Proof of Giants?

Posted by: Nick Redfern on September 13th, 2013


In a new article at Mysterious Universe, Micah Hanks begins…

“A recent video appearing online that features Michael Tellinger, author of books like African Temples of the Annunaki, shows the author as he leads a hike up to a hillside where the apparent presence of a huge footprint exists. Indeed, the impression left in stone that is displayed in the video is quite impressive, and perhaps even anomalous in nature; according to some, it has been touted as evidence of beings of tremendous stature that once existed long ago.

Thus, as the video has gained attention on the web, it has also somewhat renewed the existing controversy over the debate about ‘giants’ which some believe may have roamed the Earth in ancient times. The footage is indeed compelling, and the impression visible in the rock certainly does look very much like a human foot, right down to the five toes that are visible. Tellinger explains that the discovery exists near the Swaziland border in South Africa’s northeastern corner, and has apparently been preserved ‘in rough granite,’ which geologists estimate to be between 2 billion and 3 billion years old.”

Disclose.tvREAL Giant Foot Print 200 Million Yrs Old South Africa LD Michael Tellinger

Nick Redfern About Nick Redfern
Punk music fan, Tennents Super and Carlsberg Special Brew beer fan, horror film fan, chocolate fan, like to wear black clothes, like to stay up late. Work as a writer.

18 Responses to “Proof of Giants?”

  1. Alamo responds:

    Very interesting… the print looks authentic and has the characteristics you would expect from a bare foot in mud, showing the toes digging in and the substrate pressing out due to the downforce of the toes.

  2. Richard Judge via Facebook responds:

    Of all of the millions and millions of natural rock formations on earth, one of them is bound to look like a footprint. Sorry, to me, this proves only that nature is unlimited in random design, not that giants roamed the earth.

  3. Mary Sell via Facebook responds:

    that is cool

  4. alanrb responds:

    more Rorschach Science.

  5. Steve Schaper via Facebook responds:

    In granite. Has to have been carven. As to giants, I know one locally. He has the same condition, IIRC, as the late Andre the Giant. Real nice guy.

  6. Ragnar responds:

    Yeah. In granite. A material with a hardness of 7 on the Mohs scale and a compression strength of 19000 psi. Pull the other one.

  7. cryptokellie responds:

    That’s a granite erosion formation where softer material has eroded and fallen away – that with further wear down just happens to resemble a huge footprint. Notice the other similar formations just nearby and before we see the “Footprint”. There are no fossil or trace (ichnofossils) bearing formations in granite as it is an igneous rock and not a fossil bearing sedimentary rock. I think there are a couple of other examples of this here and there around the world.
    BTW Ragnar, there are innumerable granite carvings done both by hand and machine. Mt. Rushmore National Monument is one example.

    I’m a sculptor so I know, although I’ve not done any work in granite.

  8. Ragnar responds:

    @cryptokellie, yes I am aware that you can carve in granite. My point is that no “giant” stepped on granite and left a footprint unless they can put down at least 19000 psi over the entire surface. So its either carved or erosion. Either way, its not a footprint and Mr Tellinger is a kook.

  9. Anthony Finch via Facebook responds:

    Natural rock formation.

  10. cryptokellie responds:

    Ok , I’m with you 100% buddy. Geez, I wasn’t even thinking about a “Giant” stepping on granite and leaving a print. Is that what they’re trying to say? That’s ridiculous. Look at the formations as the camera approaches the “Footprint”. Natural erosion by chance simulating a footprint.

  11. sasquatch responds:

    Don’t think it’s a “natural rock formation”…

    On this site we argue about what constitutes a real looking sasquatch print-one of the the things is the pushed up mud effect.

    This has that in droves. I think if this was a recent print in mud photo-(smaller of course) most if not everyone here would say it looked like the real deal.

    I think this could be real…But if so, It would mean that popular understandings of geologic time etc. could be way off.

    Something a lot of folks won’t tolerate, as it messes with their world view, and basic understanding of reality.

  12. cryptokellie responds:

    Did you catch the fact that this is a granite formation. Granite is igneous rock and not capable recording a footprint or fossil from the past or any other time. Only two ways this “Footprint” gets left in granite. One, erosion of slightly softer material within the formation which is the most likely explanation or two, someone actually carved or added to a large footprint-like depression into the rock for some reason.
    The commentator is in error about the “Pushed up mud area” as granite only is plastic in it’s early formation stage, as in semi-molten rock. Who do you think stepped in it then…by his own admission, 2 billion years ago? Just above the toes, there is a fault line where the formation is further eroding and causing the entire structure to fracture into large blocks where the softer material can erode away even faster from the harder areas.

  13. volmar responds:

    That’s NOT a footprint.

  14. Goodfoot responds:

    You DO realize that that granite didn’t begin its life as hard granite, right?

  15. Goodfoot responds:

    Seriously? You didn’t realize that’s what they were saying?

  16. Goodfoot responds:

    There is simply no way something like that could survive and thrive. The skeletal system couldn’t handle the weight.

  17. cryptokellie responds:

    Granite was never at anytime plastic and cool enough to record any type of footprint or anything else for that mater with burning what ever came in contact with it. Granites are formed from molten lava. Doubt it? Go to Hawaii and leave a bare footprint on one of the lava flows that is even semi-hard…goodbye foot. Add to this that almost all granites were formed long long long before there was anything around to leave a footprint in it. Enough with this one, it’s silly.

  18. DWA responds:

    All I did was read the posts.

    Come ON.

    Evidence more by far, in consistency and volume, than we have for anything else that remains unproven is out there for hairy hominoids.

    And we’re trying to will footprints into granite?

    Uh, some of you guys need to talk to one another, and, you know, work on putting the real evidence out there.

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.