they lived among and interbred with the ancestors of some present-day modern humans, with about 3% to 5% of the DNA of Melanesians and Aboriginal Australiansderiving from Denisovans. Other ethnicities, such as the Malays, Polynesians, the Dravidians of India, Burmans, and Mon-Khmer-speaking peoples may be included in this category as well. A comparison with the genome of a Neanderthal from the same cave revealed significant local interbreeding, with local Neanderthal DNA representing 17% of the Denisovan genome, while evidence was also detected of interbreeding with an as yet unidentified ancient human lineage.Similar analysis of a toe bone discovered in 2011 is underway, while analysis of DNA from two teeth found in different layers than the finger bone revealed an unexpected degree of mtDNA divergence among Denisovans. In 2013, mitochondrial DNA from a 400,000-year-old hominin femur bone from Spain, which had been seen as either Neanderthal or Homo heidelbergensis, was found to be closer to Denisovan mtDNA than to Neanderthal mtDNA.
In this quote as well as in the remainder of the article, no mention of giants or oversize is made. I cite this as an example of obfuscation. Instead, they are called “robust”:
The single finger bone is unusually broad and robust, well outside the variation seen in modern people. Surprisingly, it belonged to a female, indicating the Denisovans were extremely robust, perhaps similar in build to the Neanderthals. The tooth that has been characterized shares no derived morphological features with Neanderthal or modern humans.An initial morphological characterization of the toe bone led to the suggestion that it may have belonged to a Neanderthal-Denisovan hybrid individual, although a critic suggested the morphology was inconclusive. This toe bone is currently undergoing DNA analysis by Pääbo.
Below a video posted by the Max-Planck Society, we find a more accurate description (bolding mine):
Bence Viola from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig discovered the tooth fragments together with Russian colleagues in the Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains. Initially, he thought the inconspicuous-looking object was the molar of a cave bear. But when the remaining fragments of the tooth turned up, it became obvious that the researchers had found the tooth of a hominid. It was too large, however, to be from a modern man or Neanderthal. When the researchers finally succeeded in decoding the DNA of the tooth, their suspicion was confirmed: it hailed from a previously unknown early human species living in Asia at least 30,000 years ago.
Denisovan teeth are found to be bigger than the largest Neanderthal teeth ever found, which would make them approximately three to four times bigger than the teeth of modern humans. Articles on “Denisovans” are however quick to downplay this fact. From a National Geographic article:
The tooth, a molar, is bigger than any modern human tooth and is even bigger than the biggest Neanderthal tooth. This could suggest Denisovans were “comparable in size to Neanderthals, maybe a little bit bigger,” said George Washington University’s Richmond.
Richmond cautioned, however, that tooth size isn’t always a good indicator of body size. A hominin “can have big teeth and not be a giant,” he said.
The article claims that Denisovans were “comparable in size to Neanderthals” and that “tooth size is no indicator of anything”. I however, would like to offer that if the human-teeth are four times bigger than those of normal humans, then the body may also be four times taller than a human body.
Of course part of the problem here is that it is made to look as if this discovery were the first or only of its kind. But gigantic skeletons, skulls, teeth and so forth, of human-like beings have been dug up for a long time, (see my book for more on this) and also long before the word “Denisovan” was coined.
The above image shows a kind of iron Hammer-device that was found beside at waterfall in London, Texas in 1934. It was embedded in rock that is a 100 Million years old. Thousands of similar objects have been found (you find them when you google “out of place artifacts” or OOPARTS) but debunkers claim that “geological strata” can form around them, making it appear as if recent items are much older. Hence this Hammer is “not a 100 Million years old, but rather made by Americans some time in the last few hundred years. While I am no expert by a long shot and this particular Hammer may in fact be more recent, these kind of explanations seem kind of suspicious to me. I`d need to see a demonstration of how rock is supposed to “grow” around an object in a few hundred years. As far as I know, rock pretty much stays the same for many thousands of years.
In fact, none of the hundreds of out-of-place and out-of-time artifacts dug out which contradict the “official view” have been accepted as genuine or mysterious by mainstream research. According to the mainstream, finding Giants does not confirm mythological stories of Giants but the existence of “Denisovans”, finding Dragons does not confirm mythological stories of Dragons but the existence of “Dinosaurs”, oversized skulls don’t confirm the existence of aliens but some “illness”, skeletons of dwarves don’t confirm mythology but again some other “illness” and so forth. Unless of course ancient times were exactly as our ancestors said they were.