ECUADORIAN GIANT SKELETONS

ECUADORIAN GIANT SKELETONS

The old saying that there were "giants in the earth" certainly appears to be true according to this story spotted by S.D. It caught my eye, for a very specific reason, but we'll get back to that. The story itself concerns the discovery of giant skeletons in Ecuador of people whose height was between 7 and 8 feet tall. The skeletons were exposed during heavy rains:

Ecuador Expose the Skeletons of an Ancient Race of Giant Humans – 7 Times Bigger Than Modern Humans

Now, what interests me here are these paragraphs:

According to a research team led by British anthropologist Russell Dement, strikingly tall skeletons uncovered in the Amazon region of Ecuador and Peru are undergoing examination in Germany. Will these remains prove that a race of tall people existed deep in the Amazon rainforest hundreds of years ago?

A half dozen human skeletons from the early 1400s to mid-1500s were confirmed to have been discovered, varying from 7 feet and 8 feet (213 to 243 centimeters) in height.

Dement told Cuenca Highlife: “We are very early in our research and I am only able to provide a general overview of what we have found. I don’t want to make claims based on speculation since our work is ongoing. Because of the size of the skeletons, this has both anthropological and medical implications.

In late 2013, Dement received word that a skeleton had been uncovered by a Shuar local, approximately 70 miles (112 kilometers) from Cuenca, in Loja Province, Ecuador. Dement traveled to the site and recovered the rib cage and skull of a female which had been exposed by flooding.

The bones were thought to date to 600 years ago. The rest of the skeleton was located and, once assembled, reportedly measured 7 feet and 4 inches (223.5 centimeters) in height.

...

Dement told Cuenca Highlife: “The skeletons show no signs of diseases such as the hormonal growth problems that are common in most cases of gigantism.

In all the skeletons, the joints seemed healthy and the lung cavity appeared large. One of the skeletons that we have dated was of a female who was about 60 when she died, much older than typical cases of gigantism.”

The article goes on from there into much more sensational claims, but before we address those, I want to consider an implication of the information cited above. Obviously, I am skeptical of articles of this sort. It's very easy in today's internet age to say just about anything, slap a couple of pictures together, and voila, one has a story about giants. But a few hundred years ago, before there were things like photoshop or even obsolete technologies like cameras and film, there are unusual statements from early European explorers, Christopher Columbus among them, that they encountered native American Indians among whom there were people that were "giants," and in some descriptions, these people were from 7 to 9 feet tall. The descriptions are odd in another respect, too, in that they do not indicate one way or another any health problems associated with them. Perhaps the lack of mention is simply due to not having been around them enough to observe any such problems, but then again, we don't know. In either case, the Ecuadorian "discovery," if true, might confirm that odd detail in early explorers' comments about having encountered "giants," i.e., extremely tall people, for according to the article, the bones "were thought to date to 600 years ago," the right time for the age of exploration.

The article concludes with something sensational:

Carlos Miguel Vaca Alvarado, of the parish of the town of Changaiminas, Ecuador, was all his life interested in archaeology, and this motivated him to discover a group of numerous giant human skeletons.

The bones were about 7 meters high and have been discovered in the mountains of the Amazon area. The seven fragments of the skeleton were carefully analyzed by many experts who reached the conclusion that those bones were part of a human skeleton seven times bigger than a modern human being.

Legends say that this region was known as the “cemetery of the gods”, sine in ancient times this region was inhabited by giants. Many experts affirm that this place is the lost city of the giants since many pyramids were discovered there, and their size reached 80 meters high and 80 meters wide.

It's not uncommon for giants to be associated with "the gods," for such stories span the planet and can be found on every continent (except Antarctica, and given the strangeness there, I'm not taking any bets). What one notices at this point of the article is the absence of details about the "many experts" who allegedly examined the 7-meter high human skeletal remains, whereas such details were forthcoming in the previous portion.

So, color me skeptical, for I'm about 50-50 on this one; the claims made for the first find are detailed and intriguing enough for me to think there may be a great deal to them, not the least of which is the time frame and coordination with textual accounts and stories of such people encountered by European explorers.

But oddly enough, there's a bit of highly weird corroboration of sorts even of the 7-meter-high story, and it comes from almost half a world away, in the form of Babylonian cylinder seals:

Academics often assume that such depictions are merely artistic metaphor, where the large humans are simply "figures of power" such as kings, and so on. But skeletons of giants changes the picture completely (not to coin a pun), and even kings, in some of those ancient texts, were said to be extraordinarily tall.

See you on the flip side...

34 thoughts on “ECUADORIAN GIANT SKELETONS”

  1. Both stories from Ecuador are fake… Sorry Doc. You waste your time.. Russel Dement never existed, so german scientist from Freie Univ. Picture of giant in museum is fake to. Is from E Von Daniken Theme Park in Interlaken in Switzerland… Swiss version of P.T. Barnum Show

  2. Thanks for bringing this one up, Doc!!! Two things…..

    First are the HUGE stone structures they are finding in the remote places in Russia….nothing people of our size could build!! They are bigger than The Pregnant Woman Stone in Baalbek.

