# If/since giants existed very recently, why does the Bible speak of giants like they were a far off thing?



## Gold (Feb 2, 2021)

Could they be talking about colussi, and considered them different?
I've heard whacky things like, "the God of the old Testament, wanted the Cannanites destroyed because they were a mixed bastardized race of giants having mixed with lesser hominids, and not the intended creation that Ea, had intended to be his creation i.e. cro-magnon" 
If giants were a normal thing until recently why do some texts speak of them like they weren't?


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 2, 2021)

Maybe what we consider a giant (let's say 2,50 meters - 8,2 feet) was a regular guy in those times. They considered a giant someone even taller


----------



## freygeist (Feb 2, 2021)

It is most likely, that there are different types of giants, possibly Titans, (_Die __*Titanen*__ sind in der griechischen Mythologie Riesen in Menschengestalt und ein mächtiges Göttergeschlecht, das in der legendären Goldenen Ära herrschte. _The Titans are, according to greek mythology, giants shaped as men and a powerful Pantheon, which reigned in the legendary Golden Age _)_  who got smaller over times after the Exodus, and then maybe another type of giants, like described in the norse mythology: The most common were the frost giants, that lived in Jotunheim, the land of the giants. These giants and their world embodied chaos, contrasting with the order offered by Asgard and the Aesir gods. This made them the enemies of the Aesir gods, but not evil per se.


----------



## Worsaae (Feb 2, 2021)

Romans used to call the Cimbri from Jutland in Scandinavia giants. Interestingly, the word for giant in danish "Kæmpe" is directly rooted from the word for cimbri "Kimbre". The swedish word for giant is jätte, I don't know if it is related to jut-land, where the Cimbris are from. 
From this source Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/eutaz - Wiktionary it does seem like Jutland, Jätte and Giant is connected.


----------



## Corsair (Feb 3, 2021)

Worsaae said:


> Romans used to call the Cimbri from Jutland in Scandinavia giants. Interestingly, the word for giant in danish "Kæmpe" is directly rooted from the word for cimbri "Kimbre". The swedish word for giant is jätte, I don't know if it is related to jut-land, where the Cimbris are from.
> From this source Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/eutaz - Wiktionary it does seem like Jutland, Jätte and Giant is connected.



I'd guess all of the J-names are derived from the archaic Norse jötunn or jötnar, which is generally translated as "giant", though "troll" is sometimes applicable as well. They've got an origin close to that of the Olympian gods of Greece, born asexually from the body of the primordial _Ymir_, whose body is later used to build the world (not sure if that's all the realms of Yggdrasil or any specific one). 

In any case, the jötnar are not always of enormous size and range from beautiful to hideous, and several gods of the Norse pantheon are jötnar or descendants of them. Occasionally they're neutral or can be persuaded to assist the gods (Æsir and Vanir), but more often than not they're unpleasant characters, and Thor spends a good bit of time smiting them.


----------



## Akanah (Feb 3, 2021)

I believe the most famous giant or titan in mythology like Ymir/Zeus was the plasmaphenomenon of the Squatter-Men, a old form of our Sun.
I have the Idea Religions and Mytholgies told the story of creation of our Sun. The Sun we do see in nowadays looks in ancient times different because she was more subtle.


----------



## Broken Agate (Mar 9, 2021)

The Bible has been redacted so many times, by so many different people, that there's is no way of knowing what it originally said about giants.  Given how we are lied to about everything else, there's no reason to think that the Bible is the one exception. Those stories could have been written in such a way as to make readers believe it all happened a very long time ago, when it could have happened only in the last few hundred years. Perhaps that explains why so many artists depicted Bible characters in European garb, surrounded by Old World/Tartarian architecture; that's when it all took place, so that's how they drew it. And that means that giants really were part of the recent past.


----------



## veeall (Mar 10, 2021)

I deleted my post, except just this: 4 Ezra (Apocrypha), chapter 5:54
*Consider thou therefore also, how that ye are less of stature than those that were before you.
And so are they that come after you less than ye...*

Strange, isn't it.


----------



## Gold (Mar 21, 2021)

veeall said:


> I deleted my post, except just this: 4 Ezra (Apocrypha), chapter 5:54
> *Consider thou therefore also, how that ye are less of stature than those that were before you.
> And so are they that come after you less than ye...*
> 
> Strange, isn't it.


Very strange. There seems to be a common link between highness of being, whether you consider that righteousness or being in line with nature or whatever, and large stature, and the opposite with a smaller one. Reminds me of how each Yuga cycle is shorter than the previous until it resets to greatness again. But what could the link between stature and sin implied here be other than the wickedness of civilization and the poisons that come with it as we accelerate downward as we have been?


