He literally puts in an image of giants, calls the temple on Malta a monument to them. Questions how it was made. Then he goes over to another place with giants and questions it. The Americas.

The clause as you put it, is simply to adapt his version, cataclysm in the younger dryas, and prediluvian advanced civilization into the paradigm.

Explanation, no major upsets, small steps.

Giants present a colossal problem to the monkeys. I mean you have this evolutionary model look it up. Giants where?

They wrote them in, kinda of ignoring the rest, the bones lost from the mounds in the Americas. The evidence in history, from early recordings. Was it a myth or did it represent more. He has a redundant argument. If he calls this other stuff fact but giants bah farce. He hasn't, watch it. It's subtle. Besides he has found the evidence of cataclysm. Giants what went wrong. Monkeys did. Many mammals have double sets of teeth a lot more teeth than humans, where many monkey species have human teeth, the same number. Giant recorded finds don't, look it up, they have extra teeth like most mammals. Double sets of teeth. There are primate, humanoid skulls with this. But. The problem becomes giganticism. On the evolutionary model it was evolving from something smaller, monkeys, rather than King Kong. However Denisovans are supposedly larger. This becomes boggling, some are in a natural history selection others aren't. Same with the teeth. The other anomaly is elongated skulls. Natural sutures. Or deformation. Both have been found. On what selection. Aw the human one it's deformation. Hang on.

You're dumber than bullshit. If you watched the presentation than listened too ah there weren't. It undermines it.

Let's go back to Indonesia. Shall we. The first episode. They built a mountain. They stepped the largest pyramid on the planet. They were after peak rainfall for agriculture. Think about the scale of population needed for this. What were they feeding for such industry? Multi millions of apes? Or something larger? Something recorded as look at it Malta. Same in South Africa. And other places. The scale doesn't seem correct for an ice age. We have steppe farming but off existing incline. They like the Incas stepped mountains. We go back to Mayan civilization okay multi millions. But this was far older. In a time of mythological giants.

He literally puts in an image of giants, calls the temple on Malta a monument to them. Questions how it was made. Then he goes over to another place with giants and questions it. The Americas.

The clause as you put it, is simply to adapt his version, cataclysm in the younger dryas, and prediluvian advanced civilization into the paradigm.

Explanation, no major upsets, small steps.

Giants present a colossal problem to the monkeys. I mean you have this evolutionary model look it up. Giants where?

They wrote them in, kinda of ignoring the rest, the bones lost from the mounds in the Americas. The evidence in history, from early recordings. Was it a myth or did it represent more. He has a redundant argument. If he calls this other stuff fact but giants bah farce. He hasn't, watch it. It's subtle. Besides he has found the evidence of cataclysm. Giants what went wrong. Monkeys did. Many mammals have double sets of teeth a lot more teeth than humans, where many monkey species have human teeth, the same number. Giant recorded finds don't, look it up, they have extra teeth like most mammals. Double sets of teeth. There are primate, humanoid skulls with this. But. The problem becomes giganticism. On the evolutionary model it was evolving from something smaller monkeys, rather than King Kong. However Denisovans are supposedly larger. This becomes boggling, some are in a natural history selection others aren't. Same with the teeth. The other anomaly is elongated skulls. Natural sutures. Or deformation. Both have been found. On what selection. Aw the human one it's deformation. Hang on.

You're dumber than bullshit. If you watched the presentation than listened too ah there weren't. It undermines it.

Let's go back to Indonesia. Shall we. The first episode. They built a mountain. They stepped the largest pyramid on the planet. They were after peak rainfall for agriculture. Think about the scale of population needed for this. What were they feeding for such industry? Multi millions of apes? Or something larger? Something recorded as look at it Malta. Same in South Africa. And other places. The scale doesn't seem correct for an ice age. We have steppe farming but off existing incline. They like the Incas stepped mountains. We go back to Mayan civilization okay multi millions. But this was far older. In a time of mythological giants.

He literally puts in an image of giants, calls the temple on Malta a monument to them. Questions how it was made. Then he goes over to another place with giants and questions it. The Americas.

The clause as you put it, is simply to adapt his version, cataclysm in the younger dryas, and prediluvian advanced civilization into the paradigm.

Explanation, no major upsets, small steps.

