It has been said that no remains of a bigfoot/sasquatch has ever been found, and yet I ran into more then a few websites that made mention of some very large giant skeletons found years ago. Some of the heights and sizes of the skeletons bring bigfoot to my mind. Has anyone in the bigfoot/sasquatch field ever questioned findings of these giant skeletons and wondered if there was a connection to bigfoot/sasquatch? I would definitely be interested in viewing these giant skeletons but I'm going to guess they've been spirited away from public view long ago. Some of these were reported to be found in "mounds" here in Minnesota where I live. I've also noticed some notations that appear to point to the fact that some of them at least are now at the Smithsonian. I am going to guess that none of them are available for public view, but I could be wrong.

Here is one of the websites I ran into to. At the very least it makes for interesting reading:


http://www.stangrist.com/giants.htm

Laurie

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...leton+skeletons

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...leton+skeletons

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...leton+skeletons

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=561&hl=

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=475&hl=

Thank you, Stacy! Looks like I'm going to be busy reading for a long time. That'll keep me out of mischief for awhile.

I was hoping it wasn't anything new. I had run across a few websites covering the subject and had never heard of it myself.

Re giant human bones. there are plenty of historical reports circa 1800's to sift through, some of which mention involvement by Smithsonian employees in recovery of the remains.

Source for the following ; scan of a book entitled The American Antiquarian Volume IX , January November 1887, edited by Stephen D. Peet.

Click to view attachment

2nd scan
Click to view attachment

Last scan

Click to view attachment

I stumbled across this stuff and, since no sasquatches were captured this week, thought it might be something to pass the time on while we, you know, wait. Anyone familiar with incidents like these? I find the notion of native people having access to BF stiffs and the inclination to offer some kind of burial/internment treatment perfectly reasonable. I don't know what to say about all that Egyptian stuff, but I'm pretty sure that a departed BF should leave behind something resembling....a giant skeleton!

http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/Lagoon/1345/giants.html

* In his book, The Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee, author John Haywood describes "very large" bones in stone graves found in Williamson County, Tennessee, in 1821. In White County, Tennessee, an "ancient fortification" contained skeletons of gigantic stature averaging at least 7 feet in length.

* Giant skeletons were found in the mid-1800s near Rutland and Rodman, New York. J.N. DeHart, M.D. found vertebrae "larger than those of the present type" in Wisconsin mounds in 1876. W.H.R. Lykins uncovered skull bones "of great size and thickness" in mounds of Kansas City area in 1877.

* George W. Hill, M.D., dug out a skeleton "of unusual size" in a mound of Ashland County, Ohio. In 1879, a nine-foot, eight-inch skeleton was excavated from a mound near Brewersville, Indiana(Indianapolis News, Nov 10, 1975)

* A six foot, six inch skeleton was found in a Utah mound. This was at least a foot taller than the average Indian height in the area, and these natives- what few there were of them -were not mound builders.

* "A skeleton which is reported to have been of enormous dimensions" was found in a clay coffin, with a sandstone slab containing hieroglyphics, during mound explorations by a Dr everhart near Zanesville, Ohio.(American Antiquarian, v3, 1880, pg61)

* Ten skeletons "of both sexes and of gigantic size" were taken from a mound at Warren, Minnesota, 1883. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 23, 1883)

* A skeleton 7 feet 6 inches long was found in a massive stone structure that was likened to a temple chamber within a mound in Kanawha County, West Virginia, in 1884. (American Antiquarian, v6, 1884 133f. Cyrus Thomas, Report on Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 12th Annual Report, Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology, 1890-91)

* A large mound near Gasterville, Pennsylvania, contained a vault in which was found a skeleton measuring 7 feet 2 inches. Inscriptions were carved on the vault. (American Antiquarian, v7, 1885, 52f) click here for full article

* In 1885, miners discovered the mummified remains of woman measuring 6 feet 8 inches tall holding an infant. The mummies were found in a cave behind a wall of rock in the Yosemite Valley. click here for full article

* In Minnesota, 1888, were discovered remains of seven skeletons 7 to 8 feet tall. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 29, 1888)