    Then we have the more well known places in S. Amer. which have been shown so well……they are stone structures we, ourselves could not build today!

    Let’s face it…..there have been MANY civilizations on this earth, but our Established Science has not allowed us to truthfully expose what has been found.

    Cheer to Larry…..Hope you’re doing well, Dear Friend!

  3. Being an old man, with varied interests, I have been following this subject for decades (note the above comment re: the Smithsonian is true!).

    I have seen many photos of giant skeletons… one whose cranium itself was nearly the size of the man working near it (a close aerial view – as from a crane).

    I still have the photo somewhere although it would take a while to locate which computer/folder.

    One who is really interested should invest a couple of search hours and verify for themselves.

    I have long suspected that the giant carved figures at Karnac / Egypt is most likely an accurate depiction of ancient beings rather than a Mt. Rushmore-esque tribute.

    Allen

    P.S. – thanks to all to contribute / comment on this site, and especially to the good doctor/teacher himself. Too often we (I mostly) neglect to pay respects and appreciation for my fellows/fellowettes for their kind comments and deeds until after passage to the great beyonda. Just wanted to catch you all before you/we all catch that train (or whatever)…

    Allen S (lurker)

  4. There’s a lot about South America that seems just waiting to be explored and not conquered as were the first exploits of the regions by Europeans.

    The article doesn’t go into much detail about the site discovery or how it was preserved for dating purposes and documentation despite an impressive skeleton size. Site contamination doesn’t bode well for academicians in Archæology. Worth checking further, though.

  5. Having spent some time climbing around the pyraminds of Mexico, Guatemala and Belize, I have noted the consistent feature that the steps are very tall – usually with a rise of 12-18 inches or so (normal is 8″). One may have noticed in photos that a rope or chain runs down the center of the stairs to aid tourists climbing to the top.

    One imagines the high priests in full ceremonial garb would not have wanted to look foolish or fumbling by climbing out-sized stairs that served no other purpose.

    Additionally, a feature of Mayan architecture, especially in the south, are peaked arches in many doorway lintels. In the context of giants, one imagines these might have accommodated people of unusual height.

    I also note Richard Cassaro’s work on triptych doorways in ceremonial architecture around the world. Commonly, there are three doors, with the center one being significanly larger than the other two.

    While none of these observations prove anything, taken together they seem to imply a caste of officials or authorities of taller than usual stature. This might also explain why ceremonial hats, used even today, are ridiculously tall, as if to project an image of unusual stature.

    Worth pondering.

  6. if one is truly interested in this topic read the Richard J. Dewhurtst book “The Missing Skeletons and the Great Smithsonian Cover-Up” dealing with the discovery in North America of incredibly tall skeletons-

    then go to Steve Quale’s website which hones in on the pre-existence of giant people-

    if I recall correctly in Genesis it is stated that there were giants back then-

    so WHY NOT?

    we’re all caught up in our stupid egos thinking we’re the most advanced creatures on this planet-

    could it be we’re a convenient afterthought of something we are not capable of fathoming?- sorry to be so cryptic but we’re living in a world of illusion- anyone not figured that out yet?

    I thought that’s why we’re all on this forum-

    be well all-

    Larry in Germany

      1. yes, that is exactly the problem- couldn’t agree with you more-

        the only solution is: research

        separating the wheat from the chaff

  7. The sizes of living creatures on earth tend to fall within “harmonic” groups (I think there is another name for this in biology), from the smallest to the largest. This could be a way to judge on the possibility of “immigrants” from a place with different gravity.

  8. My immediate though was the gravity on another planet, not much bigger than Earth[a lot of sci-fi lately]. Then sticking w/it; over time these giants starting getting smaller in adjusting to a new planet’s gravity[etc.]

    So, survivors of the planet blown to smithereens?

    1. We’re thinking along similar lines once again, Robert. There are only a number of limited options available to arrivals in the 7 meter range–and some of these options are possibly bleak. A healthy community of 7 meter tall humans would certainly face horrendous challenges adapting here. Depending on when they arrived in the distance past, the oxygen and dietary requirements for this community would be astounding indeed. When one considers the shelter requirement one can see how the amount of breathable air would be problematic to beings this size. Extended sleep in an oxygen poor environment has a deleterious effect on brain function and IQ. Both might only see a decrease in body mass between generations, but this would certainly effect the transmission of information between generations. Declining intelligence, a preoccupation with survival, poor nutrition and ceaseless migration would have a cumulative effect trending toward devolution rather than cultural advancement. When one looks at the mythical and fairytale traditions there is in both a sense that these creatures were clumsy, slow and of very low intelligence. If the these artifacts are indeed real, and these literary and historical traditions reflect an observable phenomenon, we may now understand what happened to these beings. Due to the tendency of early peoples using bones for construction of tools and weapons, I can see their archaeological footprint as being relatively small over time as well. These speculations offer little in evidence and proof, but as observations with respect to the literary tradition, they do offer some convergence as a working hypothesis. Still, I think you could offer better.

