Giants of the Bible

2010, Religion  -   133 Comments
Storyline

In this multi-part series, the biblical claim that giant human beings once lived among us will be examined.

The archaeological "evidence," the scientific "evidence," and the claims of certain apologists will be highlighted.

The series concludes with a discussion of physics and how it relates to the verifiability (or not) for the existence of human giants.

The Bible describes many individuals as giants, and it also mentions several giant people groups. Interpreters have speculated about the size of these people with guesses ranging anywhere from 6 feet to more than 30 feet in height.

Also, a great deal of misinformation about biblical giants has been proliferated on the Internet along with some fake pictures of supposed giants. So did these giants really exist? - Tim Chaffey

187
5.10
12345678910
Ratings: 5.10/10from 61 users.

More great documentaries

133 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Skepticism and atheism as well have become their own religions with their own tenants disguised as truth. Both mix well with the evolutionary religion of many scientists. The existence of giants does present a problem for them that has to be answered or their religion fails. He has merely rebutted his own misunderstanding in accordance of his "faith" and some of some honestly mistaken theories from Christians of the Bible and giants. When the truth is found it will be done by persons honest enough to interpret the evidence without bias. Trying to disprove scripture is a bias.

  2. I had to stop watching this halfway through. I hate any kind of documentary or lecture given from someone claiming to be a "skeptic" because 9 times out of 10 they are complete @-holes. This guy certainly fits the bill true to form. He starts off trying to sound all scientific and open minded but he can't hold it together very long and soon starts presenting opinion as fact and making fun of the opinions and he's spotlighting.
    There are points where he shows the other side of the argument to certain claims (which is good) and a lot of it debunks some "fringe" creationist claims.
    Then he starts just pointing to the opinions of scientists as fact that debunks the creationists alternative claims. What the hell? No one needs your documentary for that!. The creationists were well aware of the generally accepted theories before as were the rest of us. That's why they call the creationists theories "ALTERNATIVE"!
    Anyway, then this nimrod just starts mocking people openly. At one point he seems to be using the fact that one creationist has a different theory about how giants originated then another as some sort of proof debunking the first theory in itself.
    It would have been nice if this person just stuck to splicing clips of other people together instead of trying to be the star himself.

    Skepticism has become a religion and most people are simple full of crap when they claim to be "debunking" things. They act like the other side wasn't aware of conventional wisdom and now that they've stated it in their film the problem is solved. Theory "Debunked!"!

    This video is total cr*p so don't waste your time.

  3. Many ancient texts speak of giants. The Iliad, for example.

    And archaeologists have found "giants," or at least very tall people compared even to modern people, such as the Mummies of Urumchi, Celtic people found deep in central Asia, many standing 6'6" or taller, even the women.

  4. The written traditions started at the time Israel came out of Egyptian slavery. They were persecuted as a race and treated like livestock by their rulers. Under this condition, superstitions and false ideas filled the minds of the ordinary Israelite. Fact is only Moses was raised a nobility who got training and formal education. The rest of the Israelites know their roots from oral traditions, most likely from folk lore or recreating stories in a sensational, exaggerated and less sober style.

    Moses too had an issue. In fact God rejected Moses for his inability to show the Almighty to the Israelites. This happened when Moses failed to acknowledge the power of God before Israel by giving thanks after God granted the wish of the community to give them water.

    Moses wanted to save his work and effort for posterity, leading to the written account of his misadventure. Yet the nation of Israel - conditioned as slaves - regarded Moses as the great prophet, not understanding that Moses failed to lead them to God too - proof of which is written as the reason why Moses had to die in the desert as punishment or sign that he failed in this mission..

    Perhaps the primitive language or crude literary form and expression of lore by Israel got to share blame for the exaggerations and confusions that Scriptures contain. Realize that in those days, folk lore or story telling was the media mode of public communication and entertainment. This style is comparable to ancient or classic compilations prior to publishing and the science procedure such as Arabian Nights or Aesop's Fables

    For this reason, Jesus had to come down from heaven to show men the Way to God. His advise was to let the Holy Spirit guide you to the knowledge or Truth of the Scriptures. People may never realize the issues or what really happened unless it is the Holy Spirit explaining it.

