Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
egyptian lad

The Giants of ancient egypt are fact

531 posts in this topic

Thanks, Tipsy. Is that a common phrase? (am losing my mind methinks.. I used to know stuff)

No it had me confused too. Took me a few mins and google to work it out.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a note on the "giant mummy finger", has anybody noticed the "bone" at the base (in the upper right of the four photos)? It doesn't look like a millennia-old mummified bone to me... I could be wrong, I'm not an expert on mummification, but it doesn't look like bone, particularly in the way it's broken of. At the very least, it looks as though it's been tampered with; though it's more probable that it outright betrays a wholesale fabrication. What's visible of the 'interior' of the "bone" in particular doesn't look at all like the interior of a human bone.

I'd also be keenly interested to know where these people claim that the rest of this "giant" mummy went... I mean, it would be rather odd to find just a mummified finger, wouldn't it? Where's the rest of it's body suppose to be?

According to the article posted by Mangoze, the finger was discovered not far from Cairo, my guess is Kerdassa judging from the material of the cushions in the picture which is a typical craft of the place. This kind of material is woven there and sold in the numerous tourist bazaars of Kerdassa. It is not commonly used by Egyptians. This makes me suspect that the 'finger' is also aimed at tourists, a wild guess but...Also, the white cloth underneath it, though dirty, is too intact & white to be an ancient piece of material supposedly predating dynastic kings of Egypt (or even dynastic kings for that)!

I also wonder why would a 'professional' tomb robber, whose 'skill' is passed on from one generation to the other, would be content with chopping off one finger and leaving the rest of the mummy? After all these 'professionals' rob tombs to sell whatever they find, they do not do it to build personal collections for their own satisfaction! If such a stupendous mummy has been sold in bits & pieces, or even whole, it would have somehow been publicized.

Everything screams hoax, or the egyptologists and all their collaborators though willing to lie about every aspect of their discipline, have maintained an amazingly strict code of ethics; despite all the competition and the temptation of fame and fortune, not one leak! I wonder if 'men in black' will show here soon :w00t:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Eldorado, tipsy_munchkin

I'm sorry for the confusion. I thought it was a common saying.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Eldorado, tipsy_munchkin

I'm sorry for the confusion. I thought it was a common saying.

My apologies, sir. I could've worked it out if i'd taken a moment to think. (am only on my second cup of tea of the day) :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies, sir. I could've worked it out if i'd taken a moment to think. (am only on my second cup of tea of the day) :)

Hey, no worries. It just never even occurred to me that the saying, surprisingly - at least to me - might be Australian in origin.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, no worries. It just never even occurred to me that the saying, surprisingly - at least to me - might be Australian in origin.

Its fine sitting and figuring it out was a welcome distraction from revision. As is writing this reply. :lol: Always good to learn new sayings.

On topic the lack of verifiable information on the mummy fingers seems to indicate something isn't quite legitimate.

Edited by tipsy_munchkin
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't enough to account for the finger but according to Manetho (per Budge)

Neferka-seker (Sesochris) of the second dynasty was 5 cubits tall and three cubits

wide. Budge does not state the means by which this was known since Manetho's

writings are lost.

Mummys of Egypt - Budge pg 26

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=dmf4SgwVKywC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Budge+mummy&source=bl&ots=BSwCbE0Bz8&sig=hJU9bFFCy1X_M_qknGKS8Ai5_K8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oo15UJe6POmw0QXkjYHoCQ&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't enough to account for the finger but according to Manetho (per Budge)

Neferka-seker (Sesochris) of the second dynasty was 5 cubits tall and three cubits

wide. Budge does not state the means by which this was known since Manetho's

writings are lost.

Mummys of Egypt - Budge pg 26

http://books.google....epage&q&f=false

Which would have made Sesochris 8 foot, 4 inches tall and 5 foot wide (using a 20 inch cubit). One has to wonder how he'd manage to lift himself. Especially since Robert Wadlow at 8 foot, 11.1 inches tall was nowhere near that wide and his size was effectively crushing his legs, ankles and feet.

cormac

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a note on the "giant mummy finger", has anybody noticed the "bone" at the base (in the upper right of the four photos)? It doesn't look like a millennia-old mummified bone to me... I could be wrong, I'm not an expert on mummification, but it doesn't look like bone, particularly in the way it's broken of. At the very least, it looks as though it's been tampered with; though it's more probable that it outright betrays a wholesale fabrication. What's visible of the 'interior' of the "bone" in particular doesn't look at all like the interior of a human bone.

I'd also be keenly interested to know where these people claim that the rest of this "giant" mummy went... I mean, it would be rather odd to find just a mummified finger, wouldn't it? Where's the rest of it's body suppose to be?

I am in agreement, Arbitran, that it doesn't even resemble bone. It seems more like wood or plastic.

