Giant Foot Print 200 Million Yrs Old - South Africa
Michael Tellinger shows off what could be one of the best pieces of evidence that there were giants on Earth a long, long time ago. Geologists have marvelled at this giant foot print in rough granite, about 4 feet long. Some still say that it is a natural erosion pattern.
People who liked this video also liked
Comments
15 comments posted so far. Login to add a comment.
44
2. kirkelicious commented 9 years ago
This is not only evidence that giants walked the earth. Since it is in granite, it also proofs that these giants lived more than 2000 m inside the earth, where they took walks on molten rock. Don't let the narrow minded erosionists tell you otherwise!
29
3. martynbiker commented 9 years ago
Some peeps will believe ANYTHING! ( of course, its on the interwebs so it MUST be true!)
10
5. ChainTexter commented 9 years ago
Did he say, "between 200m and 3.5b years"? So, before most land animals, and before atmospheric oxygenation – right.
and "scientists" - what scientists? Geologists? or christian pseudo-scientists?
Oh, and a footprint in Granite – yeah, sure.
and "scientists" - what scientists? Geologists? or christian pseudo-scientists?
Oh, and a footprint in Granite – yeah, sure.
53
6. Judge-Jake commented 9 years ago
I'll tell you exactly what happened here. Sure this is the shape of a human foot, therefore any shape found on a rock that looks like a human foot is going to be thought of as a footprint. Just the same as faces have been seen on the moon because the shape of two circles in a triangle with an elongated shape below makes us think of a human face. The fact that this face is several hundred miles across is incidental.
Going back to this foot shaped vertical object which has been in the rock for 3+ billion years and no doubt first seen by humans several million years ago, there will have been many opportunities to add, chip or scrape away to produce the toes, these days we would call it graffiti usually associated with the younger generation. How many generations of teenagers do you think will have grown up in this area over the last one million years never mind since the beginning of human kind.
Of course it is much simpler to call it the foot of God or a giant. what would have been the evolutionary point in a guy over 30 feet high
Going back to this foot shaped vertical object which has been in the rock for 3+ billion years and no doubt first seen by humans several million years ago, there will have been many opportunities to add, chip or scrape away to produce the toes, these days we would call it graffiti usually associated with the younger generation. How many generations of teenagers do you think will have grown up in this area over the last one million years never mind since the beginning of human kind.
Of course it is much simpler to call it the foot of God or a giant. what would have been the evolutionary point in a guy over 30 feet high
25
7. equilibrium2x commented 9 years ago
#5 Blasphemy! Earth is 6000 years old!
44
8. kirkelicious commented 9 years ago
#6 The fact that there is a face imprinted on the moon just shows that these giants where huge enough to bang their head against it.
54
10. ringmaster commented 9 years ago
Has anyone noticed that this print is vertical (on a 'wall'), not horizontal (in the ground)? Did they walk vertically as in defying gravity or did they have advanced climbing equipment?
28
11. BloodBeast commented 9 years ago
Oh for god's sake #10. Have you not heard of geology?
Nice imprint, but for anyone to claim that it's evidence for twenty-feet-tall people they would need to provide other evidence. All evidence is that our predecessors were small. This is therefore either something completely new that science has willingly discounted, or it's a fake (in which case I congratulate the forgers), or it's a spurious coincidence.
I'm with #6 Judge-Jake on this - graffiti. Clever graffiti, but graffiti nonetheless, not genuine, and certainly not worth the price of a ticket to SA. Nor a trek up a mountain.
And which "geologists" have marvelled at it? Name names...
Nice imprint, but for anyone to claim that it's evidence for twenty-feet-tall people they would need to provide other evidence. All evidence is that our predecessors were small. This is therefore either something completely new that science has willingly discounted, or it's a fake (in which case I congratulate the forgers), or it's a spurious coincidence.
I'm with #6 Judge-Jake on this - graffiti. Clever graffiti, but graffiti nonetheless, not genuine, and certainly not worth the price of a ticket to SA. Nor a trek up a mountain.
And which "geologists" have marvelled at it? Name names...
52
13. Natan_el_Tigre commented 9 years ago
This video made me think about the combination of these two classic clips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzlCdWwYn2I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzlCdWwYn2I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4
48
15. ComentAtor commented 9 years ago
thank you #13 for this incredible banana link
+19 1. ice9 commented 9 years ago