Thursday, May 8, 2014

Six-Toed Giants and Double Rows Of Teeth

(above: This picture was taken in 2008 by Matt Jordan at "Newspaper Rock" in Canyonlands National Park, Utah - notice the 6 toed prints?

 (Regular sized man in bottom left, big men up top, upper right corner big 6 toed footprint - if you read my post the other day on Piasa Bird - these giants wearing "horns" makes a lot of sense in regards to man-eating bird with horns!!! In fact, this petroglyph shows me that the Native Americas and the giants coexisted.)

**Note:  As always on this blog, I am opening a conversation on the possibilities of why something is the way it is. I offer my own conjecture based on my own research. This may not include your own viewpoints or personal or religious belief system.  I am attempting to show you what conclusions I personally make from research to give a real-world explanation for something that seems exceptional.**

In reported finds of ancient giants, repeatedly we hear of 6-toes and double rows of teeth. What are we to make of this "aberration"? Well, for homo sapiens that is deviated off the normal course and is usually associated with a genetic syndrome or anomaly. But, in the case of this type of man (almost surely not related to Mitochondrial Eve) why did they evolve with such features consistently and repeatedly? I'm going to discuss a potential explanation later in this post. First, let's learn about these interesting features

NOTE:  In homo sapiens, genetic issues that create extra teeth are often associated with extra digits and extra nipples. 

From (page 27) Records of Ancient Races In the Mississippi Valley": "Along the Illinois River in a cave...The larger representation of the human foot (14 inches) is singular, from the fact that it has six toes instead of five. Morse's Universal Geography according to Priest, gives an account of a number of tracks or foot impressions found in rocks in the mountains of Tennessee. Among these were a number of tracks representing human feet and they uniformly had six toes on each foot. Since it is known that is is not natural for man or animal for that matter, to have six toes, this representation is indeed singular." 

(Book:  "Records of Ancient Races in the Mississippi Valley", page 30) (quoted from book "Universal Geography" by Morse of tracks found in Tennessee). "In the State of Tennessee, on a certain mountain called the Enchanted Mountain, situated a few miles south of Braystown, which is at the headwaters of the Tennessee River, are found impressed on the surface of the solid rock a great number of tracks, as turkeys, bears, horses and human beings, as perfectas as they could be made in snow or sand. The human tracks are remarkable for having uniformly six toes each, one only excepted, which appears to be the print of a Negro foot. One among these tracks is distinguished from the rest by its monstrousness, being of no less dimensions than sixteen inches in length across the toes 13 inches, behind the toes where the foot narrows toward the instep, 7 inches, and the heel ball five inches." 

These double rows of teeth reported in ancient giant skulls seem like an odd "aberration," but it could have been genetically unique to these people and perpetuated by breeding among their own kind over thousands and thousands of years until it was a regular trait, like us having five toes and a single row of teeth.

Supernumerary tooth formation (extra teeth).  This condition would be genetic. So, if ancient giants tended to have it, they tended to pass this on. In this case, it is a third set of adult teeth. "The etiology of supernumerary teeth is still uncertain. A number of theories have been postulated to try to explain their presence, including atavism (evolutionary throwback)...This theory is based on the phenomena that ancestor mammals have more teeth with three incisors, one canine, four premolars, and three molars in each quadrant of the jaw (Babu et al., 1998; Osborne, 1978; Smith, 1969). The teeth of common modern mammals belong to these four tooth families. It is generally thought that during evolution, the total number of teeth per dentition decreased (from polyodonty to oligodonty) and the generations of teeth were also reduced (from polyphyodonty to diphyodonty or monophyodonty); whereas the morphology of teeth became more complex (from homodonty to heterodonty). Over the course of evolution, the teeth in placental mammals tend to disappear in an order that is opposite to the order of their eruption...

Heredity is also believed to be an important factor. Supernumerary teeth occur more commonly in the relatives of affected patients than in the general population...There are also reports that supernumerary teeth are sometimes associated with polydactyly and extra nipples ( (Hyun et al., 2008; Kantor et al., "

**Supernumerary teeth in Pleistocene, Recent, and hybrid individuals of the Spermophilus richardsonii complex (Sciuridae)   "A supernumerary distal upper molar expressed bilaterally, occurred in the specimens of Spermaophilus richardsonni complex...(this complex) includes two closely related ground squirrels occupying the northern Great Plains."

NOTE:  What this (above) is saying is that two closely related creatures of the same genus mating in the Pleistocene Era resulted in double molars (in squirrels). 

If this were applied to my tentative theory that Giants were Neanderthal and Denisovan hybrids (both were descendents of Heidelbergensis, not of the Mitochondrial Eve as were homo sapiens), then double rows of teeth might be an expected offshoot of this close but different relation hybridization.  