I've worked around mummies for a long time now and have seen my share of ancient bones. I'm not an expert either, but many conditions contribute to coloration of ancient bones. If the bone is sheathed in soft tissue for millennia and kept safe from soil and other contaminants, it often remains surprisingly white. But if the bone is exposed to any one of different outside contaminants, it can easily discolor. This "finger" was supposed to be the heirloom of an "unnamed old man with a history of grave robbing" (source), so I'd have to imagine that such an heirloom kept in less than clinical surroundings might cause discoloration to the exposed "bone."

There. That's my nod to the fringe. If you look into the sources on the internet where this finger is mentioned, none seem to be reputable scientific sources. Many of the links are for alternative sites as well as personal blogs and message boards. That alone should make one suspicious of the whole thing. There's also the image of the "X-ray" of the finger, which seems conveniently and suspiciously blurry. If it's even a real X-ray, there's no reason to suspect it's of the "giant" finger. Supposedly the "unnamed old man with a history of grave robbing" had it X-rayed, but a visit to Google images with the keywords "finger X-rays" shows how easy it would be to obtain the raw material to Photoshop the image for the hoax.

The short of it is, unless this supposed finger is submitted to a legitimate lab for proper analysis and imaging, and subsequently reported in a reputable journal or periodical, it need no be considered as anything other than what it appears to be at first glance: a silly hoax.

All that is required to understand the facts behind the hoax is a bit of common sense as well as some critical thinking. Sadly, not everyone is equipped to apply these basic skills. :rolleyes:

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one I've not quite figured out yet. But, I have seen other pics where those bills (money) are larger, and that makes me think that some of the pictures of these giant fingers are photoshopped also.

It's clearly a fake. the "bone" sticking out the end and the one along the length of the figure have a decided look of wood and the supposed x-ray attached to the last image is not the same finger as the one on the furniture since it doesn't have the same angle at the last knuckle as the supposed finger does.

As far as the money, since it's an obvious fake, they could have built it large or they could have built it smaller and just printed a smaller version of a scanned bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you mean all rejections, not rejectors! I reject your hypothesis but prefer to stay alive for a while longer :lol:

Well this is October and in some places they celebrate Halloween, so perhaps he is going to resurrect a giant skeleton to kill all rejectors. Maybe we can watch it on the Sci-Fi channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is October and in some places they celebrate Halloween, so perhaps he is going to resurrect a giant skeleton to kill all rejectors. Maybe we can watch it on the Sci-Fi channel.

Will the giant be missing one of its fingers?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is October and in some places they celebrate Halloween, so perhaps he is going to resurrect a giant skeleton to kill all rejectors. Maybe we can watch it on the Sci-Fi channel.

A skeleton with a pumpkin head? I won't be able to decide whether I should laugh or be spooked...not a bad death, dying from laughter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the giant be missing one of its fingers?

I suggest an Halloween 'maskot' for the forum: a Giant skeleton, with pumpkin head trailing faded mummy wrappings while holding its hand groaning for its missing finger!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's clearly a fake. the "bone" sticking out the end and the one along the length of the figure have a decided look of wood and the supposed x-ray attached to the last image is not the same finger as the one on the furniture since it doesn't have the same angle at the last knuckle as the supposed finger does.

As far as the money, since it's an obvious fake, they could have built it large or they could have built it smaller and just printed a smaller version of a scanned bill.

Both good explainations Quaentum. Clearly a fake could be easily made. I was going off the assumption it was made of real meat and bone. But I could easily be wrong. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest an Halloween 'maskot' for the forum: a Giant skeleton, with pumpkin head trailing faded mummy wrappings while holding its hand groaning for its missing finger!

We could include that it's wearing an ancient Atlantean medallion marked "Made in Greenland" and it should be stepping off a flying saucer with Area 51 license plates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could include that it's wearing an ancient Atlantean medallion marked "Made in Greenland" and it should be stepping off a flying saucer with Area 51 license plates.

Standing on a giant ramp, followed by a bunch of Men in Black :D

We'll be in trouble now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is October and in some places they celebrate Halloween, so perhaps he is going to resurrect a giant skeleton to kill all rejectors. Maybe we can watch it on the Sci-Fi channel.

They did one sort of like that a while back about the Nephilim. It's called approprietly "The Fallen Ones."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in agreement, Arbitran, that it doesn't even resemble bone. It seems more like wood or plastic.

I've worked around mummies for a long time now and have seen my share of ancient bones. I'm not an expert either, but many conditions contribute to coloration of ancient bones. If the bone is sheathed in soft tissue for millennia and kept safe from soil and other contaminants, it often remains surprisingly white. But if the bone is exposed to any one of different outside contaminants, it can easily discolor. This "finger" was supposed to be the heirloom of an "unnamed old man with a history of grave robbing" (source), so I'd have to imagine that such an heirloom kept in less than clinical surroundings might cause discoloration to the exposed "bone."

