Thunderbird Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
[snip]
The sources you cite are just uncritically quoting sensationalist newspaper articles from the time. While Glidden may have discovered something of interest, or not, it is lost in a sea of Glidden's macabre exploitation of the remains, unusually poor methods, desperate need for money, and above all else wildly unsubstantiated claims and often outright fraud. Glidden was a kook and a con man. But what know he did not discover were 4,000 giants which he even opened a rather insane "museum" with these very bones yet where are the reports of giants after that when anyone for 25cents could see for themselves? Hmm.


Is there any amount of bullshit you will not believe?

> You can't pick and choose your evidence/ignore all
> else,....and say humans with Elongated skulls were
> simply more robust than others.

The only one I see doing this is you my friend. You see an elongated skull and claim "giant" yet ignore the fact the skeletal remains clearly shows they are not. Yes, the reports of giants in North America are interesting, we have spoken of them before, but you are conflating what is reported to have been found there with any elongated skull found in the rest of the world and proclaiming a race of giants roamed the earth which in the case of the others, like the many posted in just this very thread, they are clearly not "giants". The evidence I am "picking and choosing" is the actual evidence that we can all see for ourselves. I'm such a cad.

"Robust" and "gracile" are terms used in anthropology and apt descriptions when comparing one group with another.