Andy White Anthropology
  • Home
  • Research Interests
    • Complexity Science
    • Prehistoric Social Networks
    • Eastern Woodlands Prehistory
    • Ancient Giants
  • Blog
  • Work in Progress
    • The Kirk Project >
      • Kirk 3D Models list
      • Kirk 3D Models embedded
      • Kirk 2D images >
        • Indiana
        • Kentucky
        • Michigan
        • Ontario
      • Kirk Project Datasets
    • Computational Modeling >
      • FN3D_V3
    • Radiocarbon Compilation
    • Fake Hercules Swords
    • Wild Carolina >
      • Plants >
        • Mosses
        • Ferns
        • Conifers
        • Flowering Plants >
          • Grasses
          • Trees
          • Other Flowering Plants
      • Animals >
        • Birds
        • Mammals
        • Crustaceans
        • Insects
        • Arachnids
        • Millipedes and Centipedes
        • Reptiles and Amphibians
      • Fungi
  • Annotated Publications
    • Journal Articles
    • Technical Reports
    • Doctoral Dissertation
  • Bibliography
  • Data

The Modern Mythology of Giants: "Double Rows of Teeth"

11/28/2014

35 Comments

 
Picture
It is not difficult to find evidence for the current popularity of the notion that an ancient "race" of giants once populated prehistoric North America.  Internet sites making that claim are numerous, as are books on the topic.  And there is a new program on H2 (Search for the Lost Giants) that follows Jim and Bill Vieira on their "quest" to investigate whether giants really existed.  Giants are a "thing" now.

The belief in ancient North American giants is based in part on the numerous accounts of large skeletons being unearthed that can be found in newspapers and county histories from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These accounts are "real" (in that they exist - they were written), and there are a lot of them.  And, therefore, they deserve an explanation.  I've spent some time looking at them, and I think they tell a really interesting story that has many parts to it: cultural, historical, archaeological, political, linguistic, etc.  Interesting story, yes.  But do I think that they actually tell the story of a "race" of ancient giants in North America?  No.

But I don't think that all of those stories were fabricated, either (though some certainly were).  I think the explanation is more complicated than that.  In this post, I'm going to talk about one of the apparent peculiarities of those stories that I've now seen presented numerous times as evidence of a "race" of giants: "double rows of teeth."  The Vieira brothers have talked about "double rows of teeth" on each episode of Search for the Lost Giants, and it is commonly mentioned in various books and websites on the subject.  Generally, it is stated that descriptions of "double rows of teeth" appear frequently in the accounts of large skeletons because it was a dental condition peculiar to ancient giants:

"Another physical characteristic that is evident within this population is the physical abnormality of possessing a double row of teeth.  While a large skeleton would appear to be rare, in combination with a double row of teeth would imply that a single people is being represented" (Zimmerman, Fritz, 2010:33, The Nephilim Chronicles:  Fallen Angels in the Ohio Valley).

I remember being struck by the oddity of "double teeth" when I first came across accounts of large skeletons in some county histories from Indiana or Ohio.  It was puzzling.  I didn't know what it meant at the time, and I also had no idea how many other similar accounts existed.  That was in the early 1990s, when it was much more difficult to get information.  Now it is simpler to get access to old newspaper archives.  This has made it easier to compile numerous accounts of large skeletons (which many people have done) and also try to critically analyze and understand the content of those accounts (which very few people have done). 

Most of the information here is drawn from historical archives of American newspapers (including Chronicling America, freely available from the Library of Congress) and dictionaries.  I'll give you my findings and some brief examples and then talk about what they mean in terms of giant skeletons.  I'll save the quantitative data and more detailed analysis for a paper that I'm working on.

There were several different phrases/terms used to describe the dentitions of reportedly giant skeletons, including
“double teeth,” “double rows of teeth,” “double teeth all around.”  These are not equivalent (check your stories closely, giant believers - you'll see that it's true). These same terms/phrases are also applied in numerous cases to living individuals and non-giant skeletons. 

First, the term “double tooth” was used in nineteenth and early twentieth century America as a synonym for a molar or premolar tooth. It was not a mysterious term, appearing in dictionaries and works of science and literature in Europe and the Americas from at least the 1500s until the early 1900s.  A distinction between “single teeth” (incisors and canines) and “double teeth” (molars and premolars) seems to have been based on both function and morphology.  In functional terms, “double teeth” are for grinding.  The “double” of “double tooth” refers to the appearance of premolars and molars as being composed of multiple "single" teeth. "Double teeth" are larger than "single teeth" and have multiple roots.


