re: Do you think human giants ever roamed this earth?

quote:

---

Should’ve stopped after the first part. There is no reason to think that Denisovans were very tall…much less that they were the giants from the Bible.

---

There are indeed Some reasons to think they were tall, just not the 8 feet or higher originally estimated based on that one finger bone. Nevertheless, I’m not staking a claim on this point, only to suggest a possibility.

That brings us back to the biblical narratives. The desire to disregard or even dismiss these narratives because of an anti-religious bias is just as foolish, or maybe more so, than taking them literally.

First of all, the amount of written documents from ancient history is preciously small. Secondly, the use of contextual references helps to understand that some of the narratives are clearly exaggerations for effect.

The idea of a material world separated from the spiritual and mythical world came about very recently, so you need to set aside assumptions about scientific accuracy in this realm.

That doesn’t mean we can’t sift for clues about the past from these texts.

The mention of giants or of interbreeding between different humans and giants or angels is a very unusual passage in the biblical texts which would ordinarily be considered outside of the standard creation stories, and therefore can’t be so easily dismissed as some fabrication to fool people into believing a myth.

So, the new scientific evidence of interbreeding between what was heretofore considered different species along a linear evolutionary path is quite new and enlightening in the extreme. It changes our entire understanding of the prehistoric period of biologically modern human history.

The fact that there are ancient writings that mention interbreeding of “men of old” seems to mesh with this new scientific evidence, don’t you think?

Ever seen Shaq

quote:

---

Hush with that. The Bible is a bunch of fairy tales for low IQ people narrative must stand among the intellectually superior.

---

You do understand that he made up the 1000s of found skeletons, right?

quote:

---

Yes, but there is enough archaeological evidence to keep the anti-religion “science people from validly dismissing it, and they know it. Much more important to look cool in their circles by laughing at people of faith.

---

You're creating an enemy ITT that doesn't exist.

Nobody has suggested everything in the Bible was just made up. You'd be hard-pressed to find a hardcore atheist, anti-religious type who will say that. There is clearly history adapted within the story. The question is if that history occurred with the mystical aspects or was co-opted later by the religious to validate their religion's history.

quote:

---

The question is if that history occurred with the mystical aspects or was co-opted later by the religious to validate their religion's history.

---

The question of the actual existence of Nephilim and their role in my belief system is beyond minor. Much more interesting in my mind is the combination of pre-flood occurrences raising the question, “Did God mess up?”

quote:

---

Of course there was. They were destroyed in the great flood

---

Yes. Little known fact is that giants CAN’T SWIM!

Yep

quote:

---

The question of the actual existence of Nephilim and their role in my belief system is beyond minor.

---

It's not physically possible for them to exist, even as 20-footers (I've seen some accounts say they were thousands of feet tall ) unless their bodies lacked all aspects of humanity. Steel wasn't invented for thousands of years later, so there wasn't even any substances on Earth to manufacture them.

quote:

---

. That is a flawed assumption. Nature is rife with examples of bone structures NOT like ours - birds, elephants, whales, sharks, and even dinosaurs - that were designed to different parameters for specialized applications. Ditto things like circulatory systems. There is no reason whatsoever why a "giant" couldn't have internals tweaked to support greater height and still look at least vaguely like us

---

But it wouldn't look vaguely like us at all, then.

This is the skeleton of the largest bipedal mammal that we've found.



Even then, it wasn't purely bipedal. It looks nothing like a human, also. Look how short the hind legs are, as well as the tail.

Even the OP was clear enough to qualify it as human giants.

quote:

---

Jack Ruby

---

You son of a bitch.