----------



## Knowncitizen (Mar 22, 2021)

Newspaper page with some interesting timelines for giants.


----------



## Forrest (Mar 22, 2021)

There are physical and biological limits to the sizes of giants. In today's one-gravity field, 2.72 meter (9 feet) tall is about as tall as a humanoid can stand, just barely. These too-tall people usually have debilitating physical problems.




​In this list, most of the ANCIENT. are probably either exaggerated or complete fantasies, with John Middleton being the closest to credible. If Earth's gravity had been lower, by at least 30% in the 14th C., De Vallemont could have been 17 feet tall- and so could every one else. If there can be a single mighty giant of yore, then there can be many.


----------



## Gold (Mar 22, 2021)

Forrest said:


> There are physical and biological limits to the sizes of giants. In today's one-gravity field, 2.72 meter (9 feet) tall is about as tall as a humanoid can stand, just barely. These too-tall people usually have debilitating physical problems.
> 
> View attachment 7715​In this list, most of the ANCIENT. are probably either exaggerated or complete fantasies, with John Middleton being the closest to credible. If Earth's gravity had been lower, by at least 30% in the 14th C., De Vallemont could have been 17 feet tall- and so could every one else. If there can be a single mighty giant of yore, then there can be many.


Considering some of the skeletons found in caves and photographed 200 years ago that get into the 15 foot range and as far as caves beyond that (and titan sized creatures if you believe in mudfossils), I think sometime before the 1500s or so when winter first started showing up in art you probably had people in this 15+ foot range. Then, after a series of deluges from then into the 1800s, surviving structures seem to be retrofitted and resized for people at a maximum of 10~ feet give or take. You can find people of this height in art from the 1700s, there's a thread here somewhere that I contributed to about giants in art, as far as I know it's only the 18th century where they're depicted so regularly, because they're painted alongside people our size. 
I do 100% believe that something probably tied to the destruction of our atmosphere led to harsher gravity thus a reduction in height and a reduction in the aetheric activity that saw stuff like lightning rod fashion becoming seemingly necessary to survive since people were getting smitten out of existence regularly according to writings of the era. Funnily enough that was all in the 1700s too, then around 1812 and beyond there's really only 9 foot tall giants in photos and this is when you see all the abandoned cities with dirt streets, and in the case of the Winter Palace if I remember correctly, an 18th century drawing shows a whole courtyard and staircase that is now covered by pavement. Seems like another atmopsheric event happened around this time that wiped out the majority of the 9-12~ foot tall giants and left only stragglers, who were burdened with illness from the increased gravity as time went on into the 1900s where they're mostly dead now. Whatever happened buried a bunch of shit and saw the cessation of whatever electrical storms were so common just shortly before, too. 
And during this time, we see windows made into doors but with the same level of quality (seemingly) as the people before, look at fancy buildings in places like New York. Basement windows, windows under the sidewalk, huge windows, and on the same building a staircase leads up to the first floor, the door proportioned exactly as the windows mirroring it on either side but with an elegant, beautiful stone door frame. There are survivors with each destruction in an age and it seems like the 8-9~ foot tall stragglers of the 1800s are responsible for those renovations and the 9-12 footers who were seemingly the average, common sized person in the 1700s were wiped out.


----------



## Forrest (Mar 22, 2021)

Gold said:


> Forrest said:
> 
> 
> > There are physical and biological limits to the sizes of giants. In today's one-gravity field, 2.72 meter (9 feet) tall is about as tall as a humanoid can stand, just barely. These too-tall people usually have debilitating physical problems.
> ...



All of the stories of history are faked on a routine and continuing basis, starting with the evening news. Photos have been faked since photos existed. The photos of giant humans, in particular, appear to be paste ups.



> I think sometime before the 1500s or so when winter first started showing up in art you probably had people in this 15+ foot range.



What you think and what is real are entirely different subjects.



> Then, after a series of deluges from then into the 1800s, surviving structures seem to be retrofitted and resized for people at a maximum of 10~ feet give or take. You can find people of this height in art from the 1700s, there's a thread here somewhere that I contributed to about giants in art, as far as I know it's only the 18th century where they're depicted so regularly, because they're painted alongside people our size.



Artistic license.



> I do 100% believe that



Irrelevant and devoid of useful information. If a thing is not physically possible, then it cannot exist.


----------



## veeall (Mar 23, 2021)

Forrest said:


> Irrelevant and devoid of useful information. If a thing is not physically possible, then it cannot exist.