These entries from an 1854 dictionary illustrate the synonymy between "molar," "grinder," and "double" teeth: 

GRINDER, n. He or that which grinds; an instrument for grinding; one of the double or molar teeth.
MOLAR, a. . . . Having power to grind; used for grinding; as, the molar teeth, i.e. the double teeth.
MOLAR, n. A tooth, generally having a flattened, triturating surface, and situated behind the incisors; a molar tooth.


An 1898 story describing how potential military recruits were evaluated described how a certain number of “double teeth” were required for enlistment:

   ". . . a 32-year-old man who looked and was the ideal recruit with one exception. He had but one sound double tooth, although his front teeth were in fairly good condition.  The regulations demand at least one sound double tooth on each side of the upper and lower jaws, four double teeth in all.  Dr. Fulton disliked to reject him and the man’s looks showed his own disappointment, but he was “turned down,” as they say at the armory" (The Scranton Tribune, June 14, 1898).

Second, the phrase “double teeth all around” was used colloquially to refer to the dentition of living (and dead) individuals with a high degree of anterior tooth wear.  Anterior “single teeth” (canines and incisors) looked like “double teeth” (molars) when the cusps were removed through wear.  In other words, a mouth full of heavily worn teeth was a mouth in which all teeth were used for grinding and, therefore, in which all teeth had the wear characteristic of "double" teeth.  This was a common phrase: nineteenth century newspapers contain numerous accounts of living individuals described as having "double teeth all around."

"James B. Paulding . . . says that the story . . . about the soldier at Camp Chase who ate glass is true, as hundreds know.  He says the glass-eater’s name is John White . . . A peculiar feature of this man was the fact that he had a complete set of molars, or double teeth, all around, above and below. White was an old Mexican war soldier." (The National Tribune, May 19, 1887).

This article debunks the notion that it is possible to have a mouth full of molars:

"The lecturer alluded to the idea, held by some, that certain people or animals had double teeth all the way round the jaw.  This is not correct, the appearance being due to the wearing down of the teeth till they present facets similar to those of small double teeth, but they are single teeth and there not on record a single instance where a jaw has been found filled with double teeth, each with two fangs or roots." (Burlington Weekly Free Press, March 30, 1877).

Third, the phrases "double rows of teeth" and "double row of teeth" were used to describe, simply, the presence of two rows of teeth (an upper and a lower).  These phases were commonly applied to both living individuals and non-giant skeletons. 

"Classification of Beauty -- The mode of describing beauty is now reduced to a system, and we do not see why rules should not be laid down as accurate as those of any other science. . . .  1. A pair of diamond eyes. 2. One thick and one thin ruby or coral lip. 3. A double row of pearl teeth. 4. A quantity of golden hair. . . . " (Edgefield Advertiser, August 20, 1840).

I can collect and present an immense amount of contextual/historical data that will demonstrate that, in the large majority of cases, the writers of nineteenth and twentieth century accounts of "giant" skeletons were not intending to imply that those skeletons had dental features unlike those of other humans, such as two sets of teeth arranged in concentric rows.  They were simply describing characteristics of the teeth that were interesting or somewhat noteworthy:  full sets of teeth (i.e., "double rows of teeth") would have been something to remark upon in the mid 1800s, as would a uniformly high degree of tooth wear (i.e., "double teeth all around"). 

The term "double tooth" and its associated phrases appear to have fallen out of common use early in the twentieth century (I'm still compiling dictionary data).  I think that it was probably combined changes in diet, dental health, and dental medicine that caused the folk classification of "single" and "double" teeth to become less useful (more on that in the paper).  For whatever reason, those "double" terms went away.  When we see the phrase "double teeth all around" now, just 100 years later, it is foreign to us and seems to imply something bizarre.  It did not when it was used.
The peculiarity of "double teeth" can largely be explained as a mirage created by a linguistic change. 

I challenge those who believe in the giant story to sift through your accounts of "double teeth" with the historic contexts of the terms/phrases I have discussed here in mind.  And search for those terms outside of your giant skeleton accounts. Get a feel for how the terms were used in the common language of nineteenth century America and then do an honest evaluation and see if you really want to base a theory about an ancient "race" of giants on them.  I don't think I would.