Giants present a colossal problem to the monkeys. I mean you have this evolutionary model look it up. Giants where?

They wrote them in, kinda of ignoring the rest, the bones lost from the mounds in the Americas. The evidence in history, from early recordings. Was it a myth or did it represent more. He has a redundant argument. If he calls this other stuff fact but giants bah farce. He hasn't, watch it. It's subtle. Besides he has found the evidence of cataclysm. Giants what went wrong. Monkeys did. Many mammals have double sets of teeth a lot more teeth than humans, where many monkey species have human teeth, the same number. Giant recorded finds don't, look it up, they have extra teeth like most mammals. Double sets of teeth. There are primate, humanoid skulls with this. But. The problem becomes giganticism. On the evolutionary model it was evolving from something smaller monkeys, rather than King Kong. However Denisovans are supposedly larger. This becomes boggling, some are in a natural history selection others aren't. Same with the teeth. The other anomaly is elongated skulls. Natural sutures. Or deformation. Both have been found. On what selection. Aw the human one it's deformation. Hang on.

You're dumber than bullshit. If you watched the presentation than listened too ah there weren't. It undermines it.

Let's go back to Indonesia. Shall we. The first episode. They built a mountain. They stepped the largest pyramid on the planet. They were after peak rainfall gor agriculture. Think about the scale of population needed for this. What were they feeding for such industry? Multi millions of apes? Or something larger. Same in South Africa. And other places. The scale doesn't seem correct for an ice age.

He literally puts in an image of giants, calls the temple on Malta a monument to them. Questions how it was made. Then he goes over to another place with giants and questions it. The Americas.

The clause as you put it, is simply to adapt his version, cataclysm in the younger dryas, and prediluvian advanced civilization into the paradigm.

Explanation, no major upsets, small steps.

Giants present a colossal problem to the monkeys. I mean you have this evolutionary model look it up. Giants where?

They wrote them in, kinda of ignoring the rest, the bones lost from the mounds in the Americas. The evidence in history, from early recordings. Was it a myth or did it represent more. He has a redundant argument. If he calls this other stuff fact but giants bah farce. He hasn't, watch it. It's subtle. Besides he has found the evidence of cataclysm. Giants what went wrong. Monkeys did. Many mammals have double sets of teeth a lot more teeth than humans, where many monkey species have human teeth, the same number. Giant recorded finds don't, look it up, they have extra teeth like most mammals. Double sets of teeth. There are primate, humanoid skulls with this. But. The problem becomes giganticism. On the evolutionary model it was evolving from something smaller monkeys, rather than King Kong. However Denisovans are supposedly larger. This becomes boggling, some are in a natural history selection others aren't. Same with the teeth. The other anomaly is elongated skulls. Natural sutures. Or deformation. Both have been found. On what selection. Aw the human one it's deformation. Hang on.

You're dumber than bullshit. If you watched the presentation than listened too ah there weren't. It undermines it.

He literally puts in an image of giants, calls the temple on Malta a monument to them. Questions how it was made. Then he goes over to another place with giants and questions it. The Americas.

The clause as you put it, is simply to adapt his version, cataclysm in the younger dryas, and prediluvian advanced civilization into the paradigm.

Explanation, no major upsets, small steps.

Giants present a colossal problem to the monkeys. I mean you have this evolutionary model look it up. Giants where?

They wrote them in, kinda of ignoring the rest, the bones lost from the mounds in the Americas. The evidence in history, from early recordings. Was it a myth or did it represent more. He has a redundant argument. If he calls this other stuff fact but giants bah farce. He hasn't, watch it. It's subtle. Besides he has found the evidence of cataclysm. Giants what went wrong. Monkeys did. Many mammals have double sets of teeth a lot more teeth than humans, where many monkey species have human teeth, the same number. Giant recorded finds don't, look it up, they have extra teeth like most mammals. Double sets of teeth. There are primate, humanoid skulls with this. But. The problem becomes giganticism. On the evolutionary model it was evolving from something smaller monkeys, rather than King Kong. However Denisovans are supposedly larger. This becomes boggling, some are in a natural history selection others aren't. The other anomaly is elongated skulls. Natural sutures. Or deformation. Both have been found. On what selection. Aw the human one it's deformation. Hang on.

You're dumber than bullshit. If you watched the presentation than listened too ah there weren't. It undermines it.