Did tall races of 8' ever exist?

many would say no because there is no evidence. But if evidence did exist many would call them ‘giants’ and the link to the biblical would be too grating…maybe? Are all the rumors just that and why so many rumors of cover-ups?

We are in NZ and are following a rumor of 8’ tall skeletons in a cave which was immediately resealed and hidden. But we found the entrance and are digging it out. Follow our journey here -

[deleted link]

While digging out we discovered something unexpected which proves Polynesians were not here first. That post will appear Saturday (NZ time) in the section -

[deleted link]

Are there rumors of coverups from sources other than yourself, and do you have any cites other than yourself?

Not going to weigh in on the supposed validity of these unsubstantiated rumors, but if I heard of an 8’ skeleton I wouldn’t think “biblical”, or even “giant”. I’d just think “tall”. There are people alive now who are over eight feet tall and so far as I know they aren’t considered to be a different species.

Now you find something standing 20’ or more, and then I’ll …wait for independent verification.

Yeah, well Australia’s got ya beat! Look see, they found a 17-footer.

A radioactive 17-footer.

Not many, but yes, there are a few. To be precise, there are currently four living humans (all men) whose height has been documented at 8 feet or taller.

According to that Wikipedia article, setting aside disputed claims, there have been thirteen men and one woman whose heights have been verified at 8 feet or more.

Pygmies, the shortest currently living group of humans, exist (about five feet tall). Watusi men exist, are typically six to seven feet tall, and I’ve read a website that says they’re typically seven to eight feel tall, although that is about as well-researched as the OP’s links. The tallest man in the world at the moment, from Turkey, is 8 feet 2 inches tall.

The Potsdam Giants Regiment was a group of extremely tall men in what is now Germany from 1675 to 1806, although in practice it didn’t last beyond the reign of King Friedrich Wilhelm I of Prussia. The Prussian king would literally kidnap tall men, including foreigners and including some very poor recruits (such as an unusually tall monk) and force them into this regiment. (He kidnapped some foreigners of average height too and also force them into his army, just not this regiment.)

A bunch of tall people don’t mean anything. At most, perhaps New Zealand had waves of colonization before the Maori arrival, sort of like … Britain, or Spain, or Libya, or any other place you care to name. How many cultures can be identified in British history before the Celts? (The Celts didn’t build Stonehenge…)

Did the Maori sleep with your girlfriend or do you have a beef with them for other reasons?

The skeleton of a giant is buried only about a mile from my house. The fact that nobody has ever seen it shouldn’t get in the way of someone who truly believes giants existed. And apparently an entire race of giants lived in this area so if no bones have been found obviously it’s because no one has been looking.

raises hand

I say no because there is no evidence.

Wow! From your description of your digs and your analysis, I guess you are a self-taught expert graduated from the university of google, and that your evaluation of the ages of bones and whether or not they are mineralized isn’t worth the electrons it’s transmitted to me via.

If you have indeed discovered pre-maori remains you appear to be destroying an invaluable archaeological site.

If you’re actually an archaeologist, just really bad at communication it will be interesting to see your results when proper lab analyses have been done.

tangatawhenua16, let us know when there’s a publication in a refereed scientific journal, because until then there’s nothing to discuss.

There’s your problem. You move immediately from fact to supposition (and a loaded supposition, at that.)

Should have stopped at no evidence and called it a day.

This must be said bluntly. The reason professional archaeologists seal and hide sites is to prevent fucking amateurs from coming in and destroying the site with their blind and ignorant pawing. Real archaeology today is incredibly detailed, painstaking, heavily documented, and requires knowledge of multiple scientific disciplines and modern technologies.

If this a real archaeology site, leave now. Do not disturb anything more than you have. Seal it behind you. In America such vandalism is illegal. I don’t know what the law in New Zealand is but you may be breaking it this minute.

Stop. Please stop.


But personally, I’m really curious about this bit from the OP’s site:

When the actual study (PDF available here) says exactly the opposite:

I can’t help but feel someone has a specific agenda to their research. Can’t wait till Banquet Bear reads this thread…

The ironclad rule in archaeology is that once a site has been excavated, it has been destroyed. That imposes on the archaeologist the obligation to record everything in the minutest detail, so that all possible knowledge of the site is extracted and preserved. It must be recorded so thoroughly, using the most rigorous professional scientific methods, enough to justify the destruction of the site. Nowadays a 3-D computer model—if you have the software adequate for the task—can reconstruct the site given thorough preservation of all details. Any knowledge that is not rigorously recorded at the time of excavation is lost forever.

I don’t think the link to the biblical would be a issue at all. The science about their society, assuming it was a race of giants, would go on scientifically. Biblical debate if these were the angel/human hybrids of renown of Gen 6, or a race that the Jews had to deal with later and like discussion in other faiths would go on a parallel path and the moral implications of how it fits real world and how that redefine interpretations of the bible.

Incredible findings are now possible by microscopic and analytic examination of the very dirt the larger materials are found in. Simply removing bones from situ without logging in all possible data is an antiscientific hate crime.

Since others have mentioned currently-living people over 8’ tall, I’ll just mention that there was once a man who was nearly 9’ tall.

It should also be noted that he died in his twenties, because there are just so many aspects of human biology that don’t work right when scaled up to that extreme.