Giants appear in the folklore of many different cultures across the world.
Abrahamic, Janinism, Hindu, Native American, Greek, Roman, Norse, Balt, Bulgarian, Basque and many other European mythologies.
A lot of the stories tie in with the Inner Earth theory and the Ancient Astronaut theory.
Some interesting vids to start:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GTCLe1DBZY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlhDo6Z49L8
The history of Britain is very interesting if you go back far enough.
The oldest accounts all state that it was an island of Giants.
The last of which were said to be driven out by Brutus and other Romans.
The very last was said to be thrown off a cliff during a wrestling match with Corineus and the cliff still bares the name Gogmagogs leap.
There also is a statue in The Guild Hall in London, before he was killed he was held captive as a guard.
In fact countless places in Britain are named after Giants and the landscape leaves possible indicators for some kind of factual basis.
There are giant figures carved into many hillsides, The Giants Causeway, Fingols Table, Stonehenge, Spinsters Rock and many more.
Another interesting place is Malta, said to be the last stronghold of the European Giants.
Maltese folklore describes giants as having built the many temples on the island, which led to the name Ġgantija, meaning 'Giants’ tower'
Like in Britain, many of the sites have incredibly large stones.
A lot of the islands folklore suggests that some of the temples are connected to deep underground tunnels, which is where the Giants eventually fled to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1fOBdcmiU
Some evidence of Giants in India.
![Arnold_Schwarzenegger_Legs_x3[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/z0I44ey.jpg "Arnold_Schwarzenegger_Legs_x3[1].jpg")
>>17866376
>>17866369
>>17866360
>>17866348
If you want to become a giant, you must train like a giant, you must eat like a giant, you must think like a giant
>>17866392
What do giants think of?
>>17866397
>such giant
>what do i want to do?
>nothing right now (aloof)
>let me chase some cattle (exercise/play)
>oh no im hungry actually
>time to kill (exercise/hunting/work)
>eat (eat)
>let me chill in the wild (lazy)
>fucking Barbaros was looking extra giant the other day, better workout (exercise)
>where the human women at?! (sex)
>>17866348
That image was intended to represent an Ogre not a Nephilim. Its depicting a scene from Raging Roland.
>>17866348
Homo capensis.
What did Steven Spielberg mean by this?
You're not going to imply that having a giantess fetish means I'm also sexually attracted to, or have been visited by gods, too, are you ?
>>17866348
They are big people. /thread
>>17866348
http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/nephilim-giants.html
http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/the-book-of-enoch.html
http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/nephilim.html
maybe this will help
>>17866348
NOPE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square-cube_law
>>17866348
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GTCLe1DBZY
This was most likely an optical illusion.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlhDo6Z49L8
There are liturgical accounts of other hominid quasispecies. Paleontological evidence is the important part.
>>17866360
>>17866369
I am interested to see your sources about the accounts you mentioned.
>>17866376
Bhima's Stove could be a natural formation due to superstorms.
>>17868945
Dating that footprint is not so simple.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square-cube_law
It is an epistemological fallacy to cite allometry so as to discredit paleontology, the math was invented for the opposite purpose.
If you cannot debunk something by asking good questions, then you are a cynic instead of a skeptic.
>>17870286
Do you have any good reasons why the square-cube-law doesnt apply to something what totally is supposed to be something like an upscaled human? Do you have a working hypothesis on the anatomy of giants?
Also what paleontology? All I see is yt videos and folklore
Call me a cynic all you want. I raised a valid point
There is that theory that settlers in North America found giant bones all the time. They would send them in to the Smithsonian at which point they would they would never be seen again.
http://helenastales.weebly.com/blogue/the-ancient-race-of-white-giants-described-by-american-indians
>>17866392
THIS!!!
>>17870320
>Do you have any good reasons why the square-cube-law doesnt apply to something what totally is supposed to be something like an upscaled human?
For one thing, the square-cube law is only a heuristic because it merely describes the range of an exponent. That is vapid hand-waving in the field of mathematical statistics.
For another thing, the heuristic is invalid for shrimp and jellyfish.
It is your own crass ignorance to request a groundbreaking hypothesis on 4chan, in spite of cynicism.
