Posts Tagged ‘Nephilim’

 

dscf0611-hdr

Skulls on display at the Paracas History Museum

1620794_449562995172725_549031043_n

LA Marzulli & Dr. Aaron Judkins

Back in 2014, I was asked by LA Marzulli of the Watchers Series fame to be a consulting archaeologist regarding the Paracas skulls in Peru. I wasn’t familiar with the elongated skulls so I was not biased towards one side or the other. I agreed to join the team along with Richard Shaw, Chase Kloetzke, Joe Taylor, Ron Moorehead, Jillian Peck, and Brien Forrester as our tourist guide.

10645251_10203266117195947_7979138143883338971_n-1

Chase Kloetzke & Dr. Aaron Judkins in Boliva

When we got to Paracas, we spent five days researching the skulls. I was asked to study four specific elongated skulls. Chase Kloetzke brought her forensic investigative field kit and together with Joe Taylor we got to work.  We were given exclusive permission to unwrap the only known infant elongated skull in Peru. It is estimated at an age of 2,000 years old. The mummy wrapping textile was extremely well preserved displaying colorful sea crabs embroidered into the head wrapping.  We were astonished at the preservation of the skull. In addition to the forensic work, Joe Taylor was given permission by the late Sr. Juan (former director of the Paracas Museum) to mold several of these elongated skulls.

Below is my written report on four elongated skulls from Paracas. This report was originally published in LA Marzulli’s book “On the Trail of the Nephilim Vol. 2”. It is also in my journal the Mystery of the Elongated Skulls.

ea10f2_3a868b0301754e1bb35256c6ce3f215e~mv2

Osteological Evaluation of 4 Elongated Skulls from Paracus, Peru ©

by Aaron Judkins, Ph.D. Consulting Archaeologist

February 18, 2014

 

Specimen Number 1:  Infant, elongated skull (15-22 months)

img_7412-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; 1 intact mandible

In general, the skull has been remarkably preserved. The general shape of the skull is elongated with red-auburn colored hair still intact. This made evaluation of skull sutures difficult to assess as this obstructed the view.

The general morphology of the individual visible cranial bones is within normal limits. There is the metopic (nasal) and frontal sutures noted which are non-fused. The sagittal suture cannot be assessed e xteriorly via the anterior view due to hair obstruction. However, it is noted via the interior of the skull as seen from the inferior view and is of expected configuration and is non-fused. Sutural bones (Wormian ossicles or Incan Bones) were not possible to visualize due to the hair. The foramina are of expected configuration. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. Skull measurements were conducted using both straight & elliptical digital calipers. Cranial volume was measured using rice to determine the weight. The weight was then converted from kilograms (kg) to cubit centimeters (cm3) to determine volume. The density of the rice (753 kg/m3) was factored in.

(Cranial capacity is a measure of the volume of the interior of the cranium (also called the brain-case or skull volume). The most commonly used unit of measure is the cubic centimeter or cc. The volume of the cranium is used as a rough indicator of the size of the brain, although this is not an indicator of the potential intelligence of the organism).

img_7421-hdr

Result: 

Cranial volume: 797 cm3. Normal range for age: 369-961 cm3

Conclusion: 

Although the configuration of the skull is elongated, the cranial volume is within normal limits.

Dentition:

All of the fully erupted teeth are deciduous and in good condition. There are no dental restorations or prostheses. There is no significant attrition.

Fontanelles: 

Unable to assess the  anterior, the posterior, sphenoidal (anterolateral), and the mastoidal (posterolateral) fontanelles due to hair obstruction.

Summary:

1. This is an excellent example of an infant elongated skull. It is not currently possible to reliably differentiate between male and female infant and young child skeletal remains or amongst the major racial groups within subadults.

2. Age assessment of skeletal remains is best done in the context of the entire skeleton. It is important to emphasize that when limited to the skull, age assessment of subadult remains is best done through a coordinated evaluation of such features as dentition and fontanelle closure, as well as radiographs and/or computed tomography (CT) scans. This is particularly key for studies of tooth development (calcification, eruption). However, this testing was not readily accessible nor available during the initial on-site examination. It is important to emphasize that the evaluation of a skull without these methods is preliminary. However, the ability to analyze such remains from the strict perspective of osteology is fundamental for evaluation.

