122: Evolutionary Giants (rehash)

We are looking for skeletal evidence of what some would call giants (8'+) that existed in NZ before the Polynesians got here. Crazy right? I mean tribes of tall humans simply did not exist. The human fossil record all shows those before us as being smaller than us. Sure, legends of every single civilization talk of giants, but none existed because no evidence has been shown right?

Then there are the stories of finds and cover ups... lots and lots of them as archaeology entered it's golden years in the late 1800's. But are they not just urban legends? Still, articles on the internet persist of pathetic examples of fake finds such as the one below.

Evolution presents a theory of animals that evolved and the evidence they present shows the gradual miniaturization of animals and the skeletal evidence shows just that. Many skeletons of giant animals, birds and reptiles that have been dug up and produced. And while there are no giant human skeletons, (through one of two possible reasons), I began to wonder about what has lived on the planet previously.

So here is the thing. If giant animals no longer exist, then life must have once been able to support them. Yet they died out too. So why couldn’t humans have been larger? Or was that just timing. If evolution is true, then logic and science would have to suggest that all life from the plant kingdom to animal kingdom has become smaller. Ancient texts and legends suggest some races had giant humans that once existed. Yet archaeologists only seem to produce evidence human forms that are old yet smaller than us today.

Yet that is the reverse of what nature seems to have produced throughout all of history. That which has been purported to have been found that is human and excessively tall - (1) Either disappears or (2) Was never real in the first place.

But nothing can be proved can it? What we really need is a group of tall skeletons recorded properly before anyone can destroy, remove or attempt to debunk the find. Naturally my mind thinks that maybe I should just release word of the find, but no pictures, and let the rest of the world debunk the ‘said’ discovery - and then release the evidence! That way some detractors have to fall on their swords for it is better for people to have to change their opinion when evidence is produced, than produce something up front and have them counter it because the opinions of ‘experts’ would be deemed to be more credible.

We already have evidence of human beings that existed long before Polynesians arrived here... long before! But those fossilized bones do not provide evidence of height, and those bones did not come from inside the cave where the 14 8' skeletons are purported to lie. They came from out in the hills under the earth that is now farmland and bush. Those bones are even older than the ones we seek, but we are not after bones of extraordinary age, but height and skeletal differentiation - non-Polynesian differentiation. For we believe as many Maori do, that the Maori were not first.

Animals got smaller but human got bigger? Is it not possible a race or races existed that even when found, major efforts are made to conceal the evidence. After all, finding 'giants' would go against current evolutionary models and would give fire to the creationists - and that right there is where we think the fear of producing evidence of 'giants' remains as giant skeletons of various ancient races were not found until after Darwin's theories surfaced.

It's an interesting point none-the-less.