    Indeed God is the author of history since men may try or attempt to create history yet God always has the final say. God's Word is absolute so that Scriptures would prove that the disobedience of Israel never prospered.

  5. I haven't watched the doc yet, nor have I read all the comments, so I don't know if this has been mentioned.

    Since humans have been getting taller through time it would stand to reason they were much smaller in biblical times. There is a medical condition called acromegaly. People with this condition can grow to be as tall as 8ft! They not only grow to enormous heights, but their hands, feet, and features are also very large. Think how someone with this condition 7-8 ft tall would look to the average person of say 5ft? They would have most certainly looked like giants!

    1. Actually, humans have grown smaller and smaller over the centuries, reversing the trend only in the last 200 years or so, with better over all nutrition. Go to any castle in Germany and look at suits of armor, worn by the noble warriors, and you will see what I mean -- most young teenagers today couldn't fit into them.

      Geneticists have shown that human brain size has shrunken every where at least 10% and over 25% in some places, such as between pre-agriculture and post-agriculture European women.

      Something truly terrible happened to humanity and to the rest of the planet some not so many thousands of years ago, leading to the instantaneous extinction of the mammoths and possibly the instantaneous extinction of large mammals in North America. Across the globe human myths talk of a near complete destruction of humanity.

      The few who survived, starved and had to eat whatever they could find, including grasses, which eventually became our "staple" foods of wheat, rice, and corn, "foods" with almost no nutrition and on which people cannot thrive and grow large.

  6. Not worth the time.

  7. Reply to: Robertallen1

    Anyone can write a book--and I understand you have another volume on breast cancer. What are your qualifications, especially in biology and medicine? Furthermore, it's obvious that you have posted here merely to promote your book and I'm certain that the moderators will deal with this appropriately.

    P.S. In light of a six-day creation, a talking snake, the resurrection, the differing accounts in the synoptic gospels, anyone who claims the bible is reliable is immediately suspect and certainly not entitled to any respect.

    Since when does research require qualifications? Many of the most important discoveries were made by people not involved in a "recognised profession". However, to answer you question regarding my

    1.Another volume on breast cancer. What are your qualifications, especially in biology and medicine?

    For the book(s) I worked with three professors at the University of Washington and a pharmaceutical company "Artemisia BioMedical, Inc as well being involved with Breast Cancer Fund and COSHH, so although personally I am not medically qualified as such, those people are. In fact in the coming book the MD of Artemisia Biomedical will be writing a foreword for the book.

    As an example of my research capabilities, I am not a minerologist but my book on North Molton Gold is described by the owner of the land Peter Stucley, the youngest son of Sir Hugh Stucly and the Great grandson of George Wentworth Warwick Bampfylde, 4th Baron Poltimore (1882-1965).

    Upon first reading my book he wrote and said, "You have done a really marvellous job! It was a fascinating read. Over the last 30 years or so I have gleaned various snippets of information from the family archives, but this is the first time (that I am aware of) where somebody has pulled everything together in such a detailed and concise manner. It is a mineralogical thriller!"

    A major mining concern has read my book and found what it contained worthy enough to carry out some expensive sampling of the mine with a view to commence mining operations after 150 years.

    As for my book I mentioned and the topic here, the Bible does not say there were giants only Nephilim. An entire chapter is devoted to demonstrating this fact. I am more than willing to add this chapter as a post if I am permitted to do so. Oh and by the way, I do not believe in six days of creation and as for miracles, a visitor from the past would believe that being able to speak to someone at the other end of the world, machines carrying hundreds of passengers in the air - miracles. Just because we are not told the technology behind the Biblical miracles does not mean that they did not happen.

    As for respect, this I am not seeking. I am merely pointing out that just because someone believes in something religiously (evolution) , does not mean that it is right and if that person is not prepared to look beyond their belief system then they are not worthy of respect.

    1. In short, you have no qualifications. In short, your book appears only in Kindle form which means you published it yourself. In short, you posted merely to get suckers to buy your book. In short, your plug was deleted and rightly so. In short, you're a fraud. .