* A mound near Toledo, Ohio, held 20 skeletons, seated and facing east with jaws and teeth "twice as large as those of present day people," and besides each was a large bowl with "curiously wrought hieroglyphic figures." (Chicago Record, Oct. 24, 1895; cited by Ron G. Dobbins, NEARA Journal, v13, fall 1978)

* The skeleton of a huge man was uncovered at the Beckley farm, Lake Koronis, Minnesota; while at Moose Island and Pine City, bones of other giants came to light. (St. Paul Globe, Aug. 12, 1896)

* In 1911, several red-haired mummies ranging from 6 and a half feet to 8 feet tall were discovered in a cave in Lovelock, Nevada. click here for the full article

* In February and June of 1931, large skeletons were found in the Humboldt lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada. The first of these two skeletons found measured 8 1/2 feet tall and appeared to have been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similiar to the Egyptian manner. The second skeleton was almost 10 feet long.(Review - Miner, June 19, 1931)

* A 7 foot 7 inch skeleton was reported to have been found on the Friedman ranch, near Lovelock, Nevada, in 1939.(Review - Miner, Sept. 29, 1939)

* In 1965, a skeleton measuring 8 feet 9 inches was found buried under a rock ledge along the Holly Creek in east-central Kentucky. click here for the full article

Yeah, I've read that quite a number of ''giants'' have been found in various places in and around TN...

The supposed skeletal finds in White County have always kept my interest peeked, as there are tons of sightings and stories of Bigfoot sightings up there...

Here's an article on this topic I wrote and posted on the AIBR site (lost in the recent mixup with the provider):
================



I wish someone knowledgeable in the BF community would write a rebuttal to the skeptics’ routine charge that “No bones have ever been found” and that “There’s nary a trace of bones.” It should mention briefly all the cases where bones that might have come from a BF have been found, but have been misplaced or reburied. Come B-Day, science’s mishandling of possible BF remains will be a big embarrassment to it.

What follows are a few of the missing-bones cases; I recently heard a guest on the artistfirst Internet BF radio show (www.artistfirst.com) mention three additional cases (beyond the ones discussed below) where bones had been sent to museums and lost. The odds are strong against the validity of any one case. But the odds are lower that all the cases are invalid. Thus the disbelievers’ implication that the cupboard has always been bare is an overstatement.

Here are a couple of old quotations that indicate why it would have been quite possible, in the days before widespread Bigfoot reports, for supposed bones of “giants” or “big Indians” to get discarded upon arrival at a museum, or tossed out in the spring cleaning. Museums receive much unworthy material, including a fair number of hoaxes, so curators have developed a dismissive attitude toward items donated by amateurs, especially those items lacking scientific-type, site-specific information. I hadn’t been aware until I stumbled across these articles of the negative context in which such material would have been viewed.



In light of the above, it’s understandable how it might have seemed like standard operating procedure to an anthropologist examining, say, the famous Minaret Skull, to trashcan it. He’d thereby spare a museum from wasting its time and space on material of no scientific interest. In other cases, curators might have done the same.

BTW, this well-established practice of dumping (and also the little-known practice of “de-accessioning”) adds credibility in my mind to accusations that the Smithsonian (and possibly other museums) has used that means to dispose of artifacts relating to other anomalies that were doctrinally discomfiting.

Track Record editor Ray Crowe commented:


On the other hand, most of the tantalizing cases listed below have probably been checked out and found to be dead ends, in light of the following rueful observation:








In the Bigfoot Co-Op for April 1994, p. 9, Ray Crowe wrote, “The B.C. museum is supposed to have a huge jawbone … but no one at the museum knows where it is, except that it is crated and in storage (Bigfoot, Guenette, 1989). Even Ivan Sanderson (Abominable Snowmen) reported bones [of an 8-footer] that had been shipped to Wrexham Museum, North Wales, England. They must have evaporated, as no trace of them was ever found.” A couple more cases are then mentioned.

Track Record #28, p. 6: “Bernie Cross, from letter of July 23, 1976: Concerns find of a giant humanoid skull twice as large as a normal human’s. … returned to the mound & covered …”

Track Record #78, p. 13, col. 2, quotes a newsclip about Rex Gilroy of New South Wales who has what he thinks is a Yowie skull, which scientists won’t look at.

