Thursday, March 6, 2014

Your Daily Giant 1/9/2013

The Unearthing of what was believed to be quite possibly the largest skull in the world in 1939 in Texas. The article reports the skull is twice the size of a normal skull and several large human bones were also unearthed at the site. Marcus Goldstein, the Physical Anthropologist in charge of the find was formerly an aide to Alex Hrdlicka the curator of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Physical Anthropology. One of the arguments skeptics use to try to explain all these finds is that they were misidentified mastodon or mammoth bones. These giant skeletons were mostly found in Native American burial mounds with artifacts, jewelry and copper. This assertion is an arrogant and misleading misdirection away from the overwhelming evidence. Does the giant skull look like a Mastodon? Do you really think all these experts do not understand human anatomy?
The correspondence below is from Carolyn Spock the head of records at the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory to researcher Terje Dahl in 2010 who has graciously allowed me to post it. Goldstein the Physical Anthropologist says the skull is of extraordinary size, the newspaper calls it twice as large as normal and quite possibly the largest skull found in the world and the head of records at TARL says the skull is somehow missing. WTF. This is one for the skeptics to choke on, explain this please and notice how big the skull is compared to normal skulls in the picture.

Sent: 10. February 2010 07:03 To: Terje DahlRegarding: SV: Giant human skull The particular specimen that you ask about, the large skull found at the Morhiss site in 1939, is noted in our paperwork as missing from the collection (and has been for some time, not appearing in inventories undertaken since the collection arrived at TARL). Physical anthropologist Marcus S. Goldstein says in his manuscript, "A couple of unusual crania were unearthed at Morhiss Mound in Victoria County. One of these, although much mended and its base quite warped, is nevertheless obviously a skull of extraordinary size, in many respects larger than any yet reported. The possibility of abnormality, perhaps an endocrine disturbance, arose immediately, but the largeness of the skull seems to be symmetrical, the hand bones do not show the 'knobbing' typical of acromegaly, Moreover, other crania from the same site approximate the skull in question. Hence, it is my opinion that this exceptionally large skull was not the result of endocrine pathology."

No comments:

Post a Comment