Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ohio Serpent Mound Still a Debate


Piney

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Who knows? Maybe Lovecraft was inspired by a world or creatures we can’t readily see. Something from our collective or suppressed memories, from the past. We all have similar fears. We all fear heights and snakes. We fear the water the dark. Where did these fears come from? Or just maybe a metaphor for the creatures and bestial behaviour in us all. Maybe Atlantis or the myth was based on a true event since glorified and subjected to degree of Chinese whispers. Or maybe it just was real and we just can’t wrap our heads around it yet.

You left out the most universally terrifying, bone-chilling fear of them all: spiders.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
51 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

You left out the most universally terrifying, bone-chilling fear of them all: spiders.

I thought it was pineapple?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Captain Risky said:

I thought it was pineapple?

No, that’s just incomprehensible.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

No, that’s just incomprehensible.

How anyone can hate pineapple is beyond me too. Then again it is sesh we’re talking about, :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

You left out the most universally terrifying, bone-chilling fear of them all: spiders.

Old Lovecraft was a strange fellow: his is a discussion of his motivations:

https://newrepublic.com/article/119996/hp-lovecrafts-philosophy-horror

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

I thought it was pineapple?

Pineapples aren't too scary. They're just vile and revolting.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DirtyDocMartens said:

Has anyone heard from Coil lately?

:blink:

Really? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reviving this thread because I have some questions. 

I understand how an effigy mound can be easily identified, like the serpent mound. But how are other mounds distinguished between burial mounds and ceremonial mounds when so much has been disturbed by farmers and others? Are artifacts still being found or is it due to oral history? Do they still find evidence of burials?

And how the hell did giants get brought into it?! I was reading around on the net and that kept coming up... sounds pretty weird and I was pretty sure the Smithsonian put a smackdown on that a few years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Jenn8779 said:

I'm reviving this thread because I have some questions. 

I understand how an effigy mound can be easily identified, like the serpent mound. But how are other mounds distinguished between burial mounds and ceremonial mounds when so much has been disturbed by farmers and others? Are artifacts still being found or is it due to oral history? Do they still find evidence of burials?

And how the hell did giants get brought into it?! I was reading around on the net and that kept coming up... sounds pretty weird and I was pretty sure the Smithsonian put a smackdown on that a few years back.

I do believe giants are a result of the Mormons coming along and inserting their own mythology all over the shop in order to “prove” that the Indians were a lost tribe of Israel and that Jesus visited the place after going Super-Saiyan.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I do believe giants are a result of the Mormons coming along and inserting their own mythology all over the shop in order to “prove” that the Indians were a lost tribe of Israel and that Jesus visited the place after going Super-Saiyan.

It's also due to tall tales from the nineteenth century, but no serious scholar or historian has ecer attributed "giants" to these mounds.The bull-flop is repeated to this day because so many people lack the skills becessary for critical thinking. We can;r even be sure what exactly each mound was for, so people in the past have plugged in misleading information to try to fill the void.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I do believe giants are a result of the Mormons coming along and inserting their own mythology all over the shop in order to “prove” that the Indians were a lost tribe of Israel and that Jesus visited the place after going Super-Saiyan.

I like to pull those old news articles up and promote that the giants were actually bigfoot. :lol: But that is for the Crytozoology threads.

As far as I know, not a single bone of any of the reported "giants" has ever turned up and been documented. The old stories always say, "taken to the local museum (or university, or courthouse....), but when people go check the spotty records of the time, of the buildings/organizations in question, turns out not a peep about bones of giants.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
12 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I do believe giants are a result of the Mormons coming along and inserting their own mythology all over the shop in order to “prove” that the Indians were a lost tribe of Israel and that Jesus visited the place after going Super-Saiyan.

 

12 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

It's also due to tall tales from the nineteenth century, but no serious scholar or historian has ecer attributed "giants" to these mounds.The bull-flop is repeated to this day because so many people lack the skills becessary for critical thinking. We can;r even be sure what exactly each mound was for, so people in the past have plugged in misleading information to try to fill the void.

I had not considered the mormans.

I could understand how a couple centuries ago uneducated, more simple folks could look at something very large and say "giants must have built that" but for it to continue to this day was amazing. Then to read that they were saying giants were found buried in the mounds.... LOL. 

Thank you for explaining that it's still unknown what each mound was for. That was what I was really hoping to learn about. Just proves that the net can be a very weird and misleading place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jenn8779 said:

I'm reviving this thread because I have some questions. 

I understand how an effigy mound can be easily identified, like the serpent mound. But how are other mounds distinguished between burial mounds and ceremonial mounds when so much has been disturbed by farmers and others? Are artifacts still being found or is it due to oral history? Do they still find evidence of burials?

From what I remember from reading about the various kinds of mounds, many are still located on private property, and sometimes they do get raided for artifacts. I've not heard of anything super-bang-wizard being found in any that were opened up in the last couple decades.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I like to pull those old news articles up and promote that the giants were actually bigfoot. :lol: But that is for the Crytozoology threads.

As far as I know, not a single bone of any of the reported "giants" has ever turned up and been documented. The old stories always say, "taken to the local museum (or university, or courthouse....), but when people go check the spotty records of the time, of the buildings/organizations in question, turns out not a peep about bones of giants.

Love the Bigfoot idea! :lol:

I couldn't get over how many stories there were of giant bones being found. I could only guess it was to generate readers and tourism. As Sesh said critical thinking skills are necessary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

From what I remember from reading about the various kinds of mounds, many are still located on private property, and sometimes they do get raided for artifacts. I've not heard of anything super-bang-wizard being found in any that were opened up in the last couple decades.

I guess being on private property would create it's on set of issues. It would be harder to protect the site unless you had the money to do so. Which then puts you in a catch-22 of wanting to respect the First Nations people and leave it alone or chance it being raided by disreputable people for artifacts. IMHO, it would be best to have someone like Piney who bridges the gap investigating and salvaging whatever is there

Edited by Jenn8779
Clarification
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.