Keep in mind, that the notion of what's 'physically possible' is only a limited intellectual construct implanted into our minds by our worldview narrative.

'Gravity' is just a tag-name for something we experience, accompanied with an explanation, which is just a story. I believe 100% there are variables that could globally change the 'physical' reality with the span of a century. Maybe this already happened putting an end to giant-ism.

Discrepancies between ancient accounts and the reality how we experience it, is all attributed to primitive mindsets of ancient people. It seems logical, if believing in an evolutionary progression of man from primitive to more intricate one, as implied by 'the Evolution' story. As well as the physical progressions from worse to the better - that's us , from minuscule lifespans to loooong healthy lives.

It is interesting to find an old text implying the ancient life expectancy comparable to, or longer than ours (as in Bible, or Nurenberg Chronicle); or, with strange perception of dynamics of physical development among the generations (the quote from 4 Ezra).

We wouldn't even argue about them if there be no accounts with conflicting narratives still existing, thus an 'explanations' have to be contrived, for example - 'Hierarchical perspective' - important people depicted larger - that's how Egyptian depictions of people of different sizes were explained away. A mannerism which probably existed alongside or derived from the existence of giant people or hybrid humanoids, who often, in effect, became leaders.

For my region there's the story about how a culture existed who only could thought of decorating their vessels by poking their fingers on clay, while it took ages or another culture to arise or migrate who figured out to decorate their vessels with lines drawn on soft clay with a comb - the evolution of an IDEA!

Emphatically, anybody could understand that it takes a special breed of idiots to not to be able to variate their decorative styles during their lifetimes.


----------



## Forrest (Mar 23, 2021)

veeall said:


> Forrest said:
> 
> 
> > Irrelevant and devoid of useful information. If a thing is not physically possible, then it cannot exist.
> ...



What proof do you offer that your mind exists, and furthermore is a vessel capable of holding an intellectual construct implanted by an "our worldview narrative" something?

There is a beginning point to any inquiry, called objective reality among other names. It has nothing to do with anyone's perception of it, contrary to the erroneous claims, the grift, of relativity and quantum mechanics. The worlds exists with or without us in it.

For giant humanoids to exist, there would have to be an environment for them to exist in, which does not obtain at present. If it were possible, then we would see them in the here and now, walking among us as physically-superior beings. Instead, we see the opposite, to a point. A 6'-5" man is not to be trifled with; a 7' tall man might give you pause; but an 8' or 9' tall man is someone to pity. He is too slow and too weak to be much of a problem for anyone other than himself.

There are 'sweet spots', physical bounds and limits, for any animal or structure, outside of which that object becomes untenable. A pyramid or a mountain can only rise so high before its weight crushes it at the base. It can only be so short before it becomes a hill or a lawn ornament.

_There are limits to how big an animal can be__, whether predator or prey. The most famous of these is the square-cube law, a static relation which limits the size of an animal in a gravitational field, for one important example. But there are dynamic limits as well. The bigger the animal, the more food it needs every day. The more food it needs, the further it has to travel from one food source to the next. The Blue Whale might be the epitome of this process; it has to sweep up huge volumes of water to filter out the krill. But it has an advantage over land animals- at low speeds it can move through the water very efficiently, almost without friction.

An herbivore has to walk across rough terrain from one plant to the next, which costs it energy for every step. It usually has to eat a bit from many different plants, and to be so kind as to leave enough so the plant can grow back. The distance it has to travel depends on the size of the plant it is eating, the amount of vegetation in its area. The size the plant can grow to depends on how fast it can grow between feedings. This adds up to a general rule: for a given rate of plant growth, the bigger the animal gets, the farther it has to walk for food. 

A reduction in plant growth rates, for whatever reason, will affect the bigger animal much sooner because it can’t walk too far for its food. With all else equal in a simplified example, if a 100 kg herbivore needs to move 10 km per day to get from one plant to the next, then a 1000 kg herbivore would need to move ten times as far, or 100 km per day. It also has to transport ten times as much mass over the extra distance, which takes ten times as much force. With energy as force times distance, the bigger animal would need 100 times as much food-energy to do that, not just ten times as much. Just from this simple physics, the bigger animal has to eat more of the vegetation in a given area. It will exceed the carrying capacity of the land sooner than the smaller animal will. This is another reason we know that the giant dinosaurs lived in a more abundant world._

The same reasoning applies to the imagined races of giants- they would need giant farms with giant farm implements, and would have to walk that land over much greater distances in order to plant and bring in a harvest than us little people have to.


----------

