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 -

Tales of mysterious 'giants' still haunt Nevada's Lovelock Cave


Recommended Posts

 
It would be interesting to have unfettered access to the Smithsonian (including storage areas) to see exactly what is contained therein. A good number of rumors could then be either confirmed or debunked. Personally, I have noticed that evidence of diffusionism is generally dismissed or minimized by those who benefit from controlling the narrative of human lines of descent, especially here in the Western Hemisphere. The Smithsonian is one of those authorities. Still, it is impossible to prove either way.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Harte said:

Original Archaeological report on Lovelock Cave.
https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/anthpubs/ucb/text/ucp025-002.pdf

TLDR?

Short form - no giant skeletons.

Harte

Well, not really. No giant skeletons are mentioned being found in the report, but it also mentions that the most remarkable of the finds were either sold off to private collections or otherwise lost before the archeologists got there. So the report itself is giant-neutral.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, C L Palmer said:

It would be interesting to have unfettered access to the Smithsonian (including storage areas) to see exactly what is contained therein. A good number of rumors could then be either confirmed or debunked. Personally, I have noticed that evidence of diffusionism is generally dismissed or minimized by those who benefit from controlling the narrative of human lines of descent, especially here in the Western Hemisphere. The Smithsonian is one of those authorities. Still, it is impossible to prove either way.

bull****. When they opened NMAI they let us Indian researchers run amok in their storage areas. 

The Columbian Exchange negates any hard contact (see: diffusionism) with any area except Siberia.

In a nutshell, no European, Middle Easterner, or African taught us ****. 

Except the Swedes with splint baskets and that was after 1500. 

2 hours ago, Harte said:

Original Archaeological report on Lovelock Cave.
https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/anthpubs/ucb/text/ucp025-002.pdf

TLDR?

Short form - no giant skeletons.

Harte

Mark Raymond Harrington was a friend of my son's mother's family and I have all his stuff. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Piney said:

bull****. When they opened NMAI they let us Indian researchers run amok in their storage areas. 

The Columbian Exchange negates any hard contact (see: diffusionism) with any area except Siberia.

In a nutshell, no European, Middle Easterner, or African taught us ****. 

Except the Swedes with splint baskets and that was after 1500. 

Mark Raymond Harrington was a friend of my son's mother's family and I have all his stuff. 

I saw an article about this earlier today...

It's amazing how myths, legends,and even downright BS can be intertwined and passed on...

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

First, can they ascertain the age of the Sandal and was the sandal checked for DNA?

Their evidence of the existence of giants is quite good. On the other hand, where did the skeletons go?
Also, there should be some other signs of these humans elsewhere throughout the region.

Overall, I'd have to say - no, to the giants.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2024 at 11:14 AM, C L Palmer said:

Well, not really. No giant skeletons are mentioned being found in the report, but it also mentions that the most remarkable of the finds were either sold off to private collections or otherwise lost before the archeologists got there. So the report itself is giant-neutral.  

The only claim to giants in this cave that was ever made was made by a couple of people trying to make a dollar shoveling bat****.
The way you're using the term, ANY report about ANYTHING is "giant-neutral."

Harte

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

First, can they ascertain the age of the Sandal and was the sandal checked for DNA?

Their evidence of the existence of giants is quite good. On the other hand, where did the skeletons go?
Also, there should be some other signs of these humans elsewhere throughout the region.

Overall, I'd have to say - no, to the giants.

The DNA tests done years ago showed a relationship to the Shoshone/ Ute. The remains which MR dug up were normal sized and returned for reburial. 

And there was no evidence whatsoever of giants. 

  • Thanks 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no basis for this outside everyday observation of humans.  I attribute some of these stories to an effort to minimize Native American presence and maybe assuage some guilt.  White settlers may have driven off or killed the interlopers, the Indians, but the real civilizations of North America are giants, or Egyptians in the Grand Canyon, or Annunaki or something Biblical. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

I have no basis for this outside everyday observation of humans.  I attribute some of these stories to an effort to minimize Native American presence and maybe assuage some guilt.  White settlers may have driven off or killed the interlopers, the Indians, but the real civilizations of North America are giants, or Egyptians in the Grand Canyon, or Annunaki or something Biblical. 

Along with the "vast wilderness" trope when the land was actually "widowed". 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Piney said:

The DNA tests done years ago showed a relationship to the Shoshone/ Ute. The remains which MR dug up were normal sized and returned for reburial. 

And there was no evidence whatsoever of giants. 


thanks for that, Piney. Any ideas about the sandal's age? And if they only found the one, that would be a tell. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
9 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:


thanks for that, Piney. Any ideas about the sandal's age? And if they only found the one, that would be a tell. 

They find Indian sandals all over the Great Basin area. There was 2. What's the tell?

I think the sandals dates about 2,000 years old but don't quote me because sandals were used in that area for over 9,000 years. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Piney said:

They find Indian sandals all over the Great Basin area. There was 2. What's the tell?

I think the sandals dates about 2,000 years old but don't quote me because sandals were used in that area for over 9,000 years. 


If there was only one sandal, the TELL is, that it is a prop, more than likely. But now, you have to contend with a pair of sandals, which is natural. they *might not be* fake.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:


If there was only one sandal, the TELL is, that it is a prop, more than likely. But now, you have to contend with a pair of sandals, which is natural. they *might not be* fake.

They have hundreds of sandals from all over the area dating thousands of years apart. That's a lot to fake.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also wonder how often the remains of "giants" are larger-than-average regular skeletons, or perhaps larger than expected for the group that lives there now. Also, estimations of size based on skeletal remains (when done my amateurs) will vary a great deal. But still, the height of populations varies a great deal, even when they are of the same racial/ethnic group, based on things like nutrition, disease, etc. So it would be interesting to see the remains they found and compare them to A. the Native Americans who lived in the area at the time the discovery was made, and B. their descendants now that we live in the era of modern medicine and non-famine conditions. I know, for example, that my Vietnamese and Korean friends in high school were nearly a foot taller than their parents, which they attributed to eating mostly an American diet. 

I also wonder what percentage of archaeological material lies in the hands of private collectors, and has therefore not been factored into the academic schema. For example, one of the few Mayan codices preserved was somehow in the hands of collectors in Germany until World War II, and only afterward made its way to academic knowledge. 

https://mesoamericanstudiesonline.com/2019/08/04/the-history-and-content-of-the-maya-dresden-codex/#:~:text=It was found in a,rediscovery during World War II.

How much else is out there in private hands that could paint us a more accurate picture? For the longest time, Western academics perpetuated the myth that Native Americans were simply "noble savages," or even simply savages--uneducated and unworthy of serious consideration.

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.