Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Giant People in the bible?
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 211 of 352 (493161)
01-06-2009 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by dillion howard
01-06-2009 4:24 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Hello dillion howard, and welcome to EvC.
dillion howard writes:
who ru to say whats fiction and nonfiction look at the size of reptiles today and millons of years ago.
The reason we know about dinosaurs, is because we found fossils of them. No remains of "giant men" have ever been found.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by dillion howard, posted 01-06-2009 4:24 PM dillion howard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by ICANT, posted 01-06-2009 8:29 PM Huntard has not replied
 Message 222 by Peg, posted 01-08-2009 6:33 AM Huntard has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 212 of 352 (493170)
01-06-2009 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by b b
10-21-2006 5:48 AM


if the buffalo became extinct
No since some would exist as fossils and they could reconstruct them the same way we determine that such creatures as dinosaurs & placoderms existed.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by b b, posted 10-21-2006 5:48 AM b b has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 213 of 352 (493180)
01-06-2009 8:29 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by Huntard
01-06-2009 4:37 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Hi Huntard,
Huntard writes:
The reason we know about dinosaurs, is because we found fossils of them. No remains of "giant men" have ever been found.
Would you consider a 1400 lb man a giant? Here
How about the worlds largest living human at 8' 5" whose hand is 31 cm long.Here
Would you consider Robert Pershing Wadlow a giant?
He was 8' 11.1" tall and weighed 490 lbs.
It is said: "Robert Pershing Wadlow was a man who, to this day, is the tallest person in medical history for whom there is irrefutable evidence."
There is a nice picture of him Here with his father.
But on the other hand I have no idea what you guys consider giants.
God Bless,
HERE Technologies | The world's #1 location platform

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Huntard, posted 01-06-2009 4:37 PM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Coyote, posted 01-06-2009 10:32 PM ICANT has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 214 of 352 (493185)
01-06-2009 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by ICANT
01-06-2009 8:29 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
But on the other hand I have no idea what you guys consider giants.
If there were giants running amok in the old days, where are the bones?

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by ICANT, posted 01-06-2009 8:29 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by Brian, posted 01-07-2009 9:18 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 217 by ICANT, posted 01-07-2009 11:03 AM Coyote has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 215 of 352 (493190)
01-07-2009 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by dillion howard
01-06-2009 4:24 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
dillion writes:
who ru to say whats fiction and nonfiction look at the size of reptiles today and millons of years ago
I r1. The structure of the human skeleton is such that their height can not exceed approximately nine feet without major modification due to the height/weight ratio in this gravitational field.
To exceed this limitation we are looking at peg legs as in elephants (#1 in land dwelling weight), Hippos (#2), or Rhinos (#3). Among fossils, those real big plant eaters were essentially large elephants with extra neck and tail when it comes to structure.
The only way to get viable human skeletons over nine feet is going to require a lot of knuckle walking, if not a total rejection of bipedalism.
Sorry, blame Newton for limiting these fantasies. It is called mechanics, as in engineering mechanics. Refutation of this field would involve the revocation of the equation of gravity, a violation of which has never been observed throughout history, on any gravitational body, or even amongst many gravitational bodies (think NASA).
Edited by anglagard, : plural in last phrase

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by dillion howard, posted 01-06-2009 4:24 PM dillion howard has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 216 of 352 (493223)
01-07-2009 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Coyote
01-06-2009 10:32 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
If there were giants running amok in the old days, where are the bones?
There should be more evidence than just their bones. There's a whole range of artefacts and ecofacts missing as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Coyote, posted 01-06-2009 10:32 PM Coyote has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 217 of 352 (493232)
01-07-2009 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Coyote
01-06-2009 10:32 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Hi Coyote,
Coyote writes:
If there were giants running amok in the old days, where are the bones?
The same place all those missing bones creationist keep asking for.
How many people were on the earth at the time being discussed?
How many of those were giants?
That would limit how many bones you might find.
The time element would have a little bit to do with it also.
But I know you are stuck on a few thousand years though.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Coyote, posted 01-06-2009 10:32 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Coyote, posted 01-07-2009 11:18 AM ICANT has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 218 of 352 (493234)
01-07-2009 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by ICANT
01-07-2009 11:03 AM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Hi Coyote,
Coyote writes:
If there were giants running amok in the old days, where are the bones?
The same place all those missing bones creationist keep asking for.
Actually, no.
The bones from human evolution are tens of thousands to millions of years old. They would definitely not be in the same location as bones from some tribe mentioned in the Bible.
How many people were on the earth at the time being discussed?
How many of those were giants?
That would limit how many bones you might find.
The time element would have a little bit to do with it also.
But I know you are stuck on a few thousand years though.
Stuck on a few thousand years? If its an extant tribe mentioned in the Bible what else would it be than within a few thousand years?
My point is simple: if there were giants, we should be able to find the bones. The past several thousand years are well explored by archaeologists, and we usually have decent preservation in that time period for anything that was deliberately buried.
Also, as was pointed out, we are missing everything else from such a tribe as well--artifacts, dwellings, etc.
Given this lack of evidence, I think these "giants" are about as real as the Abominable Snowman (or perhaps less so, as there are eyewitness accounts of the Snowman).