    2. I guess the professors in Washington are frauds, the pharmaceutical company I mentioned is a fraud and the doctors whom I am working with are regarding the breast cancer book are too. I guess that the major mining company found my North Molton Gold book so bad that they decided to spend thousands to check it out. Perhaps everyone who has anything to say that you disagree with are frauds My goodness! You have such a huge chip on your shoulder I see no point in debating anything with you so I won't waste my time. Why is it that "casting pearls to swine" comes to mind? Have a nice day.....

    3. Which professors at University of Washington? Which doctors at the pharmaceutical company? Just which major mining concern is this? As a matter of fact, where is the peer review for any of your works? No, you're a fraud plain and simple trying to sucker people into buying your junk. Well, it didn't work.

    4. I guess one needs a degree in Physics to know that if one drops an object that it will fall to the ground - unless you are in space of course.

      Anyway as you have asked not that it will make any difference to your attitude, the professors at UV are Dr Henry Lai, Narendra P. Singh and Tomikazu Sasaki. I won't do the work for you so if you are interested do a Google search on them and read their peer reviewed papers.

      As for the pharmaceutical company I sent you the link so take a look yourself and see what they are doing. Take a look at the pipleline as they go through the long process of FDA regulations for new drugs. They have reached the point of human trials. But according to you they must be frauds and wasting their time.

      As for the major mining company, I have signed a non-disclosure agreement, so I am afraid I am not permitted to disclose who they are. But if all goes well I shall be able to make known the commencement of mining operations sometime later in the year and will have exclusivity to be the first to publish the story in the press.

      As far as peer reviews for my works, I used over 380 peer reviewed references in my Nephilim book but I suppose that does not count. I guess if I add 2 + 2 and make 4, the calculated total must be wrong because unless I can point to a professor of mathematics who can confirm that the result is correct then you are not prepared to accept the result.

      And as for the book containing junk I guess me quoting numerous professors in their field of anthropology is of no value because they are talking junk. Perhaps since most of them quoted are evolutionists you could be right.

      As for trying to sucker people, they have the option to read three chapters of the book on Amazon, (read inside facility) or read the description before purchasing.

      As for publishing on the Kindle I guess you have no idea about publishing otherwise you would not have made the silly remarks that you have. With 70% royalties who is not going to publish for the Kindle. Most if not all leading authors do...

  8. @over_the_edge
    Received your e-mail on problems with discus. Tried to respond to it directly, but it has been deleted. Thank you for researching this.

  9. Oxymoron story could not see it in its entirety YAWN

  10. Silly movie, This is the 21st century for gawds sake! Wishful thinking for small people to look to the heavens to a BIG guy who will listen to our prayers and make the sun shine on our parade day.
    I'll make it real simple for all you religious folks out there in never neverland.
    Isn't it strange to you, that no matter where you were born. God ordained YOUR religion to be the true one? IF you were born in India, more than likely you'd be a Hindu or a Moslem!
    Lucky us in the USA, we were "given" this land by a Xian god named Yeshua , who happens to be a Jew!. And folks this is the TRUE (tm) religion for most of us, Patriotic Americans.
    Sorry Jews, you had your chance! But God did "give" you guys Israel and made you "The Chosen Ones". Impressive!
    Religions Suck! NOTHING divides man more than religious beliefs, we are all brother animals.

  11. I don't think that it's worth my time to watch this documentary, but I'm interested in knowing which bible passages refer to giants. Many ancient mythologies refer to giants - could these tales have been passed down orally through generations since the time of the coexistence of homo sapiens and neanderthals? The passages themselves might reveal some clues to this, so if anyone watches this long enough to see which passages these are, I'd be grateful if you posted the passage titles or pasted the passages themselves as a reply to this comment.

    1. Genesis 6:4 - There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.

    2. Read different translations of the bible there are so many different interpritations of scripture' the bible is the most interesting history book!!! Jesus is the king of kings and the LORD of lords. Bless you!

    3. What do you mean? That it's a translation problem when the Bible talks about giants?

      The David and Goliath story wouldn't make the same sense then, now would it?

