Summations Only

I switched from moderating this thread to a regular participant some time ago. I guess if you persist in flouting the Forum Guidelines for a little longer that will force me to shift back to a moderator role (after withdrawing from participation for two days), but I'd really rather not do that.So just let me beg upon your integrity to follow the Forum Guidelines that you agreed to follow when you registered for EvC Forum. I think everyone would be happy to discuss actual evidence, but the "evidence" you've presented so far has already been considered and found to be obvious concoctions like fabricated images of giant skeletons and claims where the evidence is held secret. Real evidence differs from the kind of "evidence" you've been presenting in that it has actual tangible existence. If you have any tangible evidence, please present it.But first figure out if you're making the point you intend. For instance, if fossils of giant humans actually exist then we'd all have to accept that giant humans once roamed the Earth and begin work on how it fits into the human evolutionary bush, but it would only reinforce the main claim of this topic: Evolution. We have the fossils. We win.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Fix garbled grammar in 1st sentence of last para.

Repeated denial is not an argument. Evidence is required to justify a position or it is just hearsay blind opinion. Evidence can convince others that your view has merit, lack of it is grounds for mockery. Thus you are the only who benefits from evidence that substantiates your position -- that is what puts the onus on you to provide it. Curiously a single word is not evidence. Sacsayhauman

quote:

---

The Inca used similar construction techniques in building Saksaywaman as they used on all their stonework, albeit on a far more massive scale.[10]The stones were rough-cut to the approximate shape in the quarries usingriver cobbles.[19]They were dragged by rope to the construction site, a feat that at times required hundreds of men.[20]The ropes were so impressive that they warranted mentiodn byDiego de Trujillo(1948:63 [1571]) as he inspected a room filled with building materials. The stones were shaped into their final form at the building site and then laid in place.[21]The work, while supervised by Inca architects, was largely carried out by groups of individuals fulfilling their labor obligations to the state. In this system ofmitaor "turn" labor, each village or ethnic group provided a certain number of individuals to participate in such public works projects.[10]

---

In other words there are known and observed construction techniques that explain the structure without the need for fabricating giants who magically leave no trace of their existence.Or, more succinctly, this is not evidence of giants, but evidence that a posited existence of giants is not required to explain the structure ... meaning that you still have not provided (objective empirical) evidence to support your position.Enjoy

You know that normal-sized people can move rocks, right? So why are rocks evidence of giants rather than of normal people, or for that matter aliens as you would doubtless be insisting if you were a different sort of kook?

I looked up that page as well and noticed this:

quote:

---

The ropes were so impressive that they warranted mention by Diego de Trujillo [1571] as he inspected a room filled with building materials.

---

and

quote:

---

Cieza de Len, who visited Saksaywaman two times in the late 1540s, mentions the quarrying of the stones, their transposition to the site, and the digging of foundation trenches.

---

So, two eye witnesses who failed to mention giants although they made notes about several other impressive features.Weird huh?HBD

I did the research, it is not evidence. So you think people should accept what you spout unquestioningly? Such hubris. Then why are you here? This is a discussion forum where we discuss evidence. If you want to preach, find a church.

Fun fact, when Anglo-Saxons saw Roman remains they identified them as entageweorc --- "the work of giants". But there was some excuse for their confusion --- the Roman remains were indeed beyond anything they could build, and so they might be excused for attributing its construction to superhumans.But we, Big Al, we can build skyscrapers literally half a mile high, and yet you look at this ... ... and convince yourself that it couldn't have been done by ordinary humans like us, who can only do stuff like this:

Compare the Statue of Liberty with the ancient monoliths.Following its completion in France it was shipped to the U.S; broken down into 350 pieces that were packed into 214 crates.The steel and copper construction has a combined weight of 250-tons. Two and half million stones went into the Great Pyramid and the estimated weight is 6 million tons! The largest stone blocks in the pyramid weigh about 70 tons. However, there are numerous 40, 100, 200 and a few 400-ton blocks of precisely cut stones in Peru that had to be hauled a considerable distance and then fit into place at various sites.The weight of the stones rather than the height or the complexity appears to be the main issue here.Source --> Page not found - WORLD MYSTERIES

Hi Al,It's great that you're seeking evidence of the giant humans that you obviously believe once roamed the Earth, but your evidence is about the Statue of Liberty and the stone blocks of pyramids. This thread is about fossils. If you want to discuss evidence of giant humans, in this thread the evidence has to be fossils.--Percy

The largest monolith ever transported is the Thunder Stone, weighing 1500 tons. As it was moved in the late eighteenth century, we know exactly how it was done. Here's a picture. Note the absence of giants. It follows that moving big rocks is not evidence of giants, since it can be done without giants.

Here are some interesting facts I got from Wikipedia. (controlled by globalists)1,250 t[19] Thunder Stone Boulder, Statue pedestal Saint Petersburg, Russia Russian Empire, 1770 Moved 6 km overland for shipment,[19] and cut from 1,500 t to current size while on transport[20]1,000 t[21][22] Ramesseum Statue Thebes, Egypt Ancient Egypt Transported 170 miles (270 km) by ship from AswanYou can see the ancient stones (in some cases) are comparable in size. You will notice that the ancient stones have been transported much further distances. The thunder stone was only transported 6km and probably only to show that it is possible in the modern age to do so. How the ancients did so again and again, rock after rock is a mystery. Even your picture shows that hundreds of regular sized people are needed and I am not sure of its validity.

And that they're smaller, and that the one you cite was transported by ship. Ships work without giants. Cargo ships have been built that can transport over 200,000 tons, all without any giants being involved. Only to you. Yes, hundreds of regular-sized people are needed. 'Cos of rocks being heavy.Why are you "not sure of its validity"? Do you think the Russians secretly used giants to move the Thunder Stone but didn't tell anyone?

I disagree. If Big Al wants to argue that non-fossil evidence contradicts and is superior to the fossil evidence, that would seem to be a viable approach -- at least hypothetically. Al is considerably short on the execution, but at least what he is doing is better than making up stories about mind controlling illuminati are hiding the evidence.Let's let him lose the argument on his own terms.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I think you've got a good handle on how to take what has captured Al's fascination and connect it to the topic, but Al doesn't. If you want to connect the necessary dots then the thread could be poised to take the turn toward woo that you seem to want, but you don't really expect Al to do this himself, do you? Or even follow along while you do it?--Percy

Why do you trust the information provided by the globalists without question?And I notice you haven't even mentioned the giant tools. Why not?

Ahhh yes, I had missed off 'personal attacks' on my globalist strategy list.