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by ICANT, posted 01-07-2009 11:03 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by ICANT, posted 01-07-2009 4:33 PM Coyote has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 219 of 352 (493249)
01-07-2009 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Coyote
01-07-2009 11:18 AM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Hi Coyote,
Coyote writes:
The bones from human evolution are tens of thousands to millions of years old. They would definitely not be in the same location as bones from some tribe mentioned in the Bible.
I was referring to missing.
I understand we have a lot of early human fragments that scientist are using to help explain the evolutionary history of man.
But do we have anything more than fragments?
Coyote writes:
Stuck on a few thousand years? If its an extant tribe mentioned in the Bible what else would it be than within a few thousand years?
You don't believe the Bible.
Yet you are adamant that it only goes back a few thousand years.
Why is that?
I do believe the Bible and it goes a lot further back than a few thousand years.
In fact it covers from the beginning.
Now just when was that?
Was it a few thousand years ago as some believe and teach?
Was it a few billion years ago as some believe and teach?
Was it forever in the past as some believe. The Bounce Theory, a series of oscillations, each beginning with a big bang and ending with a big crunch. That will continue forever in the future?
You see I believe in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. I also believe everything listed from Genesis 2:4-4:26 happened in the light period of that day.
That is all the information we are given concerning the day the Lord God created the heaven and the earth.
Now there could be more information in Genesis as the words here were handed down for a few generations before it was written down. So it is very possible for some of the information to get mixed up. That doesn't mean it is not all there just that is is not in the proper place.
Science tells us this earth is only 4+ billion years old. If that is correct then Genesis 1:1 is probably not talking about this earth.
Anything that was on that earth bones and all would have disappeared in the big crunch if there was one.
I don't know if there has been a big crunch before or not.
But the Bible says this present universe and the present earth we live on will melt with fervent heat. I think that is what the big crunch implies.
II Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
The Bible also says there will be a new heaven and a new earth.
Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
(Note: this new earth don't have a sea just like the one in Genesis 1:1 didn't have one.)
Anything material that is on the earth today will not exist on the new earth.
Just as if there were giants in that land you will never find them.
Also if there was giants 5k years ago you may or may not find their bones.
That would depend on how they disposed of the dead wouldn't it?
As well as how many was in the tribe. The fewer in number the less chance of finding them.
It would also be determined by what was considered a giant at the time by those refering to giants. Not necessarly what you consider a giant.
I think the 1400 lb man I mentioned would be a giant no matter how tall he was as well as the 900+lb man that Oprah had extracted from his bedroom and had on her show.
When a body is cremated today the bones are ground up and there is very little trace of the body. If it is scattered you would be hard pressed to find any of it.
So the initial assumptions you start out with determines what you wind up with. If you change the initial assumptions everything changes.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Coyote, posted 01-07-2009 11:18 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Brian, posted 01-07-2009 4:42 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 221 by Coyote, posted 01-07-2009 6:57 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 220 of 352 (493250)
01-07-2009 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by ICANT
01-07-2009 4:33 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Yet you are adamant that it only goes back a few thousand years.
The mention of some giants only goes back a few thousand years. Giants are mentioned in Numbers, a post Exodus book, and the giants in Genesis 6 can be dated by Bible chronology to be only c. 4400 years ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by ICANT, posted 01-07-2009 4:33 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 221 of 352 (493261)
01-07-2009 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by ICANT
01-07-2009 4:33 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
I was referring to missing.
I understand we have a lot of early human fragments that scientist are using to help explain the evolutionary history of man.
But do we have anything more than fragments?
Sure. Intact skeletons are found all the time. I have excavated several hundred spanning some thousands of years.
I am talking about these purported "giants" not something back in evolutionary history. That places it within written/remembered history, say some 5-6 thousand years.
You don't believe the Bible.
Yet you are adamant that it only goes back a few thousand years.
Why is that?
Because I am told constantly on various websites that there is nothing older than about 6-10 thousand years. I have been called, variously, an atheist, an evo-cultist, a nazi, a communist and worse for accepting the evidence for evolution and an old earth. (Oh, I missed evo-nazi.)
Science tells us this earth is only 4+ billion years old. If that is correct then Genesis 1:1 is probably not talking about this earth.
Anything that was on that earth bones and all would have disappeared in the big crunch if there was one.
Certainly we don't find bones from billions of years ago. Why would suppose these "giants" were around then? What is the evidence?
Also if there was giants 5k years ago you may or may not find their bones.
That would depend on how they disposed of the dead wouldn't it?
As well as how many was in the tribe. The fewer in number the less chance of finding them.
Certainly these are all factors.
I think the 1400 lb man I mentioned would be a giant no matter how tall he was as well as the 900+lb man that Oprah had extracted from his bedroom and had on her show.
The excess weight would not make the bones gigantic. It would contribute to enlarged muscle attachments and possibly some deformation in places, but it would have little effect on the size of the bones.
When a body is cremated today the bones are ground up and there is very little trace of the body. If it is scattered you would be hard pressed to find any of it.
Cremations from the distant past certainly are harder to deal with than skeletons, but they did not traditionally grind the bones (that we know of).
But to return to the original point: if you are going to posit "giants" wouldn't it be better to come up with some evidence to support their existence than to make up excuses for why no traces of them can be found?
So the initial assumptions you start out with determines what you wind up with. If you change the initial assumptions everything changes.
Data is data. Interpretations of that data may vary, but initial assumptions don't change the data. Bones is bones, and we don't have any giant bones of which I have ever seen or heard. Other that the Bible, do you have any confirming evidence?