35 Comments
Andy
11/29/2014 03:11:59 am

From Jason Colavito's website: http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/giants-double-teeth-a-case-of-linguistic-confusion

Reply
Bret Ruby link
12/1/2014 01:27:02 am

Andy, very well done. Visitors to our park often ask about giants with double rows of teeth. Now we can set them straight! Thanks.

Reply
Andy
12/1/2014 01:58:50 am

This doesn't explain all of the accounts, but it will take care of a lot of them. A more detailed analysis will be coming some day.

Reply
Dave
5/3/2015 09:20:54 am

Thank you so much for your research into this colloquialism. I had not even considered a colloquial dialogue shift as the explanation, but it makes so much sense.

Reply
Andy White
5/3/2015 10:33:17 pm

Thanks Dave. In case you didn't see it, here's the latest (of many posts) on "double rows of teeth:" http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/double-rows-of-teeth-in-historical-perspective

Reply
Lyzdekiel
6/22/2015 10:18:18 pm

https://www.facebook.com/notes/andrew-collins/were-the-american-giants-denisovan-human-hybrids-a-collins-the-coming-of-the-gia/1003976322950569

Reply
tom chiconas link
8/29/2015 10:30:53 pm

Andy, Thanks for the research on double row teeth. I have an interest in prehistoric mound builders ,earthen dwellers in Wisconsin. From time to time I have read in old books about a very large,violent group of earthen dwellers. That they roamed the edges of the glacial lobes hunting and living in earthen homes, or holes behind a mound of soil. . There are the strange newspaper articles from the 1800's . Beloit college was involved in unearthing a giant skeleton or two. Andy have you heard of these stories? I find them hard to believe yet as a mound builder person the grave unearthing is a real event that was observed? I am skeptical Thanks Tom.

Reply
Andy White
9/30/2015 04:34:04 pm

While all the attention is flattering, you'll either need to stay on topic or be interesting. Or at least funny.

Reply
Adrian Brooks Collins link
7/2/2016 04:18:43 pm

You're wrong Andy White. Shame on you for standing in the way of their reintegration into our history. You have no right to white wash documented history, that is reprehensible behavior, unforgivable. You should take down this screed. You're promoting specious research.

Adrian Brooks Collins.

Reply
Otis White
12/26/2016 10:25:03 am

To discount or generalize historic documentation in a way to support your own theories is discrediting to your own work. In many accounts these single phrases, such as; "double rows of teeth", "double teeth all around", "double teeth", etc... are described in detail. I have read descriptions in old accounts varying from "two sets of front cutting teeth on both the upper and lower jaw, one behind the other" to "molar-like grinding teeth all around". There are also accounts of skeletons found with abnormal numbers of fingers and toes. the most common abnormality seems to be six on each hand or foot. All of these things could be easily explained by inbreeding or cross-breeding. Inbreeding and cross-breeding are an extremely likely scenario considering the social conditions of prehistoric man. We know that more that one species of intelligent primates have existed. At times, more than one species has coexisted. We know that cross-breeding two closely related species of animal can create larger than normal hybrids with unusual features sometimes not visible in either parent species. the Liger is a contemporary example, as well as the mule. I prefer to reserve my judgement on this subject until more facts come to light.

Reply
mac
1/2/2017 05:19:44 pm

I had a friend who had two rows of concentric teeth. Female.

Reply
Lee
1/4/2017 07:42:51 am

My brother had two full sets of teeth with an few 3rd teeth behind the front teeth. Some teeth had 3 roots. All were pulled as an adult.

Reply
Ms Michelle
5/1/2017 09:17:25 pm

With all due respect, your "research" is basically just conjecture and subjective interpretation about reports, and anecdotal information. It is not for the scientist to rewrite history to fit his or her own theory. It is not for the scientist to speculate based on personal bias and personal interpretation. It is for the scientist to document, collect information, and report facts.

Reply
Tom T
9/7/2017 03:31:30 pm

I am new to the 'giant' thread and so I have no opinion on its validity. However, your dismissal seems pretty glib in that you not only discount but discredit a subject of inquiry based on nothing objective beyond some outmoded turn of phrase. The description, "double rows of teeth" seem pretty clear to me and would be odd phrasing indeed if someone were simply referring to a molar. I found your explanation unhelpful.

