By Christopher Parker, s8intcom 2007
Left to right by size comparison;
"Elk Grove Man", 6 feet tall, "Java Man", 9 feet tall
and "Swartkrans Man", 10 feet tall
In Genesis we are told that, “there were giants in the earth in those days, and after” and here on this site at the very least we can say that we’ve provided is, strong circumstantial and anecdotal evidence that giant humans once lived here in North America and in other parts of the world in the past.
For the most part, science has ignored, belittled, rationalized away or forgotten about much of this evidence. Consequently, in is somewhat refreshing to see the "outlandish" claims about giant men being made by science itself.
On a prior page of this section, we discussed Gigantopithecus and Meganthropus, two giant apes or giant men (depending on who you listen to). Scientists who support evolutionary theory have always had a reason to find transitional ape-men, the missing link if you will, because it would be convincing proof that man had evolved from apes.
Consequently, there is a temptation to blur the line between men and apes with respect to some of these ancient “hominid” fossils.
In most if not all cases, these fossils have eventually been classified as either man or as apes.
Hopefully by now CSI can clearly distinguish a man’s remains from that of an ape. I’m pretty sure that CSI Las Vegas could, anyway.
In an article announcing the find of yet another giant from ancient times, the New York Times of December 1, 1948 had the following:
“BERKELEY, Calif., Nov. 30—Discovery near Johannesburg of a new type of ape man which might have been larger than the nine-foot-tall primitive Java man found several years ago was reported today by the University of California.”
A local paleontologist attached to the Transvaal Museum in South Africa, who was working with the leader of an expedition to the area from U.C. Berkeley, Dr. Robert Broom, made the discovery. The initial discovery consisted of some extremely large dentition; two upper incisors, an upper canine and a part of a lower jaw still containing three premolars as well as four molars.
“The jaw is very massive” Dr. Broom cabled. The teeth are a little larger than in the recently discovered giant man of Java (meganthropus). The incisor teeth and canine teeth are typically human and very unlike those of an anthropoid ape”
On the evidence to date we can say that a new type of ape man has been discovered larger than those previously known.”
The find was to be known as “Swartkrans Man”.
Back in 1948, the estimate was that “Swartkrans Man” had lived along with other mega sized men between 500,000 and 5,000,000 years ago.
It was somewhat controversial for scientists to estimate the size of “Swartkrans Man” and others such as Gigantopithecus based primarily on the size of their teeth and, -- the sizes that were being put forth for them were themselves controversial.
Since teeth are very hard, they are often the only parts of the body that survive intact. A later find of a thumb bone described as “robust”, a code word for large would seem to support the initial size estimates.
Tools and artifacts were also found in the cave with this new “giant race”. In later years, Swartkrans Man would be taken out of the line of human evolution (which is mythical) because giant "men" don’t fit in that line.
Oh, and why do I say that? Some have pointed out in the past that since science verified and identified, Gigantopithecus, Java Man and other robust "ancestors" that in fact they do fit into evolutionary theory. However, as we've shown on these pages, giant humans, giant reptiles, giant sheep, giant goats, camels, horses, birds, turtles and in fact giant versions of most animals and insects that we know today existed in the past. How does evolutionary theory account for these and for example eight foot long insects?
Keeping the assumption of uniformism in mind, what selection pressures led to giant versions of current creatures (including man)in the past and then--to the smaller sizes of those same creatures that we see today?
A headline in the July 21, edition of the Los Angeles Times of 1895 announced the following"
“San Diego, July 18.__(Special Correspondence.) a discovery made in Sweetwater Valley in San Diego county some time ago may yet create a sensation among scientists when the full import of the fossil is made known.
While digging a well the workmen unearthed what appears to be the fossil of a huge human foot, a photograph of which has been taken specially for The Times.
This foot is twenty inches long and of exceedingly large dimensions. It was found some forty or fifty feet below the surface of the earth, and had there been a means at hand for further exploration, it is believed that other parts of a gigantic human skeleton, of which this fossilized foot is deemed a part, might have been found.”
A drawing of the photo. Click and drag photo to resize.
I haven’t been able to discover what happened after this report, but we doubt very seriously whether in fact a sensation was created because in our experience investigating these things, scientist were much more likely to flock in a direction away from this discovery than to the discovery.
Also, having an actual photo of the fossil and the fossil itself would have made it a touch more difficult to label the artifact as the foot of an “ape-man” or any other type of “primitive man”.
The writers of the article referenced the “Calaveras Skull”, a giant skull that had been found in a mine by a miner named Mattison in 1866. That fossil, although championed by an archaeologist, was controversial because of its size and the strata in which it was found.
According to geological principles, that gravel encrusted skull had been deposited before the mountain that topped the mine had been formed.
As to the giant fossilized human foot? Not knowing where it is now, is almost equal to it not ever having existed.