|
Author
|
Topic: Giant People in the bible?
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
Message 266 of 352 (525574)
09-23-2009 8:16 PM
|
Reply to: Message 262 by terry107
09-23-2009 6:39 PM
|
|
Re: An Essay on Giants by Thomas Molyneux M.D.
Taken from the website you referenced.
quote:
We have a Biblical viewpoint on the world. Ooparts are evidence, we think, that the Flood actually happened. News items or magazine articles that report them may not have the same perspective that Christians do. When we read for instance, a scientific article that puzzles over our lack of genetic variability, we think of the Flood of Noah. We would include that article here, without editing, because we expect Christians to use their filters on such an article. That does not mean that we agree with the evolutionary timeframe given in said article.
I have gone over this website before and it all is bunk. I know of no out of place artifact that has stood up to scrutiny. Also, you claim the writer of the essay was a skeptic. Does he say he was a a skeptic? You also must realize what was termed a skeptic in 1700 is a bit different than a skeptic today. Oh yeah it sure is amazing that those giant bones don't exist anymore doesn't it.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 262 by terry107, posted 09-23-2009 6:39 PM | | terry107 has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Re: An Essay on Giants by Thomas Molyneux M.D.
Where are the bones? Why can't anyone produce them to have them tested by modern means?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 300 of 352 (532930)
10-27-2009 10:29 AM
|
Reply to: Message 297 by Calypsis4
10-27-2009 12:08 AM
|
|
Reality bites, don't it
But those photographs of John Aason (9'2), Petrussen (8'8), and Robert Wadlow (8'11) were no lie. quote:
In June 2008 Dr. Kerby Oberg of Loma Linda University confirmed that the 2.19 m (7 foot 2.4 inch) skeleton they had in their collection, was Johan Aasen. This together with Dr. H. Gray's published "The Minneapolis Giant" from May 1937 where Johan is measured at 7 feet, brings Johan to a height between 7 feet and 7 feet 2 inches.
Source Oh and about Johann Petursson
quote:
His height was 2.205 m. (7 ft 2 in), his weight was 135 kg (298 lbs).
quote:
While exhibiting himself with the Ringling stand in Sarasota, Florida he often claimed to have stood 8 ft 8 inches tall. He wore US shoe (42 cm).
Source Oh by the way he was not known as the "Russian giant". He was "The Viking Giant". Your sources really suck. You did get Robert Wadlow correct but that is about all you got correct. You also might want to visit this site. Pulsa303 : Situs Judi Slot Online Deposit Pulsa 10rb Tanpa Potongan 2022 Lots of pictures you can copy and post. Looks like they use real evidence too.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 297 by Calypsis4, posted 10-27-2009 12:08 AM | | Calypsis4 has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 302 of 352 (532938)
10-27-2009 11:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 301 by Calypsis4
10-27-2009 11:02 AM
|
|
Evidence please, evidence
First of all Steve Quayle is a nutball and he provides no real evidence for his assertions. Second of all I do not see on his site where he asserts the measurements you do. Also, his sources are more than suspect.
Mt. Blanco Fossil Museumquote:
MT. BLANCO FOSSIL MUSEUM
The Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum is a scientific and educational institution dedicated to a correct interpretation of Earth history and fossil remains. We believe that the fossil record speaks of catastrophic events happening several thousand years ago rather than slow processes taking place over millions or billions of years as is held by the popular establishment.
Gee no one at the museum has any scientific training. Whudda thunk. You really have no concept of perspective do you. How do you know the two men standing next to Shaq and John Aasen are both 6 feet tall. Do you have any evidence? It has always been typical to stand tall men next to shorter people to make the height seem even higher. You may have provided documentation but you have not provided any proof.
Shaq then you are either (1) blind or (2) deliberately lying. I think that latter. Whats up with the accusations of lying? Who the hell are you to start accusing me of lying? I provide evidence you provide nothing and then accuse me of lying. Grow up. Either debate like an adult or don't bother.