    4. Before you post further, I suggest that you read the comment policy against preaching. This site is not your personal pulpit. Any further instances will be reported to a moderator. Act accordingly.

    5. "sons of God came in unto...."

      Sons is plural. Hmmm, what's Jesus' brothers names?

    6. Actually James, known as "the Just," is mentioned in Galatians 1:1. There is a detailed Wikipedia article about him.

    7. James the just.

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just

    8. Got a good lol from that other link that you posted. High tech Lucifer, stole a crashed alien ship and their bodies. lol.

    9. Yeah, that link was so weird I decided to delete it, lol
      What is more weird is that 15,000,000 people believe it, funny religee's.

    10. From that wikipedia article;

      "Protestant groups claim the Matthew 1:25 statement that Joseph "knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son" to mean that Joseph and Mary did have normal marital relations after Jesus' birth, and that James, Joses, Jude, and Simon were the biological sons of Mary and Joseph; and, thus, Jesus' half-brothers."

      As neither Joseph or Mary are 'God', even though they may have been Jesus' half-brothers they don't qualify as 'sons of God' in that way.

    11. Now you know what it feels like to be a Christian apologist. Stick to the wallabees; you'll get better results.

    12. ??? How is pointing out something with their scripture make me know what it feels like to be a Christian apologist? It doesn't help them. I don't follow you.
      Unless you missed it in my last post, your answer doesn't fit as a 'son of God', but as a son of Mary and Joseph, a half-brother, missing the relevance of my question.
      In Gen 6:4, the meaning of 'sons of God' is different to 'daughters of men', and not only referring to sex/gender. Supposed giants apparently in this case.
      Jesus is supposed to be The Son of God, so who are these other 'sons of God'? I've not heard any Christian answer that one.

      Wallabies? Are you referring to the Aussie Rugby Union team, or trying to be sarcastic?

    13. The point is that Christian apologists try to explain away the unexplainable, the vague or the patently contradictory. You'd do better with the natural world.

    14. As I was asking a question about a contradiction in the Bible and not apologising for or explaining anything, I fail to see how that makes me know what Christian apologists feel like, as you asserted.

      In fact, in this case, you are more like the apologists then I, when you gave an answer that wasn't correct in the context of my post, thus missing or sidestepping the contradiction. Jesus' brothers, the other 'sons of God' as per Gen 6:4.

      I'm quite aware of what Christian apologists do, as you already know.

      I suggest you reserve your sarcasms for dumb religiee's, you'll get better results.

      Btw, it's wallabies, not wallabees.

    15. Please note that Achems_Razor also supplied you with James the Just and referred you to the same Wikipedia article. One way or the other, you'd be the last person anyone would accuse of being a Christian apologist.
      Btw it's religees, not religiee's.

    16. sons as used in this verse in Hebrew is Ben (Strong's Number: 01121), pronounced as bane which means sons (as characterisation, i.e. sons of injustice [for un- righteous men] or sons of God [for angels]. Thus, sons of God refers to the angels of God or God's messengers. The ones that came in unto the daughters of men are referred to as the fallen angels. When Jesus is called the Son of God, the scriptures use a capital letter for Son which means coming from or part of. The angels were created just as we were and are not part of God as Jesus is.

    17. Thank you for your literary explanation, that makes sense.

      As for your last sentence...
      The angels (what angels exactly?) were created by our parents having sex? That's how we were created.
      I know most of the Trinity story.. but here's a couple questions you might know what the 'official' answers are; what part of God was Jesus then, before he took on his human form and name, "Jesus" ? And the Holy Spirit, assuming the Trinity has always been in place, why isn't It mentioned in the Bible until after Jesus had arrived?

      Why is the 'God' of the NT so different, not only in nature and actions, but in actual 'physical make-up', to the 'God' of the OT? Why wasn't it the Holy Spirit that gave Moses the commandments?

    18. You misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying that both angels and humans were created by God. In other words the point I was trying to make is that neither angels nor humans were in human terms conceived by God.

      Jesus is the Word as John explains in
      John 1:1-3
      [In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.]