Reply
Andy White
9/8/2017 06:09:36 am

Before you glibly dismiss the explanation as "glib," you should familiarize yourself with some of the other things I've written on the topic. Indeed "double tooth" is not the same as "double rows of teeth" - they are different terms but both have linguistic explanations. Try clicking on the "Double Rows of Teeth" link in the "Categories" list on the sidebar.

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/category/double-rows-of-teeth

Reply
Viqui link
5/19/2018 09:55:59 pm

Good work. Thank you!

Reply
Ben
9/13/2018 06:56:23 pm

The problem is that Andy's explanations don't really make sense in many of the old newspaper accounts. Let me give example. Andy says that the term "double row of teeth" just simply means a row of teeth on the upper jaw and a row of teeth on the lower jaw. Well, first of all why would newspaper writers describe something normal as something remarkable or unusual? That would be like saying "a remarkable feature of the giant skeleton was normal rows on both jaws." I imagine that it may be unusual for older people at that time to have full set of teeth but surely many younger people had decent looking teeth and it would not be considered unusual to find a skull with good teeth in both jaws.

Also, on page 196 if Jim Viera's book Giants on Record, Jim gives this following newspaper account of a giant skeleton "He had a double row of teeth, both upper and lower."
Notice it said "both upper and lower" and that clearly means double rows of teeth on the upper and double rows of teeth on the lower.

Reply
Ernie link
9/16/2018 09:36:06 am

Andy , there are Giants being unearthed as you read this in NC, 24ft tall and has his teeth, but best thing is , he has company, at least 7 Giants on sight ,hope you see this quickly, don't want them to disappear, thanks for your time .

Reply
Zeek Wolfe
9/29/2018 09:52:04 pm

Well, that's it then. The very large skeletons uncovered across the world some of which having unusual dentition are simply fabrications of drunken or deluded diggers. One seven or eight foot skeleton, a Robert Wardlow lookalike if you will, might have been found, but hundreds if not thousands of "giants?" Preposterous! Anthropologists have said so. Nothing else to say and see here, folks, you can move on.

Reply
Jason
2/13/2019 08:19:46 pm

Quite funny how Andy only chooses certain things to respond to.
Giants existed, plain and simple and had distinguishing features. It is said in every culture and in every bible of every religion.
The distinguishing features are mentioned in each book which includes 2 rowns of teeth (one set behind the other) and 6 digits on each hand and foot.

Now im no scientist but im pretty sure that with language barriers and travel restrictions in those times it would not be easy for every religion/race/country/continent to make these stories up.

In the times of the newspaper articles, as said above, why would news be made on something using a “normal term” for those times?
Whilst you are correct in identifying that these terms mean different things in history, you have to be a special kind of ignorant to think that applies in these articles.

Reply
Andy White
2/14/2019 05:24:08 am

Please provide one religious book or ancient text that describes a giant human with both "2 rows of teeth (one set behind the other)" and "6 digits on each hand and foot."

Reply
R. Z.
2/20/2019 10:20:58 am

"Every culture and religion text"

Funny how you Jason tries to prove his point.
The Abrahamic religions are based on the same tales. Not actually a plural cultural belief, just the same text basis. These don't make the nephilim/giants/whatever a obvious fact. Like no text or tale of ancient superstitious people from anywhere automatically proves something...

"Because they said" isn't a fact and a truth, not a scientific proof brought by the scientific method. Just logical fallacy with appeal to age.

And Andy wrote about SOME of the accounts must be fake or misinterpreted. Not ALL the accounts.
Goddamn, interpretation of text is still a thing some people don't even try it.

Waiting to be enlighted by those biblical texts about 6 fingers and teeth.

Dennis
2/25/2019 12:45:59 pm

You will not find anything in the bible about the double rows of teeth or the six fingers and toes. It was more than irrelevant and not important. The important is the bible does confirm that giants existed back in the day

Bob
3/16/2019 07:50:17 pm

Andy then you have never done any real research.
Ancients all believed in a human/god to rule over them. They were huge, with 6 digits and double row of teeth. Before the flood and after the flood, we see so many clues in the Egyptian history and Greek mythologies.

Even today, people are born with six digits and double row of teeth.
You sound bias. Look around.

James Preston Smith
9/5/2019 08:36:55 am

Way back in the 1970s when I was just starting in the 9th grade or so (I am now 63) David J. Smith had an interesting show on AM Radio it was called the "Race of Giants" I ordered the book and saw numerous photos of "Giant" Skeletons seeing modern Giants exist, I assumed that the Book of Giants was on point! Still do you know there are lots of items that do not make any sense found in the deep mines of South Western Virginian COAL MINES I personally saw something that seems to be "humanoid" from perhaps 5 miles down in Grundy Virginia none of the old timers wanted to comment! Strange Human? hard to say!