If you do not think that digging up fossilized skeletons is paleontology, then you should learn which discipline includes archaeology and anthropology as sub-fields.
Do not lower yourself to rhetorical surrender when someone tells you how to make a valid point. Please try to be kind, and have fun with an open mind.
>>17866360
>The very last was said to be thrown off a cliff during a wrestling match with Corineus
Can't have been much of a giant then...
>>17870826
>That is vapid hand-waving in the field of mathematical statistics
No no no. It seems to me, like you dont know why the square-cube-law is an important issue here. You cant hand wave away basic mathematical principles like that. I can go into detail if you wish, but basically from the c.s.l. follows, that you cant just have a giant human.
>It is your own crass ignorance to request a groundbreaking hypothesis on 4chan
It doesnt have to be groundbreaking. But since you imply that the s.c.l. is no issue, I figure I am missing something here. Like maybe they have a special bone structure or completely different proportions or something.
>If you do not think that digging up fossilized skeletons is paleontology
Strawman. I am absolutely aware what paleontology is, dont worry. My point was, I dont think we ever dug up bones of humanoid giants. I made this pretty clear actually.
>Please try to be kind, and have fun with an open mind.
Well sorry if I come across like a giant dick, but I was just sharing my (admittedly) sceptic view on this.
I am open minded, so please share some papers about the fossilized humanoid giant bones I am obviously not aware of. Or anything else really. Just because I dont think they are real doesnt mean I dont enjoy the folklore and the illustrations
By giants we are speaking what 9-10 ft?
>>17866392
Also, steroids.
>>17870994
>No no no. It seems to me, like you dont know why the square-cube-law is an important issue here. You cant hand wave away basic mathematical principles like that. I can go into detail if you wish, but basically from the c.s.l. follows, that you cant just have a giant human.
The CSL is a heuristic, not an integration technique.
The delta functional formula is only true for concave surfaces with closed topologies. It does not work when the shape has holes of a maximum size, put simply.
The square-cube heuristic is not mathematics, in general; it is pseudoscience. You can tell because they attribute the discovery to a Galileo, even though he did not specify the numbers.
Besides, I have given you a factual counterpoint in zoology; and explained why the anatomical argument is untrue with respect to the algebraic geometry of physiology- it ignores pores.
>It doesnt have to be groundbreaking.
It does, because of the subject matter.
>But since you imply that the s.c.l. is no issue, I figure I am missing something here.
While "mathematical principles" can be used for discovery, those heuristics are a crutch for people who do not know higher math. Therefore the only use is induction, not deduction. Only an ignorant cynic can reject observations without trying to explain the data in the same objective framework as acceptance.
>Like maybe they have a special bone structure
This is the kind of question you can ask that would have been a valid point, next time use a question mark when your sentence includes 'Like maybe' as an operative term.
>aware what paleontology is.
>>Also what paleontology?
If you had included a comma then your question would mean that which you claim.
>I dont think we ever dug up bones
Your argument is in physical biochemistry. Skeletons get stolen a lot.
>Well sorry if I come across like a giant dick
No, you sound like an irritated asshole.
>please share some papers
I am not obliged to do so; you used profanity first.
>>17870931
There are many accounts of normal men killing giants because they were special. i.e. David and Goliath
>>17871186
>The square-cube heuristic is not mathematics, in general; it is pseudoscience. You can tell because they attribute the discovery to a Galileo, even though he did not specify the numbers
It is a simple mathmatical principle. There is nothing pseudoscientific about and its discovery has nothing to do with its validity.
When an object grows in size, its volume increases faster than its area.
This is not debatable.
Since you failed to give a hypothesis on their anatomy, I have to go by the illustrations that universally depict them as overall bigger humans with the same proportions.
>are a crutch for people who do not know higher math
I know higher math. But the s.c.l. is a nice starting point for a general overview and you already fail to adress the implications that follow from it.
>next time use a question mark
Are you serious here? You dont like how I formulate my points? It wasnt supposed to be question. I was guessing what could be different in order to make giants work.
How is their anatomy different? They cant have everything in the same proportions, so what is different?
Your other points are about how there arent any paleontological findings
Also thanks for the insults and your nitpicking about my punctuation. I thought, I was quite polite for a 4chan post, but you dont seem to be interested in an actual discussion about the subject. too bad
Every thread.