There. That's my nod to the fringe. If you look into the sources on the internet where this finger is mentioned, none seem to be reputable scientific sources. Many of the links are for alternative sites as well as personal blogs and message boards. That alone should make one suspicious of the whole thing. There's also the image of the "X-ray" of the finger, which seems conveniently and suspiciously blurry. If it's even a real X-ray, there's no reason to suspect it's of the "giant" finger. Supposedly the "unnamed old man with a history of grave robbing" had it X-rayed, but a visit to Google images with the keywords "finger X-rays" shows how easy it would be to obtain the raw material to Photoshop the image for the hoax.

The short of it is, unless this supposed finger is submitted to a legitimate lab for proper analysis and imaging, and subsequently reported in a reputable journal or periodical, it need no be considered as anything other than what it appears to be at first glance: a silly hoax.

All that is required to understand the facts behind the hoax is a bit of common sense as well as some critical thinking. Sadly, not everyone is equipped to apply these basic skills. :rolleyes:

Kmt and Arbitran - Time again at a premium. Just a quick note. As Kmt is aware, have critiqued this bit of phoniness in the past. Points that other readers may wish to note:

1) Were this appendage of human origin, it would have been cut/broken somewhere in the diaphysis of the proximal phalanx. The human proximal phalanx does not have a linear ventral concavity (photo, upper right).

2) Note the lack of dessication in the musculature end view, photo, upper right. Also bear in mind that human phalanges do not incorporate true muscles.

3) Note the quite apparent presence of subcutaneous osteological structures parallel to the "primary digit" as per photo, lower left.

4) Note the apparent presence of pads, photo, upper right.

5) Note the apparent presence of intact, short, dense hair.

Will desist for the moment. Can go into greater detail at a later point. While working from low-grade photos is inherently quite limiting, the following would be suggested:

The photos would appear to present the mid-metapoidal and further distal extremities of a comparatively small quadrupedal herbivore. Should time ever allow, will attempt to identify genus/species.

Edit: Typos.

Edited by Swede

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

2) Note the lack of dessication in the musculature end view, photo, upper right. Also bear in mind that human phalanges do not incorporate true muscles.

...

4) Note the apparent presence of pads, photo, upper right.

...

I noted both of those and those are partly what makes me think that this is real flesh and bone, just not human. I've seen some suggest it might be a kangaroo foot. Perhaps a Black Rock Wallaby?

The Black Rock Wallaby has a foot that is almost one single long toe. The side toes could have been snipped off during the drying process. And it appears in some online pictures that this wallaby has a nail, or short claw, on the top end of its toe, and not a long claw.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-flanked_rock-wallaby

220px-Black-footed_Rock-wallaby%28small%29.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noted both of those and those are partly what makes me think that this is real flesh and bone, just not human. I've seen some suggest it might be a kangaroo foot. Perhaps a Black Rock Wallaby?

The Black Rock Wallaby has a foot that is almost one single long toe. The side toes could have been snipped off during the drying process. And it appears in some online pictures that this wallaby has a nail, or short claw, on the top end of its toe, and not a long claw.

http://en.wikipedia....ed_rock-wallaby

220px-Black-footed_Rock-wallaby%28small%29.jpg

The problem I have with your suggestion is that judging by the material of the cushions and the banknote bill, the photographs seem to have been taken in Egypt where wallabies are unobtainable. Couldn't the phalange be that of another animal that lives in Egypt or even Sudan?

It is too bad the stamp and text on the page underneath the x-ray are not clear enough to read!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt a wallaby is unobtainable. I grew up next door to a kid who had a kangaroo skin hanging on his wall. All you need is a exotic pets import licence and you have a wallaby.

It could very, very easily be from some other animal. I was only making a suggestion based on other posts I've read.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Egypt? Kangaroo skin is sold in tourist shops in Australia, and yes many people who have family, or visited there would have it, but the pet scene in Egypt is a rather limited one: dogs, cats, birds and fish. The only rare cases of exotic 'pets' being kept there are basically African animals like chimps, baboons or lions, and these are very rare. I hope Swede will have enough spare time to clarify the point for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could an Egyptian tourist bring a kangaroo skin back to Egypt... or a wallaby foot? What if they were trying to make a fraudulent item and bought it online and had it shipped to them? Totally possible. Not sure the export rules for Australia, but if you can buy a kangaroo skin and take it home on an airplane, I'm assuming that you can mail it too. And I also don't know the import rules for Egypt, but I know that there are many ways around that, mostly involving a handful of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could an Egyptian tourist bring a kangaroo skin back to Egypt... or a wallaby foot? What if they were trying to make a fraudulent item and bought it online and had it shipped to them? Totally possible. Not sure the export rules for Australia, but if you can buy a kangaroo skin and take it home on an airplane, I'm assuming that you can mail it too. And I also don't know the import rules for Egypt, but I know that there are many ways around that, mostly involving a handful of money.

Unfortunately, you're right about this bolded part!

I am not saying it's absolutely impossible, just highly improbable. Of course it is possible that someone brought a wallaby toe from Australia, but it would have been easier and more within the range of the 'expected' to use the phalanges of a native animal. I'm just guessing here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.