Track Record#86, pp. 7-8, describes about several cases of possible BF bones, most taken from p. 151 of Dr. Karl Shuker’s book, The Unexplained, 1996. Here are a few stories:
• 1833—skeleton 12 tall found at Lompock Rancho, CA.
• 1856—skeleton 10 feet, 9 inches found in WV.
• 1880s—68 skeletons averaging 7 feet tall (some much taller) found in Indian mound in PA. Some bones sent to the American Investigating Museum, which can’t find them.

Track Record #91, p. 18, Steve High wrote, “I will lay money that people have found and walked right by Bigfoot bones thinking they were bear.”

Track Record #99, p. 18, col. 2, a letter from Andrew Peterson cites an old news clipping describing the discovery in a beach in Grey’s Harbor, WA of an 8-foot tall skeleton.

Track Record #118, p. 5, col. 1-2, “Todd [Neiss] told of a small museum in Sumpter, OR, at the back of the Sumpter Store, next to the Elkhorn Tavern. Todd saw there a femur bone, about 4 foot long, and labeled Bigfoot bone. He tried to buy it from the proprietor without success.”

Track Record #120, p. 10, col. 1, Valentin Sapunov, “There were leg bones of a giant man like a gorilla in the Museum of the University of Prague, but some years ago these bones disappeared….”

There may be more such items in TR, since only a portion has been put online.



Six screenfuls of material on this topic appeared in the Track Record newsletter #86, April 1999. Online go to http://www.internationalbigfootsociety.com...track.php?id=65; then hit page-down 26 times. There, correspondent Jim Lee wrote:

Kathy M. Strain commented on the above:


Ray Crowe contacted the museum’s owner and provided additional information on this in Track Record #67, at http://www.internationalbigfootsociety.com...track.php?id=50.

Kathy M. Strain commented on the above:

Although there regularly seems to be 15 different threads on any one single subject, this topic, while interesting, has several past threads covering it. And most of them contain few posts. I have merged the new topic (2 posts in total) started today by Monkey Man into the most appropriate previous thread on the matter. If it helps, there's some 'similar thread' links back near the beginning of this topic.

"Harry"

I also find it interesting that in Antiquities of Wisconsin, written by I.A. Lapham in 1855 it states:



And this is the Fig. 57 referenced:

Click to view attachment

I am highly suspicious of the lack of scientific description, cataloguing etc of "giant remains" which we seem to have enough reports of, that even if only 10% were truly out of the ordinary, we'd still have ten times as many of them as we do for all of our supposed evolutionary ancestors. I smell a rat in the realms of human evolutionary theory. I personally think that the claims of creationists, that giant skeletons somehow disprove evolution period, are off base, but that they do have a genuine point about the shakiness of the evidence for "recent" human evolution. The last couple of million years give or take.

There's been many well publicised cases of native americans claiming any and all humanish remains, such that I think that recent finds probably get ploughed back in ASAP by the farmer or whoever is finding them, because they don't want to deal with all that crap.

There's a heck of a lot you will notice, found in relation to mounds attributed to the "mound building culture" but read anything about them in official sources and no reference to gigantism or even greater than "normal" native stature is made.

I find versions of this native american tradition interesting

Seen several versions of that, along with brief mentions of a giant people having fortified villages. Described in some versions as being cowardly and unwarlike. Anyway, the fact that the legend mention that lots were killed and the manner of burial suggests very closely some of the mounds mentioned in 1800s newspaper accounts that were "full of giant bones". I've got it down as one of my "outside chance" theories that Sasquatch are actually the remains of a formerly more civilised people who got wiped out in ancient battles with native americans. Reading about Neanderthals and how they may have been wiped out by cro-magnon man gives the same impression, that the neanderthals just didn't have the same capacity or capability for making war as the cro-magnons did, for whatever reason. Perhaps these giants retained some of the genes the neanders did from whatever common ancestor they might have had. If Almas turn out to be neander relicts, that would also lend weight to the idea of a people, formerly more civilised, taking to the wilds and becoming elusive to avoid the depradations of a more warlike competitor.