Does anyone have a digital copy of this book?
>>17871186
>I am not obliged to share papers
>Skeletons get stolen a lot
so in other words: You cant provide any evidence that they ever found bones of giants. It is probably because you know that they never did.
What a surprise. Just lets talk about the mythos and stop taking it so serious.
>>17871364
looked it up on Amazon with the intention of buying it, but heck, it's 140 bucks!
it seems that it got no reprints.
would love to read it though.
>>17871156
Yeah everyone seems to forget about the steroid part haha
>>17871186
Holy crap dude. Stop babbling about his punctuation.
It only makes you look like a petty asshat. Stick to the arguments.
>I am not obliged to do so; you used profanity first.
You're not obliged to provide any evidence because he used a bad word?
Shit dude. If you're going to make excuses then at least use ones that don't make you seem like such a delicate flower.
Embarassing
>>17871268
that just makes it seem more like they're not actually giants
I figure that giants being so prevalent in mythology, religion, and folklore is because its the easiest thing to come up with.
>what if human
>but BIG
I think it'd be neat if there were actual giants, but we're limited to tall people and people with genetic disorders
>>17870286
Who invited fucking Spock to the party?
To all the people who say that the Smithsonian covers up the existence of giants:
Why would they have any interest in doing that when they're all fucking dead anyway? We know neanderthals existed. That's like saying the government doesn't want people to know neanderthals existed.
pro tip: theres zero evidence, it's not an epic coverup
>>17866348
They couldn't have existed. Their lungs would've been too big to inflate properly. They would've needed special breathing masks. If you took those off, they'd die.
I always considered the myths and legends about giants to just be based on particularely tall individuals, then enhanced by storytelling.
For instance near my house they dug up the tombs of a longobard man and wife and the man was apprroximatley 2,10m tall.
If you consider that the average height was around 1,50 for males at the time you can see why people though of giants, especially in even earlier times
>>17873516
>>17874479
You do know the atmosphere was thinner than it is today which was able to support a bigger body.
>>17874491
that is simply wrong.
in so many ways
>>17874491
>>17874498
he's partially right
oxygen level were higher in the past which is why we had extinct megafauna like ostriches that can eat a human
>>17874517
At least you are partially wrong. But no, what you described happend 400-300 million years ago and therefor had no effect on megafauna like the terrorbird (however it made huge insects possible).
For all intenses and purposes the earth atmosphere was the same in density and composition throughout human history.
A thinner atmosphere would also not benefit bigger bodies.
>>17866360
Never trust when Romans or Greeks call people giants, anon. The Hyperborean Giants in Greek mythology are speculated to be Germans, and even at some points in history, the Romans also called Germans giants. They were both historically smaller peoples, so anything over 6 foot was seen as massive to them.
>>17871012
at least 5'8
>>17874865
The Britons after the Romans left Britannia thought only giants would have been capable of building the temples and walls of stone that the Romans had left behind.
So yeah, Romans = Giants to an ignorant peasantfolk.
>>17870286
>Interested to see your sources
I can't really help with sources as such, I wouldn't know where to begin looking. But for anyone who lives in Britain and has an interest in history, it's pretty common knowledge.
The Romans left brilliant architecture behind and the pagans thought only giants would be capable of such things.
Peasant folk can't understand something so make up more powerful beings to explain it away. The oldest story every told, and it will always repeat itself.
>>17871186
And this guy, holy shit.
This post should go down in fame as "How to be a complete dick head".
Even if you have valid points, nobody is going to care if you come across like someone who deserves a good hiding.
>>17871428
You might want this one instead; it used Deloach's book and several others as sources.
https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Giants-Humanoids-Legend-Folklore/dp/1476663513
>>17866397
nigga nigga bix nood
>>17866397
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1ymcl1_daffy-duck-ep-75-beanstalk-bunny_fun
>>17866392
Arnold is one of thee shortest persons I have ever had the pleasure to meet. In movies the cameras are angled so he looks big but all he is, is a muscular short shit.
>>17866348
>In balt mythology
No they dont. Stop spreading lies. Be honesr with me, you know jack shit about balt mythology.