It is entirely possible that two other, as of yet unidentified, closely related human types mated - not necessarily Neanderthal and Denisovan, though right now they seem to have the right relationship and Neanderthal had the right coloring and skull shape. We do not know what Denisovans had, as we have yet to find their skeletons or skulls. 

I do believe we are missing many "cousins" that Neanderthal had besides just Denisovans. What their inherent characteristics were, we don't know, but height would have had to be one of them and the interbreeding would have resulted in characteristics like the six toes and double rows of teeth which over time, would have become a characteristic of their people. 

Source:  When studying a Neanderthal toe bone, the findings were presented to the journal, "Nature," by a team of scientists who sequenced the DNA from the Neanderthal toe fossil and compared it to the genomes of 25 present-day humans, as well as the genome of a sister group to Neanderthals called Denisovans....The biggest surprise, though, was the finding that a fourth hominin contributed roughly 6% of the DNA in the Denisovan genome. The identity of this DNA donor remains a mystery.

Source:  A final ancestral feature found with some regularity in Sub-Saharan Africans, relative to other modern groups, is polydontia (extra teeth). Numerous cases of extra incisors, third premolars, and fourth molars have been noted […] In one study (Watters, 1962) the incidence reached 2.5-3% in several hundred west Africans; many of the extra teeth were fully formed and erupted. “Typical” mammals exhibit three incisors and four premolars (Jordan et al., 1992). Polydontia is also found in living non-human primates […] (Irish, 1998, p. 88)

Why are these ancestral traits much more common in sub-Saharan Africans than in other humans? There are several possible reasons. One is that non-Africans began as a small founder group and thus lost much of the dental variability that still characterizes Africans. Another reason might be that natural selection favored new forms of dentition outside Africa, perhaps as a response to new food sources or new ways of preparing food.

But there’s a third possible reason: archaic admixture. Just as modern humans mixed to some extent with Neanderthals in Europe and Denisovans in Asia, perhaps there was also mixture with archaic hominins in Africa, and perhaps this admixture introduced archaic dental features into present-day Africans.

This (above) is yet another example of how hybridizing in separate groups within a genus could create extra teeth.  I also find it telling because it is saying that another group of hominins might have mated in Africa with these people and that caused this double row of teeth. Whoever these hominins were, they might have also mated with Neanderthal to produce a mix that was fair in coloring and gigantic.

Source:   A mosaic is a genetic anomaly similar in nature and effects to a chimera: genetically different populations of cells within one organism, originated from some propagated mutation of a single cell rather than from outside sources.

Source:  Findings for a number of groups, including basal (e.g. lemurs) and derived (e.g. Old World apes) lineages, demonstrate that introgression and hybrid speciation have caused a reticulate pattern that is still detectable in the, often mosaic, genomes of primates. For example, results from genetic analyses of our own species demonstrate the process of past introgressive hybridization with the progenitors of our sister taxa (i.e. chimpanzees and gorillas) and most likely also our extinct, close relatives in the hominid lineage.

Note: In other words, there is a mosaic pattern set up in the genome when mating with another in our genus of homo and this is even seen in Neanderthal and Denisovan mixed with human very very long ago.

Source:  Results show that these primate hybrids are somewhat heterotic relative to their parental populations, are highly variable, and display novel phenotypes. These effects are most evident in the dentition and probably indicate the mixing of two separately coadapted genomes and the breakdown in the coordination of early development, despite the fact that these populations diverged fairly recently.  

Note:  In other words, if you take two novel phenotypes and put them together the mosaic effect can be shown in dentitions - and likely other arenas like skeletal. 


So, as you can see, we still are missing a lot of important pieces in this evolutionary divergence between homo sapiens and Neanderthal, thought to be many thousands of years in the past. But, we do know that Denisovans and Neanderthal were closely related under the same lineage (Heidelerbergensis versus us who were from Mitochondrial Eve) which means there is every possibility that, like the squirrels mentioned above in the Pleistocene Era who were closely related and hybridized, extra teeth, extra toes could very much be the typical for them in a mosaic sort of way.

This is, of course, my own conclusion in evaluating supernumerary teeth and polydactyly (extra digits), but it is based on very real world explanation. Even when you explain something like this in a population, you are left with something even more exciting - just what were the origins of this population? They may not be alien or nephilim, but they may be a natural other offshoot of intelligent beings not related to us except back many hundreds of thousands of years ago at some primitive common creature.  I believe revealing how they could have had these features helps to prove that they are a feasible race of people that lived on the earth and not magical or make believe.


No comments:

Post a Comment


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...