Anyhoo, interesting to poke around in the legends of giants and speculate where our present day big guy fits into it all.

Flash

Hey all,
It's kinda common knowledge around here in Kansas that the Osage Indians, a nearly extinct tribe, were close to 7' tall on average, at least from some of the late 1500s missionary reports from this part of the country.
night all,
vlandrum

Many of the accouts I've read indicate the majority of the bones found in arrid climes crumbled when any attempt was made to lift them. How long does it take for a bone to reach that state of fragility? I know that any bone allowed to rest on the ground in places like the Pacific Northwest would soon dissappear for a number of reasons, and any bones burried in traditionally moist soil would dissolve and be unrecognizable until fossilization of the sediment occured.

Dan

Chief Solano (namesake for Solano County here in the San Francisco Bay Area) was reportedly 7 foot tall as well. There is life size statue of him in downtown Fairfield, the County Seat. By the Court House as I recall.

I can see why so many non-fossilized "giant" skeletons disappear from the hands of the scientific community. The major bulk of the Darwin-Driven scientific community have built their reputations and their status within that community, and the world at large, on the premise that Neanderthal and Gigantopithecus are looong gone. Just look at any rise-of-man-timeline.
Well, it would be damned inconvenient if the premise that you have hocked all your academic life suddenly withered and fell to ashes at your feet as proof-positive evidence of currently living or recently living specimens of long gone beings came to widespread public light.

Pure pride is what causes these skeletal remains to disappear or be swept under the rug and stomped into tiny, unidentifiable splinters.

Can you even imagine the huge embarassment that armies of academicians would suffer when a nine foot tall squatch and his seven foot tall mate are captured and shown to the world via Fox and/or CNN?
All of those scientists who uttered "Harumphh!" or "Preposterous!" at the very mention of modern Gigantos would suffer public humiliation on a monumental level. Their enormous egos would suffer fatal(and near fatal) falls from their Ivory Towers! They have little to gain and much to lose. Think of all the grant money and tons of writing and research they used to back up their human-ascent timelines that would become, well, nearly worthless. All of the denials that have come forth for years from the academics of a current, near mega-primate, roaming the wilds of the world would be trumped, big-time! ALL "Natural History" texts would have to be corrected and a lot of scrambling would occur to pen ammendments into college curriculums.
It would flat put the scientific world on it's collective ear.

No, it doesn't surprise me to read about disappearing "giant skeletons".


I very much look forward to the day when a living squatch or a very recently deceased carcass shows up on the evening news. When that happens, you'll see who are really the best of the scientific community.
They will get up, brush themselves off, heartily eat their crow and proceed to delve deeply into this new discovery. I suspect the rest will run for cover of some sort and lick their wounds.

Well, that's the way I see it, BUT(!), I could be wrong!

Stepping down from the soapbox now (and possibly into the fire).

All the best,
Mike U.

There are no credible reports of giant skeleton's found and/or repressed by science. First, to be considered giant, it would have to be outside of human range. There are indeed individuals in prehistory that were very tall, but clearly human. Most of these rumors of giants skeletons (and every story you hear has five or six versions, such as the skeletons from Lovelock Cave) came about by early anthropologists/archaeologists trying to explain amazing cultural finds, such as the Mound Builders culture (i.e., pure racism lead to the belief that the local Native Americans couldn't have built those mounds, and therefore some large non-extinct giant humans...usually related to biblical giants...had to have built them, etc.). Most giant skeleton stories are from the 1800s and there is some very good evidence that dinosaur bones were mistaken for humans (see work done by Adrienne Mayor).

You are propably right

Robert Wadlow was almost 9 foot tall so that would be within human range.

I would still consider that an 8 foot skeleton would deserve an investigation to make sure that it really belonged to a human.

Most scientists would propably take for granted that it was human if it looked fairly human otherwise and never do any significant analysis to make sure that it belonged to a human.