Not only so but he was measured many times for his height. 8'9 3/4 at age 18. www.stevequayle.com The records of the Mendocino State Hospital state that he was 9'2 at the time of his death. Where is this evidence? I find no reference on the site your presented. Now about Stadnick and Vin Myllyrinne. First of all they were not part of your original post, so how do you feel you can use them to back up your original post. You are resorting to doing what you always do. Just throw a bunch of shit at the wall and see what sticks. You seem to be wrong about Stadnyk.
quote:
On August 8, 2007, Guinness book's spokeswoman Amarilis Espinoza stated that in the 2008 edition of the record book, Mr Stadnyk appeared to be taller than Bao Xishun, a native of Inner Mongolia in China who stands 2.36 m (7.7 ft). Although he held the title for a few months, Stadnyk refused to be measured and was consequently denied the GWR recognition. Others have questioned the legitimacy of his record, noting that Stadnyk has never been officially measured by Guinness World Records, only by the "Ukrainian Book of Records" that says that he measures 2.54 m (8 ft 4.0 in), and that the doctor originally credited by Guinness with confirming Stadnyk's height has denied ever measuring him.[3]
This site says nothing about Petersson and Aason so how can you make such a claim. Do you even know what your arguments are? I am not denying there have been extremely tall men. I am just pointing out that you are not being factual in your assertions. Also, you may have notice that all of these extremely tall men had diseases or accidents that caused their unnatural growth spurts and that their bodies could not support their huge size. To think a human being could survive in a pre-mechanized world at heights greater than 9' is ludicrous. Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 301 by Calypsis4, posted 10-27-2009 11:02 AM | | Calypsis4 has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 306 of 352 (532976)
10-27-2009 6:34 PM
|
Reply to: Message 303 by Calypsis4
10-27-2009 12:08 PM
|
|
Re: Evidence please, evidence
Because the height of the the two men standing next to the big men was known by the researchers who did the investigation, that's why.
Please, please just a scrap of evidence. Why should we take your word for it when you won't even provide us with the source? Who were the researchers? How did they determine the height of the men? Do they know the name of the man standing next to the 'giant'.
That's because you didn't LOOK close enough. You don't wish to find the truth to begin with.
Well I looked at almost every page on the site you referenced and did not see any info about his height being measured or Mendocino State Hospitasl. Are you sure it was on the site you referenced? If so could you please provide a link to the exact page. If not could you provide a link to the correct reference.
Well, goodness, even if I told you would you grasp it. It doesn't take an intellectual 'giant' to figure it out. Where does that leave you?
I would appreciate a response to what a post not just lame attacks. So far you have given no one anything to 'grasp'.
You are the 'nut ball'. Even after being proven wrong you still maintain the lie.
Is all you can do is insult? Show me how I am lying. Do you actually know what a lie is. I am posting evidence and showing where the source of that evidence comes from. How am I lying? Is everyone that disagrees with you or shows you where you are wrong a liar in your eyes? What a sad, pathetic world you must live in. I welcome when people can show me that I am wrong. It allows me to reexamine what I think I know. Knowledge is a never ending journey, you should try getting on the path.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 303 by Calypsis4, posted 10-27-2009 12:08 PM | | Calypsis4 has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 307 by NosyNed, posted 10-27-2009 9:09 PM | | Theodoric has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 311 of 352 (533029)
10-28-2009 9:36 AM
|
Reply to: Message 307 by NosyNed
10-27-2009 9:09 PM
|
|
Re: Why does it matter?
Why do you care if there is a 2" discrepancy? What is the real point? Robert Wadlow - WikipediaThis gives the tallest human "ever" at just under 9 feet. Does it matter if there was a 9' 2" human? There have been measured very tall men. No one disputes that, right? Why do you care if there is a 2" discrepancy? What is the real point?
