Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,794 Year: 4,051/9,624 Month: 922/974 Week: 249/286 Day: 10/46 Hour: 1/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Board Administration ⇒ Proposed New Topics ⇒

Nuggin V. Randman 2: They Might Be Giants

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nuggin V. Randman 2: They Might Be Giants
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2519 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005

Nuggin Posts Only
Message 1 of 9 (270109)
12-16-2005 4:15 PM

Okay, Game on Randman.
​
The new topic is giants. And normally the first poster would take the affirmative position, but since I'm too impatient to wait, I'm going to open the post with the negative.
​
There are not/were not giants. Any and all accounts of "giants" can be explained with a rational evaluation of the accounts/evidence.
Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-16-2005 4:37 PM Nuggin has replied
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3976
Joined: 09-26-2002

Adminnemooseus Posts Only
Message 2 of 9 (270113)
12-16-2005 4:37 PM 		Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
12-16-2005 4:15 PM

On hold
I think that you may need more content in your message 1.
​
But first, please see the Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics topic that I have just started.
​
Adminnemooseus
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 12-16-2005 4:15 PM Nuggin has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Nuggin, posted 12-16-2005 5:44 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2519 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005

Nuggin Posts Only
Message 3 of 9 (270129)
12-16-2005 5:44 PM 		Reply to: Message 2 by Adminnemooseus
12-16-2005 4:37 PM

Re: On hold
Ya, waiting for Randman's pro-giants stance
This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-16-2005 4:37 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by AdminJar, posted 12-16-2005 5:47 PM Nuggin has replied
AdminJar
Inactive Member

AdminJar Posts Only
Message 4 of 9 (270131)
12-16-2005 5:47 PM 		Reply to: Message 3 by Nuggin
12-16-2005 5:44 PM

Re: On hold
It might be important to first agree on what a giant is in the first place.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Nuggin, posted 12-16-2005 5:44 PM Nuggin has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Nuggin, posted 12-16-2005 5:54 PM AdminJar has not replied
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2519 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005

Nuggin Posts Only
Message 5 of 9 (270138)
12-16-2005 5:54 PM 		Reply to: Message 4 by AdminJar
12-16-2005 5:47 PM

What's a giant?!
I would agree, but since Randman is going to be taking the affirmative, I want to give him a chance to make his statement before we dig down into definitions.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AdminJar, posted 12-16-2005 5:47 PM AdminJar has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 6:16 PM Nuggin has replied
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4925 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005

randman Posts Only
Message 6 of 9 (270144)
12-16-2005 6:16 PM 		Reply to: Message 5 by Nuggin
12-16-2005 5:54 PM

Re: What's a giant?!
My stance is there is ample scientific evidence giants existed.
​
This message has been edited by randman, 12-16-2005 06:25 PM
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Nuggin, posted 12-16-2005 5:54 PM Nuggin has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Nuggin, posted 12-16-2005 7:10 PM randman has not replied
 Message 8 by Nuggin, posted 12-17-2005 4:12 AM randman has not replied
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2519 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005

Nuggin Posts Only
Message 7 of 9 (270162)
12-16-2005 7:10 PM 		Reply to: Message 6 by randman
12-16-2005 6:16 PM

Hurray!
We have a debate! Let's move this thing to a real thread.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 6:16 PM randman has not replied
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2519 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005

Nuggin Posts Only
Message 8 of 9 (270270)
12-17-2005 4:12 AM 		Reply to: Message 6 by randman
12-16-2005 6:16 PM

I'll have to get it started I guess
In my view the various accounts of giants can be broken down into a few catagories.
​
Purely Mythical - simply a legend, think Greek Titans
​
Mistaken Anatomy - Someone finds the fossil leg bone and skull of a mammoth, they come up with the idea for the Cyclops.
​
Exageration - Often power and size are equated, so stories about powerful men quickly become stories about big powerful men. There may have been a real Hercules, but he wasn't actually nine feet tall.
​
Excessive Growth through genetic illness - Robert Wadlow 8'11"
​
Abnormally Large individual amoung normal population - Shaq
​
Slightly larger population viewed by smaller population - The 5ft Romans encounter the 6'4" Norse.
​
This covers all the "normal" giants we'd expect to find. I take it from your post that you would want to include a further group.
​
Reproducing population of excessively large individuals - numerous people exceeding the current height limitations (say, 8ft+).
​
I take it from your post above, and on the other thread, that there is physical evidence for this last group.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 6:16 PM randman has not replied
AdminPhat
Inactive Member

AdminPhat Posts Only
Message 9 of 9 (270297)
12-17-2005 10:21 AM

Thread copied to the Nuggin V. Randman 2: They Might Be Giants thread in the The Great Debate forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024