3. Dental Age: Likely 15 – 22 months.Non-Dental: No older than 22 months. Evaluation for age was done by a consulting forensic Peruvian Dentist, Dr. Daniel Mendoza Alarcon who used odontological parameters based purely on visible eruption patterns noted.

4.  In the evaluation of subadult skulls, particularly when studying ‘typical’ eruption patterns, it must be stated that statistical data is based on populations, and may not necessarily be reflective of reality in an individual.

5. It is necessary to note the differences between primary and secondary dentition, eruption patterns, and controversies surrounding the timelines that ‘typify’ those eruption patterns.

6. The probability of Cuneiforme modeling [A specific cradle-boarding technique of the skull with pressure applied to the forehead and back of the skull to produce an artificially conical or truncated cone-shape] should not be ruled out. Differential diagnosis should include “cultural practices” by the Paracas culture.

7.  Applying the scientific principle of Ockham’s Razor; while it does not tell us that the simplest explanation is true, may provide the best explanation based on methodological grounds.

img_7426-hdr

 

dscf0606

Senior Juan from the Paracas History Museum holding the infant elongated skull 

 

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-23-40-pm

Specimen Number 2: Adult, elongated skull (unknown age)

img_7432-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; intact mandible (not shown)

The skull is in good condition. The general shape of the skull is markedly elongated (in the anteroposterior plane), has a very high forehead, and a deeply sloping parieto-occipital region. The ectocranial morphology of the individual cranial bones is within normal limits. The foramen magnum is unusually large and the occipital condyles are very large and somewhat elevated although the general morphology of the individual visible cranial bones is within normal limits. The mandible is robust (not shown). There coronal suture is clearly visible with partial fu  sion noted. The sagittal suture is absent. Skull measurements were conducted using both straight & elliptical digital calipers. The hair is red-auburn colored which is mostly non-intact. This made evaluation of skull very easy to assess. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. Cranial volume was measured using the technique already described above.

Result: 

Cranial volume: 2,390 cm3. Normal range: 1,350-1,750 cm with 1,450 cm3 being average.    

Conclusion:

The cranial volume is much larger and outside of normal parameters.

Dentition:

The dental condition is poor. There is evidence of severe periodontal disease, and only 9 of 32 teeth remain. Caries and severe abrasion are noted.

Features of Sex:

The supraorbital ridges are bulging, and the supraorbital margins are well-rounded. The mastoid processes are large, and suprameatal crests (zygomatic arch extensions) are present. The nuchal area is large but not significantly ridged.

Summary:

1. Adult; probably male although sex and age are not definitively determined.

2. Cranial volume is much larger than expected and outside of normal parameters; unknown etiology.

3. Absence of the sagittal suture; cannot rule out craniosynostosis with marked dolichocephaly.

4. The skull appears to possibly share a few similar Polynesian traits but this is inconclusive at this time.

5. The probability of Tabulate modeling [The most common type of cradle-boarding practiced by the Paracas Culture] should not be ruled out. Differential diagnosis should include “cultural practices” by the Paracas culture.

6. Applying the scientific principle of Ockham’s Razor; while it does not tell us that the simplest explanation is true, may provide the best explanation based on methodological grounds.

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-24-11-pm

Specimen Number 3: Adult skull (unknown age)

img_7541-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; no mandible

The skull is in overall good condition with no hair. The coronal suture is clearly visible with partial fusion noted. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. The sagittal suture is absent. Two markedly elongated parietal bones are possibly fused at the midline, and a small ridge/elevation sits at what would have been the site of the sagittal suture. The skull exhibits a mild sagittal keel and parietal bossing. The cranial s  utures are otherwise normally configured. The individual visible cranial bones is within normal limits.

Skull measurements were conducted using both straight & elliptical digital calipers.

Cranial volume was measured using the technique already described above.

Result: 

Cranial volume: 1,726 cm3. Normal range: 1,350-1,750 cm with 1,450 cm3 being average.    

Conclusion:

The cranial volume is within normal parameters.

Dentition:

Absence of most of the teeth in the maxillae.

