If the carvings are giant 'land quipus,' wouldn't it stand to reason that they were made by the ancestors of the Inca/Andean peoples?
The way the article is written makes it 'sound' as though there was an advanced people who were wiped out and then modern humans came and built cultures and (in the case of some) civilizations in the same area. How then did the Inca learn how to read and 'write' quipus if the people who invented the system had long disappeared?
- The geoglyphs could be natural formations. Or agricultural mounds--contrary to the article. As opposed to the Nazca lines, these are not in recognizable shapes/images.
- If the lines are people-made, then why couldn't they have been built by ordinary humans over many generations (as with the Nazca lines, most of these lines don't seem particularly deep and rely on there not being much rain).
- If the builders had craniums three times that of modern humans, but body sizes roughly that of humans (the article only mentions the cranial capacity, and while 'giants' are used, Biblical giants weren't three times the height of modern man), how would they be born? By cesarean? Hip width is already pushing the max. Add onto that the intelligence (which is what they seem to be getting at) among species is supposed to be a ratio of brain to body size: fish have a small ratio, reptiles a larger one, mammals higher, and humans higher still. If the giants were thrice the size of humans and had thrice the brain size (so they could be naturally born), they might be about as intelligent as humans--or might not; there's more to intelligence than mere brain size. Whales have much larger brains than humans, but have a body even more immense, so their ratio is lower than humans'.
- The Flood was global, and the universe is only a few thousand Earth years old. (just to get in a little Creationist point).
Still, of the opinion that mainstream archeology and history may be selling short ancient Amerindian civilizations. Though this seems to be changing.