Reply
Tony Lykins
12/27/2019 06:30:42 am

Say what you will......

New York Times May 4, 1912
First reported in the 4 May 1912 issue of the New York Times, the 18 skeletons found by the Peterson brothers on Lake Lawn Farm in southwest Wisconsin exhibited several strange and freakish features. Their heights ranged between seven and nine feet and their skulls "presumably those of men, are much larger than the heads of any race which inhabit America to-day."
Above the eye sockets, "the head slopes straight back and the nasal bones protrude far above the cheek bones. The jaw bones are long and pointed, bearing a minute resemblance to the head of the monkey. The teeth in the front of the jaw are regular molars."

Reply
Tony Lykins
12/27/2019 07:24:04 am

We know that Fewkes was working with/for the Smithsonian and was active in getting "protective legislature" for these indigenous sites... but we also know that most Native histories, stories and folklore report that there were mound building giants here before they were... So what happened to the skeleton? Was the legislature to conceal the truth? Why don't they want us to know the truth about these people?

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/11074316/giant_18_feet_in_austin_texas_probably/

Reply
Brian Keith Mino link
9/29/2020 02:27:09 am

You are incorrect because although rare people today sometimes have double dentition or extra teeth and they being giants secreted alot more HGH = Human Growth Hormone in order to be gigantic and you also conveniently left out the fact that these giants also had some of them 6 fingers and 6 toes like the Giant at the battle of Gath in the Bible in the second Book of Samuel CH 20 verse 21. On the other end of the spectrum otzi the Ice man supposedly 5300 years old was only 5.2-5.3 in height and 110 pounds in weight literally the size of a featherweight boxer had anatomical abnormalities as well instead of 13 Pairs of Ribs found in many of the giants he also had a gaped tooth I forget the term for it astemata? Oetzi had O+ blood type and was about 48 to 50 years old when he was murdered. OTZI lived during the antediluvian period.

Reply
Brian Keith Mino link
12/12/2022 04:52:32 am

Sorry Oetzi did not have an extra pair of ribs, he was missing a pair of ribs.

Reply
Rose link
12/29/2020 03:21:20 am

Thanks for postiing this

Reply
Paul
6/22/2021 09:30:57 pm

It’s obvious that bias has taken the better of Andy. So instead of old newspaper articles how about the actual remains themselves. They exist and there is lots of them. The Smithsonian is in active pursuit of destroying as many as possible. All to further a debunked theory of evolution.

Reply
Karl Werner
11/12/2021 06:31:06 pm

Many words disputing other peoples words. If skeletons exist.... Why did you not go look or dispute their existance.

Reply
Gabriella R Shimone
2/26/2022 08:56:06 pm

It's interesting how language, something we require to communicate information and intention, can also become the greatest obstacle to either. That said, in the absence of physical evidence of what condition is being referred to by those particular phrases, there is also a condition known as hyperdontia in which there may be what appears to be a second row of teeth, superior and/or inferior aspect(s) of the oral cavity. Since we also have concluded for some time that evolution isn't necessarily based on natural demand, such as developing specific adaptations to environment, but also on desirable traits. I'm not a forensic odonatologist or dentist, merely a retired nurse, so I can't make any valid assertions. I can only make inquiries as to possible explanations for what has been discussed and for which such possible explanation may prove plausible. Could it be these much larger than average humans, possibly due to hyperpituitarism, also have presented with hyperdontia? If both are potentially true, could their prolonged presence be the result of favourable evolution- that is, evolution resulting from socially desirable traits vs functionally necessary traits? Many species, including humans, have as many traits resulting from functional evolution as from favourable. Has that ever been considered?

Reply
Paul Briggs
6/30/2022 07:22:23 am

If you look up images of extra rows of teeth online, you will discover hundreds of examples and partial examples. And those are just the ones that have been put online.

Reply
John Miller
12/7/2022 07:15:05 pm

My great grandfather had two complete rows of teeth. I have an old picture of him lifting a table in a bar with only his mouth biting it. No drinks spilled. Big German immigrant he won bets in the bars of NYC by doing this. I’ve also heard stories for years that any large skeleton unearthed are promptly taken away by the Smithsonian. It’s all true and the real interesting parts we will never be told.

