Current Events > Ancient Giants

(+) Yeah! (+)

im talking 7ft or taller.

not gonna lie, im starting to think they did.
---

Never heard of this one before.
---

yeah just look at Fred Savage
---

in a way. they had those austrolipitichus things running around. they looked like bigfoots.

@ssj3vegeta2
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Never heard of this one before.

so the theory goes giants (possibly earlier humans, or something else)
once lived in various parts of the worlds.

when magellan travelled to South America, he claimed that he say giants in the very south.
from wikipedia:

First mention of these people came from the voyage of Ferdinand Magellan and his crew, who claimed to have seen them while exploring the coastline of South America en route to their circumnavigation of the world in the 1520s. Antonio Pigafetta, one of the expedition's few survivors and the chronicler of Magellan's expedition, wrote in his account about their encounter with natives twice a normal person's height:

"One day we suddenly saw a naked man of giant stature on the shore of the port, dancing, singing, and throwing dust on his head. The captain-general [i.e., Magellan] sent one of our men to the giant so that he might perform the same actions as a sign of peace. Having done that, the man led the giant to an islet where the captain-general was waiting. When the giant was in the captain-general's and our presence he marveled greatly, and made signs with one finger raised upward, believing that we had come from the sky. He was so tall that we reached only to his waist, and he was well proportioned..."

Pigafetta also recorded that Magellan had bestowed on these people the name "Patagão" (i.e. "Patagon", or Patagoni in Pigafetta's Italian plural), but he did not further elaborate on his reasons for doing so.[1]

apparently some weird skeletons have been found, as well in parts of the US (Virginia, Arkansas, etc)

the theory also connects to Bible stuff (if you go that way).
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4-AVow9WBc
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdcCiZAlIrI



Dat video convinced me dere were tbh
---

I mean, there's people over 7ft tall now. There's not stretch of anything to think that people aren't randomly born taller than that. Never mind tons of recorded evidence.
---

CreekCo posted...

I mean, there's people over 7ft tall now. There's not stretch of anything to think that people aren't randomly born taller than that. Never mind tons of recorded evidence.

perhaps. but isnt it also true that many humans are now taller than they used to be?
for example Spaniards in 1500s were shorter than today. I would bet with certain nutrition and dna changes that happened in many places.
---

Yes.
---

ssj3vegeta2 posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdcCiZAlIrI



Dat video convinced me dere were tbh

And again, contrary to the common excuse, those aren't no damn baby girafafafeses, neither is it an artistic style done for effect.
---

FlashOfLight posted...

ssj3vegeta2 posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdcCiZAlIrI



Dat video convinced me dere were tbh

And again, contrary to the common excuse, those aren't no damn baby girafafafeses, neither is it an artistic style done for effect.

Can you prove that?
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Can you prove that?

There's not much to go on except for the available wall paintings, and one of the original researchers who defended the idea with the other wall paintings, did also include the blocks that the pyramids are supposed to depict, being carried by them without the use of the instruments expected to be needed for such a thing.

So here is a snapshot of that -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/whR4egenEEA/hqdefault.jpg

Here is another picture from that same author, with the text he used, notice that they can't be children, since they're drawn as adults, and under the excuse that this was either a space issue for the painting or somehow to diminish the status of servants by picturing them smaller in size, is just fanciful avoidance of the obvious explanation -

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/cf/61/a8/cf61a8fa15ff5399d98a76744e5fa4cc.jpg
---

Ok, and the Bible talks about that immediate area being full of tall and gigantic people.

Deuteronomy 2:10-11 & 19-21

The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims.

And when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, distress them not, nor meddle with them: for I will not give thee of the land of the children of Ammon any possession; because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession.

(That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims;

A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; but the LORD destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead:

Now modern giants, as they are called, who tend to suffer from gigantism due to their pituitary gland or acromegaly, tend to be very fragile and weak. The famous Robert Wadlow was a fragile man who didn't have much strength overall despite his size, but these other giants were proportional in their size, and they had equal strength and proportionately distributed throughout their members. They were strong and able, not fragile and with restricted movement as we see today.
---

Zikten posted...

in a way. they had those austrolipitichus things running around. they looked like bigfoots.

You mean gigantopithecus. Austrolipithichus rather smallish ancestor to the homo genus.

Anyways, naw, don't believe in them

also some ancient paintings do depict giants and strange nonhumanoid figures.
---

Some people really have a taboo with there being giant people. I don't get what the big deal is.

The same people prefer aliens to exist.

SMH
---

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.
---

MaverickXeo posted...

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.

horses for one

rodu_jr posted...

MaverickXeo posted...

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.

horses for one

I thought those 'smaller' horses were only one 'breed' of horses that died out and not the entire evolution of them?
---

MaverickXeo posted...

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.

