Talk:Giant (mythology)/Archive 1
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
|Archive 1||Archive 2|
In the "examples of giants" section, have added "(some of)" to the Titan reference. If you follow the Titan (mythology) link to the Wiki page it specifically mentions that large things have been erroneously named as Titanic, when the name doesn't in itself imply that. The original Titans were huge (though not as large as the Gigantes) but there's no indication that their children (e.g. Prometheus) were overly large. --MJW 184.108.40.206 14:08, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The reality of Giants
The real core issue I want to explain is that Giants [in the sense of large mammals and reptiles] did infact exist in the past-- and this should be no surprise. Prehistoric animals of colossal size; Mammoth, Bison, Camel, Bear, vulcher, and even beaver, of very large proportions have co-existed with our ancient ancestors in the dawn of pre-history between 2 million and 5,000 years ago in America and the entire globe. Examples of these giants would be: Teratornis-meriamii or Teratornis Woodburnensis, a giant vulture whose wingspan spread between 12 and 20 feet wide. Or how about the Columbian, or Imperial mammoth who stood 12-16 feet at the shoulder, Giant short faced bears 10- 12 feet tall, Beavers 6 to 8 feet long, Bison 9 feet tall at the shoulder, and camels 12 to 18 feet high. Not to mention giant lizards and reptillians whose ancient bones were excavated by native peoples--and legends likely sprang from such early fossil discoveries, combined with actual live encounters between pleistocene animals and man.
To view the skeletons of such ancient giants, you need only visit a local museum of natural history.
Giant humans: When looking at how tall humans can conceivably grow under the most optimal conditions, it is certainly doubtful that men a legitimate 12 or 15 feet tall have ever existed in the earth's past. However, tribal ethnic variations of humans averaging between 6 and 7 feet tall have existed in many ancient civilizations. (ex: Adena royal class). Infact one only needs to look at current living populations to see the reality of this:
The Dinka tribe of Sudan, men. Avg 6'5 c. 1990 (Guinness Book) Kranhacacore Indians of Mato grosso, Brazil men avg. 6'6 c. 1956 (Guinness Book)
Thus, in such a tall average population you will likely have an occasional giant, or person of much greater size or strength than the norm.
Based on current height statistics: http://www.halls.md/chart/men-height-w.htm , atleast 1 in any 100 men are likely to be 6" taller, or 6" shorter than the average 50th percentile.
This means, that in a theoretical population whose avg stature was 7 feet, 1 in 100 men will be 7 feet 6. Using the same proportion we could further calculate that 1 in 10,000 such men could grow to 8 feet tall. The odds then jump to 1 in 1 million who could grow 8 feet 6 ins. And then using these same numbers, 1 in 100 million might grow 9 feet.
Thus as you can see, even in a population averaging 7 feet, based on current height statistics, it would be impossible for someone to reach 10 or 12 feet, unless the population numbered in the billions.
The tallest living man verified by science was 9 feet tall, Robert Wadlow c. 1940. Had he lived even 5 years more, he may have maxed out at close to 3 meters (10 ft) tall.
Therefore, I believe you could safely say that giant humans do have a limit in stature, at about 9 to 10 feet-- and these are the individuals ( regardless of pituiary or genetics) who may have inspired the myths such as Goliath, Hercules, and Paul Bunyon.
It is absurd for this to be a separate article. Clearly, giants exist. Why are they shunted into mythology just as they are exceptional? --Daniel C. Boyer 17:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
--220.127.116.11 09:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC) Yes, but there is a difference between mythological 15 meter giants, and genuine 2 to 2,7 meter people.
The mythological giants of lore do indeed deserve a seperate article. Whereas those real "giants" who have gigantism and geneticly tall stature deserve their own article aswell.