Reply



Leave a Reply.


    All views expressed in my blog posts are my own. The views of those that comment are their own. That's how it works.

    I reserve the right to take down comments that I deem to be defamatory or harassing. 

    Andy White

    Follow me on Twitter: @Andrew_A_White

    Email me: andy.white.zpm@gmail.com

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    Picture

    Sick of the woo?  Want to help keep honest and open dialogue about pseudo-archaeology on the internet? Please consider contributing to Woo War Two.
    Picture

    Follow updates on posts related to giants on the Modern Mythology of Giants page on Facebook.

    Archives

    January 2023
    January 2022
    November 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    March 2021
    June 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    3D Models
    AAA
    Adena
    Afrocentrism
    Agent Based Modeling
    Agent-based Modeling
    Aircraft
    Alabama
    Aliens
    Ancient Artifact Preservation Society
    Androgynous Fish Gods
    ANTH 227
    ANTH 291
    ANTH 322
    Anthropology History
    Anunnaki
    Appalachia
    Archaeology
    Ardipithecus
    Art
    Atlantis
    Australia
    Australopithecines
    Aviation History
    Bigfoot
    Birds
    Boas
    Book Of Mormon
    Broad River Archaeological Field School
    Bronze Age
    Caribou
    Carolina Bays
    Ceramics
    China
    Clovis
    Complexity
    Copper Culture
    Cotton Mather
    COVID-19
    Creationism
    Croatia
    Crow
    Demography
    Denisovans
    Diffusionism
    DINAA
    Dinosaurs
    Dirt Dance Floor
    Double Rows Of Teeth
    Dragonflies
    Early Archaic
    Early Woodland
    Earthworks
    Eastern Woodlands
    Eastern Woodlands Household Archaeology Data Project
    Education
    Egypt
    Europe
    Evolution
    Ewhadp
    Fake Hercules Swords
    Fetal Head Molding
    Field School
    Film
    Florida
    Forbidden Archaeology
    Forbidden History
    Four Field Anthropology
    Four-field Anthropology
    France
    Genetics
    Genus Homo
    Geology
    Geometry
    Geophysics
    Georgia
    Giants
    Giants Of Olden Times
    Gigantism
    Gigantopithecus
    Graham Hancock
    Grand Valley State
    Great Lakes
    Hollow Earth
    Homo Erectus
    Hunter Gatherers
    Hunter-gatherers
    Illinois
    India
    Indiana
    Indonesia
    Iowa
    Iraq
    Israel
    Jim Vieira
    Jobs
    Kensington Rune Stone
    Kentucky
    Kirk Project
    Late Archaic
    Lemuria
    Lithic Raw Materials
    Lithics
    Lizard Man
    Lomekwi
    Lost Continents
    Mack
    Mammoths
    Mastodons
    Maya
    Megafauna
    Megaliths
    Mesolithic
    Michigan
    Middle Archaic
    Middle Pleistocene
    Middle Woodland
    Midwest
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Mississippian
    Missouri
    Modeling
    Morphometric
    Mound Builder Myth
    Mu
    Music
    Nazis
    Neandertals
    Near East
    Nephilim
    Nevada
    New Mexico
    Newspapers
    New York
    North Carolina
    Oahspe
    Oak Island
    Obstetrics
    Ohio
    Ohio Valley
    Oldowan
    Olmec
    Open Data
    Paleoindian
    Paleolithic
    Pilumgate
    Pleistocene
    Pliocene
    Pre Clovis
    Pre-Clovis
    Prehistoric Families
    Pseudo Science
    Pseudo-science
    Radiocarbon
    Reality Check
    Rome
    Russia
    SAA
    Sardinia
    SCIAA
    Science
    Scientific Racism
    Sculpture
    SEAC
    Search For The Lost Giants
    Sexual Dimorphism
    Sitchin
    Social Complexity
    Social Networks
    Solutrean Hypothesis
    South Africa
    South America
    South Carolina
    Southeast
    Stone Holes
    Subsistence
    Swordgate
    Teaching
    Technology
    Teeth
    Television
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Topper
    Travel
    Travel Diaries
    Vaccines
    Washington
    Whatzit
    White Supremacists
    Wisconsin
    Woo War Two
    World War I
    World War II
    Writing
    Younger Dryas

    RSS Feed

    Picture
Proudly powered by Weebly