      1. OrigensChild
        When looking at any puzzle; sometimes one has to approach it from an obvious, yet not exact science/metaphor. For example, think of the greatest desert on Earth?
        Your right. Antarctica. So desolate and huge; yet no life, except on the margins.
        The problem is that most schooling deals in the old basic dynamics of the Newtonian clockworks. A Darwinian blind watchmaker, to be precise.
        When in fact; or, more precisely, in all probability “we” are casually effective agents in creation of “evolving” reality. Both actors/actresses and/or spectators.
        So when looking at these giant skeletons. What kind of footprint did they leave behind? Umm? Doesn’t seem to be much of one, if anything at all.
        Umm?
        What animal today appears to be the exact opposite of “our” giant skeleton?
        Leaving bones; but not footprints?
        In other words:
        leaving no bone; but huge footprints?
        Right again: Bigfoot.
        Some say he disappears through a portal.
        That “they’re” using mind dynamics
        over matter – [literally].
        Now, that’s another angle;
        as yet, not mentioned.

        Tried to think of a Sherlock Holmes title for this case; but could only come up with…
        Here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten me into.

          1. Good news.
            Bad news.
            What you want to hear first?
            Bad news. [the tribe replies to Chief]
            Bad winter.
            Only have Buffalo dung to eat
            What’s good news? asks tribe.
            Chief smiles.
            Have plenty of Buffalo dung.

            Like the times we are in now.
            Your Honest Injun remark sparked this
            Our leaders today have good news and bad news.
            They’re smiling as well;
            and feeding us you know what.

    2. Or, if we came from somewhere else and the food we ate had different amino acids and nutrients that don’t exist on this planet; then over time when the plants we brought with us finally died out we no longer had access to those essentials. Then we became weaker, smaller, not as bright, and shorter lived. But at least we adapted. If only we can get our hands on some of that mana; or learn to synthesize what we lost in a lab.

      1. I thought of this, too. If these beings existed and came here millennia ago to settle semi-permanently they would have attempted to bring native plants and food stuffs to transplant here. The consequence on their physiology and those seeds would again be cumulative. It’s a hunch, but the nutrients in native soils might not work well with those alien plants or animals. They might adapt but the cumulative change in the environment might cause these life forms to lose their nutritional benefits. They may even become toxic. The other thing to consider are the bacteria and viruses they might have brought with them to this planet that would contribute to the terraforming project now underway. Though it might not be large scale, some “terraforming” would be required. It’s an interesting puzzle.

    3. RB, on this subject, you might like the science fiction novel The Survivors (formerly Ragnarok Calling) by Tom Godwin (first published in 1958). The book’s premise is somewhat the opposite of adjusting to the gravity of Earth. In it, humans are intentionally marooned (to die) on a planet (Ragnarok) which has a gravity 1.5 times that of Earth. The book is about their survival, adaptation over generations, and ‘revenge’. Highly recommended. (And it has a sequel…)

        1. Goshawks I read that novel in a junior high school library. The paperback title was Prison Planet. I also read the sequel Space Barbarians under its paperback title. There might be other factors than gravity encouraging gigantism during the Carboniferous Era a higher amount of oxygen in the atmosphere encouraged gigantism among insects could that have led to giantism among Dinosaurs and later Mammals.

          1. This too came to mind as I was writing the proposal. If this was once a space faring race that would have been the most likely time for any migration.

            The only other strange anomaly that I see in the solar system’s configuration are the two planetary bodies with rocky cores and bulges at the equator. The bulge is not easily explained by centrifugal force and plate tectonics alone. Combine the bulges of the earth and Mars with other planetary bodies in the solar system that act like moons (except our own, of course) they have similar lunar bulges. The problem of space travel is greatly simplified if both planetary bodies were once moons around a common host.

            Gheez, I just sawed that limb off the tree and now I’m falling…

  9. The first half of the cited article is fairly believable. Seven to even nine feet tall falls within structural limits on bones. Then, we get into ‘who were these people’? That part is fascinating.

    On the seven meter skeletons, I would need much more proof. Gravity dictates that their lower-body bone mass/diameters would be huge – more like elephant bones. And simple falls could easily be fatal. Giants on low-mass planets, I could believe. On Earth, not so much…

    1. If you go by the expanding Earth theory, the gravity problem goes away. Hence the size of some of the dinosaurs. Many ancient texts speak of giants along with many Indian legends. These skeletal remains have been found all over the US only to end up in the Smithsonian and vanished.
      I really don’t have a problem believing they once existed. I attended high school with a 17 year old boy who was 7′ 2″. There are many other examples of people over 7′ in modern times. I wouldn’t consider anyone in the 7′-8′ range to be a giant, 10′ and above is a different matter.

Comments are closed.