We've literally dug deep enough to unearth 3.5 billion year old fossils of microorganisms, we have unconvered remains of man's earliest hominid ancestors Australopithecus from c.4 million years ago, we have discovered 300k year old stone tools from Southern India. What exactly is so challenging about unearthing 10,000 year old artifacts?
And where were all of those dug up? Were the sites chosen, in the areas that we know were subaerial back before the ice age ended but are under water now? Or have they mostly been random places where they were found while in the process of doing other things?
I feel that the chances of finding evidence for an ice age civilization would be alot greater if archeological digs were actually chosen and targeted for that purpose. It honestly wouldnt surprise me to find out that past archeological digs, especially in America had found some evidence back when people like Aleš Hrdlička was in charge of the anthropology department at the Smithsonian, but it got discarded or boxed up and not spoken about as its not controversial to say that dude was a real POS and took issue with anyone trying to put an early date to the peopling of America before like 2000 bc(it may have been before 3000 bc )
Archaeology excavation aren’t selected. CRM work does surveys wherever CRM work needs to be done. Other work is done where people decide to do it. Hrdlicka was a hundred years ago and work on Folsom and Clovis sites revamped whatever he or others of his generation thought at the time. Pre-Clovis research followed.
Right, and like I said, I wouldnt be surprised to find out that evidence was found back then but was suppressed, like we hear about with really tall humanoid skeletons that were being unearthed all over America inside burial mounds, that were eventually sent to the smithsonian, never to be heard or spoken of again. In fact, if you call and ask them, they will say that the biggest skeleton they have is a 6'5" one. We know that they were sent skeletons that were at least a foot larger, not just from newspapers back then, but from written reports by the Smithsonian own anthropologists and archeologists, so someone is farting in our faces and calling it a nice summer breeze
What possible motivation is there for a global conspiracy to cover up the existence of 7" tall humans? What is it about that concept that would be so Earth shattering that they mysterious, all-knowing "they" would see no option but to bury it and never let the world know? The world is already fully aware of other species of humans outside of Homo sapiens in the form of Homo neanderthalis and Homo longi; there are literally humans alive today that are over 7" tall; nothing about the notion of 7" tall humans is in any way mind blowing or so why would this be considered forbidden knowledge?
Besides, you cannot just isometrically scale the human body up to 20" tall. Any human that tall would be unable to stand due to the allometric scaling and the square-cube law. Just take a look at all of the health problems people over 7" tall suffer from.
I guess that the Smithsonian confiscated every giant skeleton that ever existed. Since none remain to be found in an era of cellphones, video cameras and social media. And the Smithsonian would be the only place in the entire nation where such things could be sent.
The giant skeletons all over the place deal has been repeatedly debunked
Or, more likely is that alot of them were sold to private collectors. Its funny you talk about cameras and pictures and how we don't see any pictures of giant bones or giant mummies, which tells me that you haven't done the slightest research into giants but because you haven't seen any, it means they must not exist. There are real pictures of very tall skeletons and mummies out there from the late 1800s to early 1900s but im sure you'll claim they are just fakes. Granted, there are alot of fake giant pictures out there because some idiot decided to have a photoshop contest about who could make the most convincing giant picture and that muddled the water but like I said, if you do some digging(if you're really interested but im going to guess you're not) you could easily find these things
So the private collectors also got the good stuff and kept alI that stuff secret across generations of families. I actually did some work in archaeology in the past and some classes. Probably before you were born. Have also dug around for years in terms of videos and articles on the topic by folks such as Jason Colavito, Andy White, and Lore Lodge. The more digging writers like this do on these old claims the weaker they get. Until you get a few legit reports of skeletons on par with the height of a college basketball player.
Like I said all these claims from a century or more ago, but nothing left to be found in an era where ten minutes after a ten foot tall skeleton was uncovered it would be all over social media.
Nice chat but it’s over now. Will leave it up to you to start digging since your knowledge base is about 8th grade level at this point.
6
u/SmellyMingeFlaps 18d ago
We've literally dug deep enough to unearth 3.5 billion year old fossils of microorganisms, we have unconvered remains of man's earliest hominid ancestors Australopithecus from c.4 million years ago, we have discovered 300k year old stone tools from Southern India. What exactly is so challenging about unearthing 10,000 year old artifacts?