Features of Sex:

Probably male with bulging supraorbital ridges.

img_7538-hdr

Summary:

1.  Adult; most likely greater than 30 years of age.

2.  Cranial volume is within normal parameters.

3.  Absence of s agittal suture with a mild sagittal keel and parietal bossing. Cannot rule out craniosynostosis with moderate dolichocephaly.

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-24-31-pm

Specimen Number 4 Adult skull (20-24 yrs of age)

dscf0739

img_7551-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; no mandible; Paracas, Peru

The skull is small and in overall good condition. There is no hair. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. The forehead is somewhat sloping. This specimen has a deviated septum and flattened nasals. The coronal suture is clearly visible. The sagittal suture is absent. In the left temporal suture there are four extra bones. The occipital profile is markedly flat. A large sutural bone (Wormian ossicles or Incan Bones) is noted in the lambdoid suture. The skull has an appearance of having been flattened in the anteroposterior plane.

Skull measurements were conducted usin  g both straight & elliptical digital calipers. Cranial volume was measured using the technique already described above.

Result: 

Cranial volume:  929 cm3. Normal range: 1,350-1,750 cm with 1,450 cm3 being average.

Conclusion: The cranial volume is smaller than normal parameters for an adult skull. Unknown etiology.

Dentition:

Absence of the teeth in the maxillae. There is a one-half inch separation between where the front teeth were. Without the mandible, it is difficult to assess the degree of alveolar prognathism; however, the maxilla suggests at least a mild      degree of prominence.

Features of Sex:

Assessment of sex indicates female characteristics as there is a generalized gracility of the cranium.

Summary:

  1. Adult female; most likely between 20-24 years of age.
  2. Cranial volume much smaller than anticipated for suspected age.
  3. Absence of sagittal suture. Cannot rule out craniosynostosis with marked scaphocephaly.
  4. The nasal appears to possibly share similar Polynesian traits of flattened nasals with a deviated septum.

5. Prominent cranial sha pe anomalies. The probability of Annular modeling should not be ruled out. Differential diagnosis should include “cultural practices” by the Paracas culture.

6.  Applying the scientific principle of Ockham’s Razor; while it does not tell us that the simplest explanation is true, may provide the best explanation based on methodological grounds.

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-24-52-pm

 

DISCLAIMER:

This report is meant only as a preliminary examination of the anatomical, anthropology and forensic sciences to learn more about its forensic osteology. Although my evaluation has been done with the original specimens, my evaluation is based solely upon the osteologic material and my opinions are based solely upon the material presented to me.

Cranial capacity was measured using rice to determine the weight. The weight was then converted from kilograms (kg) to cubit centimeters (cm3) to determine volume. Using this method was the only viable method available in the field and can only estimate cranial capacity.

Forensic investigations should also include additional studies that would be undertaken to formulate a basis of accumulated knowledge by forensic anthropologist &/or pathologist and the publishing of a peer-reviewed report. Definitive analysis should include laser scanning, function analysis by FORDISC 3.0 &/or 3D modeling.

My opinions regarding these skulls were made without access to the entire skeletons. This should not be considered a final report or definitive analysis of the specimens.

Aaron Judkins, Ph.D. http://www.AARONJUDKINS.com

REFERENCES:

1. Aufderheide, A. and Rodriguez-Martin, C. (1998). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Paleopathology. Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.

2. Krogman, W. and Iscan, M. (1986). The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine. 2 ed. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

3. Matisoo-Smith, E. & Ramirez, J. (2010). Human Skeletal Evidence of Polynesian Presence in South America? Journal of Pacific Archaeology. Vol.1, No.1.

4. Matshes, E. and Lew, E. (2006). Forensic osteology. In Forensic Pathology: Principles and Practice, D. Dolinak, E. Matshes, and E. Lew, Editors. San Diego, CA: Elsevier (Academic Press). 

5. Milner, Richard. “Cranial Capacity.” The Encyclopedia of Evolution: Humanity’s Search For Its Origins. New York: Holt, 1990: 98.

