Update on my previous post…Smithsonian Guilty of Giant Coverup

After I rushed to post this article, I discovered that it is a satire.  There is not a Supreme Court ruling coming out that forces the Smithsonian Institute to release this information about giants.  Even though they should be, since we all know that they are guilty of doing this.

If I find something else out that is true, I will post it.  Otherwise, take the last post as a satire article that hopefully will come true.



About sherrycottle@gmail.com

Sherry Cottle Graham is a freelance writer and the author of Blood Brothers - The Forgotten Children of the Mound Builders. This book should be available on June 1, 2013.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Update on my previous post…Smithsonian Guilty of Giant Coverup

  1. Alan says:

    It is so hard sometimes to see what is real and what is not. Some of these internet posters get a kick out of bamboozling the public and make it difficult for those who are doing real archaeological and anthropological study of the first peoples- because when they do legitimately find something of value and interest -the legitimate folks get their legitimate work thrown into the same basket as the hoaxers . I am sure that thousands of others jumped in on this one, in fact I almost shared this too-for the same reasons. Glad you caught that it was not real-thanks for sorting that out.

  2. Jerry Wills says:

    We are also trying to determine if this story os satire. How did you arrive to that conclusion? Thanks in advance ; )

    • Hi Jerry

      About this story about the ships, I believe at this time is true. It came from a reliable source. So, now it is a waiting game to see if it materializes.

      I hope you have a Happy Holidays!


  3. Alex Fane says:

    Thanks for the correction, Sherry. I’ve been looking for a link to the Supreme Court ruling on FindLaw and could find none, even at the level of a lower court. Someone at WND is creating a disinformation campaign on the topic of the giant bones, which I guess is why there was no byline on that article. It did not strike me as a satire but intentional planting of wrong information to discredit the topic. Much like intelligence services do on many topics, to muddy the waters, and make a mockery of those who hold nonconforming opinions, or who attempt to expose the perfidy of the same agencies.