      Trinity is a concept created by man to define an Infinite Being such as God. The Hebrew word used for God is Elohim and is a much better explanation of God. To call God Elohim, addresses God in his plurality and singularity. In other words there is only one God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who came in the flesh as Jesus.

      Genesis 1:2 [ And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.]
      Psalm 51:11 [Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy Holy Spirit from me.]
      Isaiah 63:10 [But they rebelled , and vexed his Holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy , and he fought against them.]
      Three different books in the old testament that refer to the Holy Spirit.

      The Israelites were suppose to have gotten the Holy Spirit, but because they worshiped God through the golden calf the sinned against God and could not receive the Holy Spirit and become priests of God. Only the tribe of Levi did not worship God through the golden calf and became priests of God and they still are today. Pentecost was the time that the Holy Spirit was sent down to enter all the men and women that accepted Jesus as their Messiah.

      Jesus and God the Father are the same now and always. As stated previously.

      With regards to the physical difference. God had to come in the flesh to qualify as a sacrifice for our sins. If you read Leviticus you will understand how the sacrificial system works and what qualifies as an acceptable sacrifice. One is a lamb without blemish and Jesus is referred to as to Lamb of God. If God did not atone for our sins in the flesh we would all have still been under the punishment of death and would have faced eternal damnation.

      Referring back to what I stated above, the commandments were given to Moses by the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, since they are all One (Echad - Hebrew for One).

  12. Ohhh!! ''Giants of the bible''...time to educate my self! Yippee!!!

  13. So they are using the
    King James Bible to support their argument.
    Try looking into the original
    languages of scripture with a Hebrew
    Or Geek dictionary to
    get to the original meaning of a word and
    how it has been
    translated.

    1. use a interleaner bible

  14. people still think the bible is fact?WOW

  15. Hardly any use in disputing the Bible Skeptic since his stated agenda clearly colors his views. In almost everything he does, Bible Skeptic sets up his straw men, knocks them down, and then thinks he has exposed the poor Christians for fools. For the sake of viewers, here are a few items to consider:
    1. While some "so called giants" are given actual height measurements, the defining characteristic of the nephilim were that they were "mighty men of renown" of which great height is not a requirement. It represents influence.
    2. The bible mentions the nephilim in a manner that suggests that who and what they were was common knowledge. Clearly, information has been lost regarding their origin and identity.
    3. Bible Skeptic spends most of his time addressing concepts of giants that are based in fairy tales or television programs of recent times while very little is known of the Nephilim.
    4. Several words have been incorrectly translated as "giant" meaning a gigantic human. For example, the word "rephaim" is not originally a word that means giants but refers to to dead ancestors.

    There are more, but I'll let the reader do their own research. However, it's pretty clear that bias plays an enormous role in how things are presented. The neo-athiest would claim that christians have a "god of the gaps" and
    that soon science will provide explanations that will dispel iron-age
    myths. And yet this hubris is based on such poor science. Here are a few well-known examples as food for thought:

    Reports of recent genetic testing indicates the possibility of Neanderthal DNA in the human genome of people of European decent was accepted as gospel (sorry) rather quickly. Isn't that rather close to what the bible was saying regarding a dilution of the human bloodline?

    All the so-called evidence for human evolution would still fit, with room to spare, inside a single coffin. The NY Times reported "That makes a rather poor sample from which to draw conclusions."

    Until fairly recently, it was accepted that evidence for a Israelite civilization was non existent. Now, because errors in the timeline have been exposed, a wealth of artifacts are being reexamined and reclassified as Israelite. Since the bible reports that the Nephilim were tracked down, destroyed and their cities burnt, how much evidence would you expect to find?

    Supposedly, the Argument from Design was defeated by the Multiverse theory (if there are an infinity of universes, then the odds of having a universe fine-tuned for life becomes inevitable) so the math demonstrates that a designer is not needed. But this idea falls under its own weight because it depends upon absolute infinities which do not exist outside in the real world. There is a difference between ideas popularized by best-selling authors (who sell books) and speakers, and peer-reviewed and supported scientific theory. Real mathematicians (information scientists) avoid talking about the multiverse the way that other scientists (who only use math) do.