6. Powell, T.V. and Brodie, A.G. (1963). Closure of the Spheno-Occipital Synchondrosis. Anatomical Record, 147: 15-23.

7. Raven, Peter H. & Johnson, George B. Biology. Iowa: Brown, 1995: 443.

8. Scheuer, L. and Black, S. (2000). Developmental Juvenile Osteology. San Diego, CA: Elsevier (Academic Press).

9. Standring, S., Ed. (2005). Gray’s Anatomy: The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice. 39 ed. London: Elsevier (Churchill Livingstone).

10. Walker, Alan & Shipman, Pat. The Wisdom of the Bones. New York: Knopf, 1996.

11. Weber, J., et al. (2007). Morphometric analysis of untreated adult skulls in syndromic and nonsyndromic craniosynostosis. Neurosurgical Review, 31(2): 179-188.

Also see: 

Another Bone to Pick…With Peruvian Nephilim/Alien Hybrids

Ancient Elongated Skulls: Alien Remains?

Star Child Skull report here: 

Peru 2014

Posted: November 27, 2013 by Maverick in Archaeology
Tags: , , , ,

Paracas Skull DNA

I am  headed to Peru in January with LA Marzulli on the Trail of the Nephilim.  I will be one of two American archaeologist as well as one Peruvian archaeologist.  Joe Taylor will also be with us who will do more castings, of the elongated skulls there along with Ron Moorehead will also accompany us.

I could use some prayer support, but there’s another matter which I want to bring up and it is this.  If any of you have some extra dollars and want to “sow” into Man vs Archaeology, now might be a good time to do so.

If you feel compelled to do so, you will get The Los Lunas Mystery Stone DVD, as well as my book, “Alien Agenda: the Return of the Nephilim” which will total a $40.00 value, if you donate $100.00 or more.

We are going to collect DNA samples from various sites and this is what part of your donations will go to.  We’re attempting to find out if these elongated skulls are the remains of a hybrid being, known as the Nephilim. The testing of the samples will reach about $7000.00 per sample!  There are many expenses on this trip, as I have to pay for my hotel & daily expenses such meals.

My airfare is paid so I’m going no matter what.  We will be gone for about three weeks.

If your interested in helping out please go to the donation button at www.AARONJUDKINS.com.   I’m not a 501c3, so your donations will not be tax deductible.

Thank you for investing into this work!

Maverick

Thank you to those who have donated! You make a difference! 

1. Sally Cline

2. Tye Towriss

3. Audrey Robinson – Canada

4. E.E. “Bud” Dallmann

 

ARCHAEOLOGY NEWSFLASH
This news is from Jonathan Gray -www.beforeus.com 

You’ll be astonished at this news which Lisa has revealed. A young New Zealander on a visit to the USA, Lisa worked for a while with the New Mexico Parks Department. During her term of employment there was a big “washout” in one of the Park regions and I’m assuming it was up in Pueblo country around Taos.

The flash flood scoured out embankments and in doing so a large number of anomalous skeletons were exposed. Lisa and her colleagues were assigned the task of gathering up the remains and placing them into crates. Also in attendance at the site were Smithsonian Institute officials and FBI agents. Each day as Lisa and the other Parks Department employees went onto the site, they were searched for cameras. Similarly they were searched as they left the site each day to make sure they weren’t removing artefacts.

They were also obliged to sign “secrecy documents” ensuring that they would never divulge details of their participation in this undertaking. The reason for this degree of secrecy stems from the fact that the skeletons were of people who were about 8 feet tall. They had six fingers on each hand and six toes per foot. They also had a strange, double row arrangement of teeth. The crates containing the recovered remains, at the termination of work, were taken away by the Smithsonian officials and, undoubtedly, will never be seen again.

Lisa later had official “hassles” when trying to come home to New Zealand and was severely grilled by United States government functionaries as she attempted to depart from the US.

The Testimony of Luigi Muscas on his property near Cagliari, Sardinia on 11/11/2012

By Paola Harris http://paolaharris.com

Luigi told me about the tombs and artifacts of giants (15 foot tall beings) who lived in Sardinia thousands of years ago. He told me that his father and his uncles, who also own land near his land, have dug up many bones and human artifacts. He also mentioned that traditional archeology does not accept this discovery and that his entire family has been threatened. He has been told over and over to keep this secret and NOT talk to the general public. His has written two books on the GIANTS, one called The Giants, Children of the Stars and The Giants and the Culture from the Stars, which has many photographs. He says

“The people who come to my house to heard about the star people, they want a certainty, the proof that this is not a fantasy but the truth. This Reality is hidden, buried until it was discovered and been sold, occulted, destroyed without respect for our Sardinian history. I am hoping we can keep this story safe until we can deal with it with extreme care because it also is the story of all humanity.”