Unfortunately the subject of giant skelitons has been tainted by numerous hoaxes, all for a nickle admission fee.
There could be some skelitins out there, tucked away in museums or freak shows. A real human body hung for half a century in a san francisco funhouse. Thought to be a prop, mumified, dried, painted repainted.... ewwww
but take everything with a grain of salt :new_lmaosmiley:

can you imagine going up against a whole tribe of BF's with primitive bows/arrows and spears! What? No M2 machine guns? No M-1Abrams tanks? Nothing but sticks and stones? No thanx, but I think your off chance theory may be correct. I have read reports where the NA's call them "people" or another "tribe" sometimes from the north. When I get back home and on my computer, I'll post a photo I have of a big leg bone on a sign that shows the outline of a human. Who knows, maybe it is a dino bone...

here is the pic I said I'd post. Notice the biblical references on it. Makes you wonder if the Genesis version might not be accurate after all!!

I came across another reference from northern tribes and the inuit that the giant people had neither throwing spears nor bows and arrows, rocks were apparently their only projectile weapon. I think they had mostly thrusting spears and clubs for weapons. So I guess early "native" peoples had a tactical advantage in that they could just cut them to pieces at a bit of a distance. They could probably throw a decent sized rock fairly far, but I guess the bowmen could see those coming fairly easily and dodge them, the bows might have been effective from outside rock throwing range. The bows were talking of wouldn't have had the range of the English/Welsh longbow, but the situation would have been analogous to when the English longbowmen cut the French to shreds at Crecy.

Hey, MonkeyBoy63. That femur is a recreation. Who knows if there ever was a real one.

Those tombs containing the jumbo bones were uncovered in the 1950's. I wonder what happened to those bones? Hmmm... :ohmy:

Wow, now either that's a big bone, or that's a very well proportioned miget.
A massive stone ax hung in the campus center of a local jr college for years, I wan't looking last year to take a picture and it'd been moved. still looking for it.

edit cause I can't spell

True it is a recreation, but of a bone that had been found in Turkey. There are literally 100's of accounts of finding big skeletons, many here in the USA. Some how though, all the skeletons end up "missing". I don't like to follow conspiracy theories. It can lead you down a path full of circles and then eventually end in your own mental illness, but what of this? where could that many skeletons of giant size, end up? Just the curiosity part of it, you'd think that at least one of them would end up in a "stuckeys" restaurant somewhere in the desert southwest! LOL. But seriously, what of the report of the BF that got burned in the forest fire in Nv. Outside of winnemucca I think. Then it disappeared too. Can you imagine what the impact would be if they were proven to exist? You think the spotted owl did some damage to the lumber industry? Wow

Ummm I don't think it was Winnemucca, there aren't any forests there. It's a pretty desolate area all around that area of Nevada. There's brush like tumbleweeds and mesquite but no real trees that I can remember seeing the several times I've been through there.

Just for posterity sake, if anyone decides to get off of I-80 and travel into Oregon on the highway to the NW of Winnemucca that leads into Lakeview OR, stop and get gas IN Winnemucca. I didn't the first time I went through there, and found myself 75 miles north of Winnemucca looking at a sign that said, "Next Gas Station 135 Miles"! Egads, only had a quarter tank of gas and it had to be about 120 degrees F* out there. I Did find a little 2 pump station about 7 miles north of the intersection with the sign off the main highway, but it was the only station within 75 miles of Winnemucca. That was back when the normal price of gas was around $1.40.. they soaked me for almost $4 a gallon for the gas, $3 a gallon for water, $5 a pack for cigs (cigs were around $1.75 anywhere else) and $1.50 for a candy bar to see me through.. GEESH! I learned real fast out there, it's not like the midwest where there's a gas station every mile or so. Many times I'd find stations 50+ miles apart in the less populated areas.

*Fahrenheit

There's more on this site: Out of Place Artifacts: Giant Skulls and Evidence of a Lost Race



For the record I belive in creation ex nihilo and that the biblical account of giants (Nephilim) is for real - as is the rest of the Book.

:biggrin:

-edited for link and picture-

poignant when the skulls are shaped as shown by the pics you've included it's been attributed to certain civilizations which made a practice of binding the heads of their infants to cause them to grow that way. It's not a natural anomaly.

Example Chinook Nation
Example Vanautu
Example Ancient Egyptians

I think I see "Siam" written on that skull, and I think that head binding was known in Thailand previous to the 19th century.