    Pretty clear that bias continues to filter what documentaries get posted to TDF, as well.

    1. Well after that edit a reply is certainly due. If you would care to listen I will explain some things regarding the topic before I deal with your additive assertions. I was going to reply earlier and state that your skepticism seemed perfectly reasonable, before half a page of logical errors appeared beneath it.

      So, with gigantism you are indeed correct that it is a hormonal disorder, that being a prolonged or otherwise excessive production by the brain of hormones that determine overall growth. However, this is essentially a description of the consequence, not the cause.There are a least 2 distinct and separate causes I am aware of, one being cancer (a primary tumor located in the relevant part of the brain causing an exponential increase in the number of cells producing the growth hormones) another being genetic mutation causing non-cancerous gland cells to produce more hormone than they otherwise would. There may be many others.

      IF there is any truth behind the myth of David and Goliath for instance, it seems very likely that his large stature was a result of the first cause, cancer, because a worrying complication of this type of brain tumor is that a relatively light blow to the head can cause the tumor to rupture leading to hemorrhage and death almost instantaneously. Obviously I understand that a stone from a sling traveling well in excess of 100mph would impart a significant force to whatever it struck, certainly enough to kill a man if the blow was direct to the head and not glancing, but you have to admit it fits the condition like a glove - it is simple and plausible. To go further on this particular mystery, requires that simple plausibility be eliminated.

      Now the problems regarding gigantic size are not ones that inhibit the growth itself - as an increase in growth hormone will cause an increase in growth, clearly evidenced by people suffering gigantism. The problem is with the length of nerve cells, which can be about a foot long, which keeps the number of cells in line from any part of your body to your brain down to a small set number (which is essential for the rapidity of signal transfer). The number of these cells in line is not affected by growth hormones in any way, though the length of the cells themselves may be. Ultimately as the long nerve cells are lengthened their functionality is impaired to the point where many with gigantism start to lose feeling and/or motor control in their extremities where the impairment is stacked to its greatest. Many will end up in wheelchairs etc. This is why about 7 feet or just over is absolutely the tallest a human being can get and remain healthy. The archaeological record shows that as a species we have been gradually trending to get larger for several 10s of thousands of years - probably through a type of natural selection (bigger, stronger, more successful) only now we are about as big as we can be without serious structural modifications, which are not going to happen as a result of further selection for 'taller'.

      A mutation that caused the number of nerve cells in line to increase might enable a human organism to exceed this limit, but there are other considerations - a 9 foot man of normal weight would have roughly 50% more blood than a 6 foot man of normal weight. His heart would have to work roughly 50% harder against gravity, as well as pumping 50% more blood over a lifetime. His bones would need to be both stronger and lighter, and too much growth inside the womb endangers both mother and child etc.

      In short, a large number of coinciding mutations are required if we are to get much taller. As the vast majority of individual mutations are either apparently benign or detrimental, to have several that are beneficial to or coincide on the same overarching problem (size) is infinitesimally likely, rather like the answer from multiplying very small fractions together i.e. 1 to the power -10 cubed.

      I am not the best at articulating these things, but I hope that softens your skepticism somewhat. Now I am compelled to refute your logical errors and I will use quotes for clarity.

      The neo-athiest would claim that christians have a "god of the gaps" and that soon science will provide explanations that will dispel iron-age myths. And yet this hubris is based on such poor science. Here are a few well-known examples as food for thought:

      Straw man. That is what you want atheists to claim, not what they actually do, so you built a straw man in order to deride. Also I am intrigued if you would indulge me a reply on this, what exactly is the difference between an atheist like myself and a 'neo-atheist'? finally in terms of hubris, which is more indicative of hubris do you think between the theist believing that human beings are somehow special amongst all life forms and the atheist not sharing that? I look forward to your answer.

      Reports of recent genetic testing indicates the possibility of Neanderthal DNA in the human genome of people of European decent was accepted as gospel (sorry) rather quickly. Isn't that rather close to what the bible was saying regarding a dilution of the human bloodline?'