To talk about the Giants stimulates much curiosity but also much skepticism. It is true that is difficult to even imagine another reality different from the one we know. But as of 1997, our Italian media has slowly started to speak about it in their broadcasts. In Sardinia, we began to see this reality in our broadcasts 2003. It is a fact that in all the world enormous bones have been discovered. In Mexico, Athens, Africa and other countries we see the photos.

Some of us in Sardinia believe that our constructions called Nuraghi are the very tombs of these “giants”. But this has not yet been recognized as official.

Paola Harris holds fossilized Giant's tooth
Paola Harris holds fossilized Giant’s tooth.
Giant tooth
Luigi Muscas holds giant tooth.
Giant jawbone
Luigi Muscas holds giant jawbone
Tomb of Giants
Giant skull
Skeleton of Giant
Skeleton of Giant
Tombs of Giants
Books by Luigi Muscas
Luigi Muscas shows Paola Harris giant tooth.
Luigi Muscas shows Paola Harris giant tooth.
Giant bones found in a secret location
Want to read more on Giants? Go here! https://manvsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/giants/

Image

Along with commentary by noted Ph.D. scholar, Dr. Michael Heiser, independent filmmaker Chris White presents an exhaustive point-by-point critique of the Ancient Aliens series while providing a massive list of references from scientific journals and other scholarly sources to back up his definitive refutations.

These 252 footnotes, combined with White’s sound, logical arguments, show that the theories promoted by the History Channel as historical fact on this wildly popular series are actually embarrassingly easy to disprove.

Even those sympathetic to the ideas proposed in the Ancient Aliens series are giving praise to this new documentary. One author from the DailyGrail.com, a very prominent website that typically upholds the viewpoints touted in Ancient Aliens, recently said the following of White’s new film:

“A new 3-hour documentary, Ancient Aliens Debunked, takes the series apart, fact-checking individual’s claims on topics including pyramid construction, the Temple of Baalbek, Incan sites, Easter Island. Pacal’s ‘rocket’, the Nazca lines, and the Egyptian ‘light bulb’.…..[the film] offers clarifications, corrections, and background information that certainly removes much of the superficial gloss from Ancient Aliens.”

Like Aaron’s Blog? Click to Tweet! http://clicktotweet.com/4dM9t

This is part 1 of 3: The Megaliths

Intro, Puma Punku, The Pyramids, Baalbek, Incan sites, Easter Island.

http://t.co/e8tpXsSD

Part 2: Ancient Artifacts

Pacal’s rocket, The Nazca Lines, Tolima “fighter jets”, Egyptian “light bulb”, Ufo’s in ancient art, The crystal skulls

Part 3: Ancient Texts

Ezekiel’s Wheel, Ancient nuclear warfare, Vimana’s, Anunnaki, Nephilim, Misc. and conclusion

http://youtu.be/y2ZgH_6T7aU

GIANT-SKELETONS-CHART

Genesis 6:4 (KJV)
4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which wereof old, men of renown.

The word the Hebrew uses here is the word “Nephilim” which means “the fallen ones” and HaGibborim which means “the mighty ones.” The Greek Septuagint (LXX), a translation of the Torah into Greek about 270 B.C., renders these as gigantes; meaning “earth-born.” These giants are the result of an unnatural union between some of the fallen angels and human women that resulted in offspring that were not only gigantic in stature but very evil. Their great size and strength likely came from the mixture of demonic “DNA” mixing with human genetics. Does that make them ancient aliens from other planets as some suppose? No. They are not extraterrestrials at all! They are hyper-dimensional in nature. After the Nephilim arrive, we see that wickedness is abound on the earth corrupting mankind. This was one of the primary reasons for the drastic judgment of the flood.