I don't care about that. What I care about is Ca;ypsis presenting fiction as fact. He was correct on Wadlow, he was not correct on the other people. I am also trying to figure out how he thinks bringing in other extremely tall men helps his position at all. I guess actually I am trying to figure out what his position actually is. Is his argument that since there have been men in the 8' range in recorded history, this is some how evidence for even earlier men in prehistoric or "biblical " times. I am not sure if this is his argument or if he just likes splashing pictures up. He is trying to use photographs of a tall guy standing next to a not tall guy and wants to use that as evidence for the guys actual height. This is ludicrous without any backing documentation. Please reread my posts to him and you should see what the point of my posts are about.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 307 by NosyNed, posted 10-27-2009 9:09 PM | | NosyNed has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
7 to 9 feet tall is not the issue
Since there are occasional people 7 to 9 feet tall nowadays, I don't think it's outlandish to suggest their having existed in "Biblical times" also. Neither do and neither would I think anyone else. The issue is claims of taller and much taller. I think we can safely see in the modern age that 9 ft tall is just not very sustainable for a human being. Looking at the evidence of the issues modern "giants" have, I think we can surmise that bronze age men would have huge problems. The human body just cannot sustain that size. Any stories of 12'+ would have to be just that. Stories
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Re: 7 to 9 feet tall is not the issue
Contrary to what Theodoric said there are scores of historical accounts of people who were 8 to 25 ft. tall. But those were before photographs could be made of them. But since photographs of giant people doesn't suffice the skeptics like Theodoric then why would we expect drawings of such things to convince them Do you even read what people post? Do you even attempt to refute what people say? Have I yet denied there were people up to 9 ft tall? I have pointed out that your sources exaggerated on some of their claims. I am still waiting for evidence you claimed earlier about Mr. Aason. Ok show me evidence for people over 9 ft tall. Not anecdote, not stories, but evidence. How about a bone or two of these 25 foot giants. Also, please explain how the human body could sustain such bulk. These people you keep mentioning that were under 9' tall do nothing to support your argument or disprove mine.
I found another picture of one Ella Ewing of Missouri who was also 8'4 but for some reason the picture would not process. You can find her picture here:
How come the website of the 30 tallest people ever doesn't mention her? Maybe because the other website you reference gives 2 heights. 8'4" and 7'6". But again this does absolutely nothing for your argument. Where are the 10 footers, the 15 footers and yes where are the 25 footers?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 314 by Calypsis4, posted 10-29-2009 1:36 PM | | Calypsis4 has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Re: 7 to 9 feet tall is not the issue
And just a few weeks ago, 8'11 was 'ludicrous'.
Who claimed 8'11' was ludicrous? Please provide the justification for this comment. Or are you "lying"?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 321 by Calypsis4, posted 10-29-2009 2:33 PM | | Calypsis4 has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Evidence please
I will add my voice to the choir. Provide evidence for you claim of people that lived that were 25' tall. You don't have any do you. You made the claim, now back it up. Or retract it. "the bible says" is not evidence.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 328 by Calypsis4, posted 10-29-2009 3:14 PM | | Calypsis4 has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Re: Physical limits of human stature
I have already mentioned my case concerning the find at Castelnau-Le-Lez, of human bones of twice the volume and length of normal man (5 1/2 foot man) suggesting an individual approx. eleven feet stature. And if this approximation is correct, I don't think we can rule out 10 to 12 feet as a possibility for the human species. As has been shown repeatedly on this thread, there is no evidence to back up this claim. No bones just the writings of one person. Not evidence in the least. Conjecture and anecdote, nothing more.
It should be noted, that the physicians who had known Wallow all his life had predicted that he would surpass 9 feet at age 22. He was 22.4 when he died and 8 feet 11.1 inches. Surprisingly, he was still growing at a rate of 2-3 inches per year and his bones had not fused. So Wadlow's case still leaves open the question... How much taller could he have grown? No one doubts he was still growing. Damage to the pituitary gland tends to have this effect. But this reinforces the argument that 10-12' tall in ancient times is just not feasible. Look at all of the health issues suffered by people over 8' in the last 2 centuries. How were they going to be able to function in the bronze age?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
™ Version 4.2