      So a story has a seeming similarity with recent events? How do you rule out coincidence? regardless I am not very well read in that matter but it seems as though you may have misinterpreted it somewhat, I will do some research and get back to you on that.

      All the so-called evidence for human evolution would still fit, with room to spare, inside a single coffin. The NY Times reported "That makes a rather poor sample from which to draw conclusions."

      You know, you could fit all the worlds written information in a black box no bigger than your thumb, so due to modern technology that analogy is very weak. Do you think the discovery and isolation of DNA followed by several decades of genetic research not to mention over 100 years of archaeology, fossil hunting and observation of living things is 'a rather poor sample from which to draw conclusions? I contend that this is the best sample that we have ever had. Care to promote a better one?

      Until fairly recently, it was accepted that evidence for a Israelite civilization was non existent. Now, because errors in the timeline have been exposed, a wealth of artifacts are being reexamined and reclassified as Israelite. Since the bible reports that the Nephilim were tracked down, destroyed and their cities burnt, how much evidence would you expect to find?

      Bones do not burn easily without modern technology. But I would expect to find as much evidence as if the story were untrue. At which point again to go further into that mystery, this simplest of possibilities must be negated, If we are to distinguish from it.

      Supposedly, the Argument from Design was defeated by the Multiverse theory (if there are an infinity of universes, then the odds of having a universe fine-tuned for life becomes inevitable) so the math demonstrates that a designer is not needed. But this idea falls under its own weight because it depends upon absolute infinities which do not exist outside in the real world. There is a difference between ideas popularized by best-selling authors (who sell books) and speakers, and peer-reviewed and supported scientific theory. Real mathematicians (information scientists) avoid talking about the multiverse the way that other scientists (who only use math) do.

      And to finish a rather obvious reversal of cause and effect. The universe is not 'fine tuned for life' - if you don't believe me, spend a day atop Mt. Everest, or at the bottom of the Marianna trench without oxygen, neither of which even involve leaving our own planet. Life adapts to its environment, which is never perfect, and will definitely change over time. Life clings on like a thin green scum on the surface of 1 planet in 1 star system amongst countless billions as far as we know. Physiological limits like those we are discussing prevent life from gaining a foothold anywhere other than this. Without the protection of the earths magnetic field, there are huge amounts of ionising radiation simply beaming throughout every part of space, particularly close to gigantic emitters like stars, and you think this place is fine tuned for life?

      Pretty clear that bias continues to filter what documentaries get posted to TDF, as well.

      The only bias showing is yours I'm afraid,

    2. Interesting rebuttal.

      I should probably let you know that I was a assistant professor of astronomy and mathematics, retired from a major US university. If you care to debate as to whether the universe is considered fine-tuned in favor of life, I should remind you that your take on the facts of of the apparent fine-tuning are not shared by the majority of the scientific community.

      It's not a matter of the possible ramifications of fine-tuning that establishes its credibility -- it's the data. The data is outrageous, almost unbelievable. The data sits the universe on a knife edge -- an impossible universe.

      While conclusions drawn from the ramifications of the data belong in philosophy class, the data itself could not be more clear in that the universe could not have evolved into its current state of and from natural undirected causes based upon the known laws of physics.

    3. Please inform us as to what data with sources, you are referring too.

    4. So, ipso facto, a god did it...obviously.

      ..major US university...coughOralRobertscough...

    5. "I should probably let you know that I was a assistant professor of astronomy and mathematics, retired from a major US university."

      Appeal to authority fallacy. Are we going to get through all the fallacies with you? Assertions stand or fall on their own merits, not your academic credentials.

      Also, life evolved, the universe didn't. The evolution of life was guided by natural selection working in tandem with various selection pressures. You are making an equivocation error, another logical fallacy.

    6. "But this idea falls under its own weight because it depends upon absolute infinities which do not exist outside in the real world." What does Cantor's absolute infinity have to do with the multiverse or is this merely an attempt at a snow job?

      "Real mathematicians (information scientists) avoid talking about the multiverse the way that other scientists (who only use math) do." Are you saying that information scientists are the only "real" mathematicians? If so, what about Andrew Wiles? Ken Ribet, John Coates and Barry Mazur? Now,just who are the "real" mathematicians and who are the "other scientists?" Or is this yet another try at a snow job.