That story was a fabrication, as I recall. I believe it was determined as such by Hairy Man.

A lot of the giant reports and ancient large footprint reports are directly related to religious beliefs. It is frustrating, whenever you try to track down a large skeleton you end up with somebody who is trying to prove that the biblical reports of giants were correct, or that man and dinosaur were contemporaries so therefore the earth is only 5000 years old, or some other such nonsense.

This is the best thread ive read here in over a year. I am overwhelminly facinated and intrigued by this subject and I believe this needs more aggresive investigative approaches by bigfoot researcher's and scientist into the disapearances of these purported giant skeletal remains.

Im ignorantly perplexed as to why their are'nt more discussions on this subject matter. I truly believe that If and at all possible that BFF members should try and research and bring more scientific and historical data to the table here at BFF and LaurieB2851 has raised a very very good question here and I would like to commend her for that,Thxs Laurie!

I wish I had found this thread yesterday as I wrote a story which is probably "heresay" but nonetheless this story, I feel fits this peticular topic.


Ive been meaning to inform somebody or someone here that may be of interest to this community. One day I sent an e-mail to a person around this same time last year to give my compliments to about a Bigfoot website and how a great job on keeping it updated on a regular basis and also mentioned it's great general database of news articles,sighting reports, ect.ect.

After introducing ourselves we we exchanged a couple of e-mails over the next few days in which we discussed things regarding sasquatch sightings and reports in or around the area I live (Quesnel B.C aka Cariboo Chilcolton) .What really caught me by surprise is when the person revealed to me a that a "dead bigfoot" was found by some local or locals near my area in a town called Penticton B.C and that researchers were currently there investigating the matter and the person also explained that it was in its late stages of decomposition and the the bones were found still fully intact.

I was completely blown away knowing I was informed with this new information and when I tried to contact the person several times after that for more questions, they never replied back or responded back to me again and so I gave up trying to correspond further. My town is 7 to 8 hours drive away or around 340 miles, (im guessing) to the town of Penticton which is in the Okanogon Valley,near the city of Kelowna which is not anywhere close to where I live.

However I must honestly say that some individuals within the Bigfoot community like to expell a little too much sensationalizm into their stories because I havent read or heard anything here or any other news agencies regarding skeletal remains of a sasquatch found "anywhere" in the past year. If anyone else here might have any new information about this story of a possible dead squatch,please feel free to tell us about it.

I brought this subject up before also there is a story that one was killed not far from here many years ago I dont know how much truth there is to it but I happen to know a girl that said she saw it in the back of a truck and that it was bigfoot and there was no dout in her mind about what she saw this is secound hand imformation becouse I havent talked to the girl yet but the people that told me this I trust they are life time freinds . They had no idea I had seen bigfoot untell I told them about it and they both told me you need to talk to so and so she swears to god she saw one when she was a kid . Thats all I have right now on this but I do plan to take the boats to this town and park them on the side of the road this will get somebodys attention I promise you when they see bigfoot reasearch team on the side of them maybe some will open up about it and not worry about being called a fool .

Interesting!,... Second hand reports of a dead hairy bipedal creature seem to get buried as fast as they are reported. I cant understand why anyone wouldnt submit them to the scientific community for analysis,...lol

Ive been reading the huge amounts of data of these very tall and extremely large human skeletal remains unearthed centuries ago in huge mounds in the ground and find no correlation between them and sasquatch or Gigantopithecus.

In some of these facinating reports, a very tall and large man could easily put the skull of one these gigantic humans directly over top and resting completely on his head with a hat still on him amazing! I find this compelling why we dont find recorded reports of mounds full of gigantic bones and large skulls 3 or 4 times the size of humans anywhere today ?

Here is a relatively typical article of the type I find in the newspaper archives about large skeletons found. I found this one at the Brooklyn Eagle's website.

tirademan

Hmm, very about the Sasquatch bodies, keep us informed.
Kokanee, did you try myspacing your contacts email? Might be able to get a name that way.


Do you know where it was debunked, was it on this site?

I am very interested in those old reports, though I think a good few of them were cruel hoaxes preying off biblical literalists.

What are some of the names attatched to those old stories, if any?