In order to understand Giants, you need to understand that there were “gods” on this earth before the flood of Noah’s day and they will appear on this earth again before the 2nd Advent of Jesus Christ. The names of these gods have survived in myth form in Greek, Roman and Babylonian mythology. The “gods” are those Nephilim, “the fallen ones,” whose offspring were the giants.

They were the men of old, men of renown as the Bible describes them. The Bible clearly uses the “sons of God.” The Hebrew word which is used is “Bene Ha Elohim.” This always refers to “angels” in the Old Testament.[1]They were not the “Daughters of Men” which is the term “benoth adam” in Hebrew and translates as the “daughters of Adam.” It is important to note that “benoth adam” means from Adam; not Cain! Since the designation “sons of God” is consistently used in the Old Testament for angles, it is logical to conclude that the term in Genesis 6:2 also referred to angels. In Job1:6 and Job 2:1 the “sons of God” came to present themselves before the Lord in heaven. Among them is Satan-a further confirmation that the “sons of God” are angels.

Genesis 6:5-9 (KJV)
5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, andNoah walked with God.

This intermarrying with the Fallen Angels is the reason that God wipes out everyone except for Noah and his family in a worldwide flood. Every human genetic line had been corrupted except for Noah’s. It wasn’t because Noah was a perfect man! The Bible doesn’t say that. It says that he was “perfect in his generations.” Noah and his family were not corrupted by the Nephilim and were the only ones to carry on the human gene pool to repopulate the earth after the Deluge. They were “perfect” in their DNA. This corruption of the human genetics with the Fallen Angels is Satan’s attempt to pollute the human gene pool to attempt to thwart the coming birth of the Messiah!  So the Nephilim were the offspring of the cohabitation of fallen angels with human women. What we have in Genesis 6 is part of the Angels that rebelled with Lucifer come down and cohabited with human women; producing a race of demonic giants.

Admittedly, this is pretty wild. Now that the human race is starting, Satan sees an opportunity to do that which he could not do before and that is to be fruitful and multiply. How does he do this? He does so by getting some of the fallen Angels (sons of God) that rebuild with him to cohabit with the daughters of men. This produces a race of demigods; half demonic, half human giants.

Here are the races of giants the Bible describes:

1. Rephaim – from the root rapha = spirits, shades; the walking dead. (Gen. 14:5, Deuteronomy 3:11, Isaiah 26:14) Gen 14 is the account of how powerful Chedorlaomer, King of Elam, was by defeating the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Rephaims, Zuzims, Emims, Horites, Amalekites and the Amorites. These were the nations of the Giants. We also read how Abram defeated Chedorlaomer in battle to rescue Lot when he invaded Sodom & Gomorrah. This was a sign to let all know that God was with Abram!

2. Anakim “Ananaki” – those from who the heavens came (Num. 13:33) They were perhaps the best known of the giants living in the land of Caanan at the time of the Exodus.

3. Emim – the proud deserters; terrors.

4. Zuzim – the evil ones, roaming things (Gen. 14:5)

5. Zamzummims – the evil plotters, (Genesis 19:38; Deut. 2:20-21) They were a people great, and tall, as the Anakims and were overcome by the Ammonites, who called them “Zamzummims.” They belonged to the Rephaim, and inhabited the country afterwards occupied by the Ammonites. It is thought that they might be Ham-zuzims (Zuzims) dwelling in Ham; a place to the south of Ashteroth (Gen_14:5), the ancient Rabbath-ammon.

Giant remains in Ancient History[2]

* Remains of Teutobochus, Rhone in 1613 -30 ft.

* Angoula. 21 ft. (12 cubits in height),

* Lucerne, 1577, Dr. Plater. – 19 ft.

* Giants of Patagonia- 11-15 ft.


[1]CF: Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 & NT: Luke 20:36

[2] Taylor, Joe, Giants Against Evolution, Mt. Blanco Publishing, 2012

Like Aaron’s Blog? Click to Tweet! http://clicktotweet.com/4dM9t

AlienAgenda-Web-page

New book by A.S. Judkins! Now Available!

www.mtblanco.com

New book by Joe Taylor: Giants: Against Evolution
http://www.mtblanco.com

         Click the pic to go to the website