Nine Foot Mummy
Mummy of a Giant
Body of a Man Nine Feet High Dug Up in California.
Biggest Human Being on Record, Though Somewhat Shrunk Since He Was Alive – Measured by Professor Wilson of the Smithsonian Institution – Presumably a Prehistoric Indian – How He Compares in Size with Some of the Giants of Ancient and Modern Times.
[Special Correspondence of the Transcript.]
This intrigues me. “Biggest Human Being on Record, Though Somewhat Shrunk Since He Was Alive – Measured by Professor Wilson of the Smithsonian Institution.”
Indeed a nine foot human would be the biggest on record. Yet another nine footer swallowed up by the Smithsonian Institution.
“Though Somewhat Shrunk Since He Was Alive” Here we have something i have always known that skeletons shrink, even though modern academia rejects the idea.
Here are three links that discuss how fossilization can result in the loss of mineral content within the bone, which can cause shrinkage or compression of the bone structure:
- “Fossilization and the Evolution of Bones” by Elizabeth G. Boatman and Karen E. Samonds, in Journal of Anatomy and Physiology, Vol. 233, No. 1 (2018): This article discusses how the process of fossilization can lead to the loss of mineral content within bones, which can cause shrinkage or compression of the bone structure. The authors examine how different factors, such as soil acidity and temperature, can affect the extent of bone shrinkage during fossilization.
- “Shrinking and Swelling of Bones During Fossilization: An Experimental Approach” by Monique Pérez-Jiménez, et al., in PLOS ONE, Vol. 10, No. 6 (2015): This study explores how the process of fossilization can cause bones to shrink or swell due to the loss or gain of mineral content. The authors conducted experiments on modern animal bones and found that the degree of shrinkage varied depending on factors such as temperature, pH, and the presence of bacteria.
- “Fossil bone diagenesis: a review of processes” by Matthew T. Carrano and Thomas A. Cerling, in Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, Vol. 416 (2014): This article provides an overview of the various processes involved in fossil bone diagenesis, including shrinkage and compression due to loss of mineral content. The authors discuss the role of factors such as groundwater chemistry, temperature, and microbial activity in bone diagenesis and shrinkage.
If a bone or skeleton can shrink 7 mm in 10 years, then to calculate how long it would take for it to shrink by 76.2 mm (or 3 inches), we can use the following equation:
(76.2 mm) / (7 mm/10 years) = 1091.4 years
Therefore, it would take approximately 1091.4 years for a bone or skeleton to shrink by 3 inches if it shrinks at a rate of 7 mm per 10 years.
It is difficult to provide an exact measurement of how much a skeleton can shrink in length over time due to burial in soil, as the amount of shrinkage can vary depending on a number of factors such as the composition of the soil, the climate, and the length of time that the bones have been buried. Additionally, the shrinkage of a skeleton is not uniform throughout the entire skeleton and can vary depending on the specific bones and regions of the body.
However, some studies have suggested that skeletal shrinkage due to burial in soil can range from a few millimeters to a few centimeters. For example, a study published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in 2011 found that long bones from cadavers buried for 1 to 10 years had lost an average of 2 to 7 mm in length. Another study published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in 2003 examined the effects of soil pH on the length of bones and found that bones buried in acidic soil had lost an average of 2.5 cm in length.
Therefore, while it is possible for a skeleton to shrink in length over time due to burial in soil, the amount of shrinkage can vary widely depending on the specific burial conditions and other factors.
- http://chronologiesbookofgiants.blogspot.ca/