Our ancestors were normal sized, so if there were giant humans they would have come from something small and went back to that small size.
---

weapon_d00d816 posted...

MaverickXeo posted...

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.

Our ancestors were normal sized, so if there were giant humans they would have come from something small and went back to that small size.

There were various 'strands' of sapiens alive; some were even co-existing. Perhaps we have not discovered one yet?
---

Of course, the Bible records several different accounts of giants in the old testament.
---

Shaq is a modern example of a proportional giant, although he's not 10-15 feet tall.
---

MaverickXeo posted...

weapon_d00d816 posted...

MaverickXeo posted...

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.

Our ancestors were normal sized, so if there were giant humans they would have come from something small and went back to that small size.

There were various 'strands' of sapiens alive; some were even co-existing. Perhaps we have not discovered one yet?

if I recall Neanderthal were "bigger and larger brain/skull". dont remember anything on height.
Many people outside Africa have some Neanderthal ancestry.
There were also the Denisovans in Asia.
---

weapon_d00d816 posted...

Shaq is a modern example of a proportional giant, although he's not 10-15 feet tall.

He's a strong one, yeah.
---

I keep reading the topic title as Andre Giants.
---

---

You can hardly make out Shaq's tattoos, what's the point of getting them if they don't even stand out? :/
---

---

No. We have fossils of humanoid species that existed hundreds of thousands of years ago, yet not a single 'giant' bone?

TheSexMachine posted...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AigJgUGCbFk/VEvdBSYnLjI/AAAAAAABDzc/IsDbpBnHt3s/s1600/rock.jpg

Rock is a manlet, confirmed.

Here's another related picture to go along with that one -

http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/ftpuploads/bloguploads/shaq-celebs-therock.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/12/73/77/1273776164bb52a7aef4f2ea0e9b9488.jpg

I still tell the story of how when I went to the NYC wax museum, they had a figure of the Rock there and I'm 6 foot and he looked small to me, so I thought at the time that the ones who made it just either botched it up or that they failed to accurately portray him, but it turns out that, yeah, he's not that tall.
---

The Rock is 6'5
---

---

That Chinese dude looks like he's really tired of people taking comparison photos.
---

Nukleen posted...

The Rock is 6'5

Yeah, that's what I thought too, but he can't be, because supposedly Charles Barkley is 6'6, and the NBA is really good at accurately keeping their stats, so going back to the picture again, the disparity between Barkley and the Rock is much more than just one inch in difference if the Rock were actually 6'5.

I just hate how the WWE does that, haha it's like you have to subtract 2 inches from any given height they give.
---

weapon_d00d816 posted...

That Chinese dude looks like he's really tired of people taking comparison photos.

Mmm, I don't know, he doesn't look too happy, but it may be because he's in some kind of pain.
---

Read up the square cube law

Giants get weaker as their height increases. That's why Robert Wadlow was so weak as someone mentioned. There is no way calcium bones could support the weight of the rest of the body. So unless the giants had bones made of titanium or carbon fibre or something, they just couldn't exist feasibly

Giants due to pituitary disorders are unique cases age even they don't reach 10 feet
---

weren't people shorter back then?

so a 7 footer would look like a monster

Here are some more pictures for consideration -

http://media.thehoopdoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/shaqtall.jpg

http://straightfromthea.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Shaquille-Oneal-Hoopz2.jpg

http://nlc.p3k.hu/data/cikk/17/168160/1.jpg

http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/ftpuploads/bloguploads/shaq-celebs-christinaaguilera.jpg

https://cdn-s3.si.com/s3fs-public/images/2013-Yao-Ming-Muggsy-Bogues.jpg
---

FlashOfLight posted...

http://media.thehoopdoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/shaqtall.jpg

I wonder if there is a visible bulge when they do it?
---

Why'd you have so many pictures of Shaq, Flash? :3
---

Nukleen posted...

Why'd you have so many pictures of Shaq, Flash? :3

Haha I don't I just got them for the thread's sake.

TheSexMachine posted...

I wonder if there is a visible bulge when they do it?

It's possible.
---

MaverickXeo posted...

rodu_jr posted...

MaverickXeo posted...

Id say there is a possibility, given that most 'primitive' animals started out pretty large. As time goes on, creatures become more efficient; and more efficient typically means smaller. I really cant think of many animals that, throughout their history, have been known to get larger over time.

horses for one

I thought those 'smaller' horses were only one 'breed' of horses that died out and not the entire evolution of them?

http://chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/horseevolution.htm

Borgnar posted...

weren't people shorter back then?

so a 7 footer would look like a monster

hell, 6'2 would've been a giant

You know how dere was an era where a lot of animals were huge




What if the humans were affected as well
---

rodu_jr posted...

You mean gigantopithecus. Austrolipithichus rather smallish ancestor to the homo genus.

oh right. sorry

bump
---

It's something idiot turds believe because somehow it makes sense with the Bible.