- It probably is a good idea to distinguish between people in the public mainstream world who have pituitary disorders or other forms of 'gigantism', and the ancient giants who ranged to over 36 feet in height at the greatest. This article also probably allows more freedom from the prying/attacking eyes of the highly dogmatic and inevitable 'mainstream crusaders'. Yes, real giants, like the enormous giants of mythology, certainly did exist. There does not seem to be any logical reason to disbelieve in such things when they are recorded in bones and in the history of every known civilisation, either orally or in writing. Mainstream academics are often very cloistered, however, and do not care to believe in anything that they don't see around campus, it seems. When the ancient Greeks refer to their heroes as two to three times as tall as an average man and describe physical acts by them which would be impossible otherwise, the natural reaction is to assume that the ancients were making it up or exagerrating for effect. It seems to me that ancient peoples spent much more time outside than modern academics, and as a result probably saw quite a lot more giants. ;) It is clear to anyone who really reads ancient texts and really studies history that these beings existed, but for many 'official' scholars their mind has been set up to filter out everything outside of their education. I suppose that in the future when the Billy Meier contacts are acknowledged as reality, these non-critical 'skeptics' will be tearing their hair out of their scalps at the statements by the Plejaren that human species range from 40cm to 11 metres in height, and that giants such as the cyclopes and gigantes were actual historical entities. Matthew A.J.י.B. 18:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
- I suppose I should comment, however, that the Creationist/Christian interpretation of giants being the descendents of angels (non-physical beings) that somehow mated with physical humans, or anything along those lines, is utter non-sense. They use the fact of giants as an excuse to bolster their religion. And furthermore, I must in this sense give some slack to the closed-minded academics who deny the existence of giants as they existed, since in typical human folly they are merely making the illogical association that because Creationists/Christian fanatics promote the idea of giants being historically real, therefore, all people who believe in the reality of giants are Creationists/Christian fanatics. This is just the classic converse error, essentially. The real story of giants, as will be accepted in the mainstream sometime this century, is that they were either genetic deformities resulting from mutations or incorrect couplings of human parents, or they were descendents of gigantic humans from other star systems who simply possessed enormous stature naturally. Also, some of the giant creatures were genetically engineered by ancient humans (~11,000-33,000 years ago). Indeed, as bizarre as it seems, some human giants were the size of the giant sloth or larger, and of course possessed a different-looking frame and stronger/thicker bones than smaller humans. Matthew A.J.י.B. 18:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I believe that alleged giant human skeleton discoveries should be investigated but with caution. It is true that the Smithsonian in the latter 1880's-1890's in their annual reports of burial mound excavations had indeed measured a number of skeletons at heights approaching and exceeding seven-feet.
However, reported human skeletons 12, 15, or 36 ft were most likely based on poorly identified prehistoric animal bones, or extreme exaggerations and hoaxes.
Cite error: There are
<ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). == Possible explination ==
It is is possible that the alleged 12 and 15 ft cases were skeletons of neanderthals with gigantism, however neanderthal remains are very rare, and a discovery of one with gigantism would certainly be well documented. The 36 foot skeleton sounds absurd, even an elephant with gigantism would not, well like said before, the referenced sites are questionable at best.
--If modern humans can't grow 12 or 15ft, then obviously a Neanderthal with gigantism couldn't have either. The largest prehistoric ape known to have existed was Gigantopithecus, probably a quadroped, but estimated to have stood 9-10ft tall when standing, and weighing half a ton or more.
There is some speculation that Homo Erectus "Meganthropus" may have been quite large, but this has not been proven.--18.104.22.168 20:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Not entirely true, Neanderthals were signifagntly larger than Sapiens, if a homo Sapien with gigantism can grow to be near 9 feet, a neanderthal with gigantism could come close to 12, of course this is again highly unlikely. However a Gigantopithecus is possible, though again unlikely. While the Meganthorpus' esixtence is questionable, it is not impossible. After all scientists were and still are puzzled by the Homo floresiensis, so a giant like relative could exist.
--Neanderthals were larger, but not taller. Same height, much more bulk.
They were shorter than modern men, but significantly heavier set.
i delete something
Djinn is not a giant. By the arabs, it is considered as a spirit, frequently depicted incredibly strong and cunning, but not a giant. so i delete it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC).
Stephen A. Kaatman?
A Flordia resident, Stephen A. Kaatman, was brutally attacked and fatally wounded by a giant in Tampa, Florida on April 20, 2007. Witnesses described the scene as "the most disturbing and disgusting act of violence ever done to a human being." Authorities could not contain the giant, as he was so enraged he broke free of his handcuffs, "twisting the metal like it was taffy," as described by an officer who was on the scene. Kaatman suffered a very large skull fracture, as giants tend to smash downwards on their victims, crushing all bones in their path. The victim also had two broken femurs, a shattered ribcage, seven broken fingers, and a lacerated tounge.
while this is an amazing story can anyone find any more info on this?
Eisnein 05:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
--Wow, are you sure this wasn't a giant neanderthal that has somehow survived to modern day, or possibly a descendant of a gigantic human from another star system as that imbecile above postulated!?
AnimalMother 05:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
While we all like to believe in the existence of true giants, I find some of these claims sketchy. I strongly question the validity of this 36 foot human skeleton. And the referenced sites are rather dodgy.
- I agree with this completely. I made several adjustments to the language in the Remains section and marked several of the references as needing verification. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
The Anthropologist Georges Vacher de Lapouge, Dr. Paul Louis André Kiener, Professor of Pathological Anatomy at Montpellier school of Medicine, Mr. Delage, Professor of Paleontology at the University of Montpellier, M. Sabatier, Professor of Zoology at the University of Montpellier, and the additional anatomists who examined the large bones of Castelnau-le-Lez and unanimously agreed that they were human, all of these gentlemen's expertise must be discounted because... they're all dead. And that's how science works. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)