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by ICANT, posted 01-07-2009 4:33 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 222 of 352 (493297)
01-08-2009 6:33 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by Huntard
01-06-2009 4:37 PM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
what were neanderthals?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Huntard, posted 01-06-2009 4:37 PM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Granny Magda, posted 01-08-2009 11:25 AM Peg has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 223 of 352 (493361)
01-08-2009 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by Peg
01-08-2009 6:33 AM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
Hi Peg,
quote:
what were neanderthals?
About 5'5".
Wiki writes:
Neanderthal males stood about 165-168 cm tall (about 5'5") and were heavily built with robust bone structure. They were much stronger, having particularly strong arms and hands. Females stood about 152-156 cm tall (about 5'1").
This may seem like a minor mistake and indeed it is, but it is indicative of the main problem with your approach to knowledge.
You are (in my opinion) reaching for whatever explanation best fits with your preconceptions. If it sounds like it gels with the Bible, you go for it. This is a terrible way to find the truth.
You need to approach the world with an open mind. You also need to check whether the facts fit your theory, something you plainly did not bother to do before posting that question. Looking something up on Wikipedia or Google is about as shallow as research can get, but you didn't even do that. You just saw a convenient-sounding idea and ran with it.
I'm sorry to preach at you like this, but if this is how you approach knowledge, you are going to get things wrong time and again. I lose count of the number of times I've saved myself some embarrassment by looking things up before I posted them (and finding out that I was quite wrong).
It is not enough that an idea explains the facts you want it to explain; it must explain all the relevant facts. That means doing your research, even if it is only a quick check on Wikipedia.
Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by Peg, posted 01-08-2009 6:33 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by Peg, posted 01-09-2009 3:51 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 224 of 352 (493486)
01-09-2009 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by Granny Magda
01-08-2009 11:25 AM


Re: Tall individuals is one thing...
granny magda writes:
It is not enough that an idea explains the facts you want it to explain; it must explain all the relevant facts. That means doing your research, even if it is only a quick check on Wikipedia.
i wasnt trying to explain anything
i was asking a question... it was not a rhetorical question btw.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Granny Magda, posted 01-08-2009 11:25 AM Granny Magda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by AdminNosy, posted 01-09-2009 9:32 AM Peg has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 225 of 352 (493527)
01-09-2009 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 224 by Peg
01-09-2009 3:51 AM


Topic
i wasnt trying to explain anything
i was asking a question... it was not a rhetorical question btw.
So you didn't think Neanderthals were giants? In other words you were totally off topic?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Peg, posted 01-09-2009 3:51 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Peg, posted 01-09-2009 8:29 PM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024