      "Reports of recent genetic testing indicates the possibility of Neanderthal DNA in the human genome of people of European decent [sic] was accepted as gospel (sorry) rather quickly. Isn't that rather close to what the bible was saying regarding a dilution of the human bloodline?" Just what makes this a dilution? Have you studied any biology?
      You are merely trying to work backwards from the a priori assumption that the bible is true (hardly the tactic expected by a true assistant professor of mathematics and astronomy at a major university) which has made it easy for Samuel Morriseey to expose you for the cheap Christian apologist you are,

    7. In some other universe, there may be some strange form of life we wouldn't even recognize as such, with his brain in his derriere and a hole in his head, wondering the same things, who can say?
      No one, as of this moment.
      It seems the data you're referring to is based upon one throw of the dice.

    8. why does an astrologist think he has any authority to comment scientifically on evolution?
      And what does your background as a mathmatician have to do with any of this?

      Your argument from authority is invalid...if anything it actually hurts your position more than it helps it!

    9. After reviewing your replies, two things become clear:

      1. That all of your information comes from the research of others, most likely in the form of documentaries on TDF. There is not a Ph.D in the bunch. Knowing who Cantor was does not make you qualified to sharpen his pencils.

      2. The anonymous nature of the internet works in your favor.

      Good luck, children. Please go read some text books, stop drinking so much, and go get some sunshine.

    10. Oh gee! does that mean you are smarter than us?!.. PHD=piled higher and deeper!

      You ain't any more intelligent than the rest of us. Arrogant person. Only ad hominem remarks Eh? Typical of religee's!

      Where is your "data" with sources that I asked of you?

    11. He uses a tactic that many who do not have the data to back up their allegations use. He says, "I'll let the reader do their own research." Every time I read a comment that includes a statement like this, I get this feeling that the commenter does not have the data and is giving personal opinions. I expect the same from this guy. If he had the data, his arrogance would have compelled him to gleefully provide us with it.

      Calling us all children. I'm surprised he actually stepped down from his throne to comment in the first place.

    12. Right! and any PHD worth his salt would not flaunt it! He is no more a PHD than I am a theoretical phycisist! The only data he probably has is from a creationist site.

    13. After reviewing your replies, two things also become clear:

      1. That you make claims without any substantiation such as the absence of a Ph.D. in the bunch. Slinging around the term "absolute infinities" does not qualify you to wipe Cantor's butt.
      2. The anonymous nature of the internet works in your favor as well, in that you can assert whatever you want about your academic qualifications without anyone being able to check up on them.
      Good riddance!.

    14. You are lying. There is no way you are a prof of astronomy, unless you are teaching some class as an adult rec program. Scientists think exactly how Samuel put it - that it is ludicrous to think it is fine tuned.

    15. Every volcano that erupts, every hurricane that strikes, every earthquake that hits, in short every natural disaster gives the lie to the concept of fine-tuning.

    16. well said sir.

    17. i wonder how your future comments will be like when you go into detail?a pleasure to click the 'like' button!

    18. "Since the bible reports that the Nephilim were tracked down, destroyed and their cities burnt, how much evidence would you expect to find?"

      Quite a bit, actually. It does not say that the Israelites killed every Nephilim that ever lived...only the ones living at that time. There had to be many dozens of generations of them who had lived and died before this supposed genocide. Where are their remains? They should have found something by now, especially if they were well known and prolific enough to live in cities.

      That they could have been Neanderthal is pure speculation and not worthy of one who claims to have the credentials you do.

    19. Peter and Paul all spoke of God’s servant Noah. Noah’s days are shown by Jesus and Peter to be prophetic of “the presence of the Son of man” and a future “day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly men.” Jehovah, in sparing Noah and his family when he destroyed that wicked world, was “setting a pattern for ungodly persons of things to come.”—2Pe 3:5-7; 2:5, 6; Isa 54:9; Eze 14:14, 20; Mt 24:37-39; Heb 11:7; 1Pe 3:20, 21.

    20. How do you know what Jehovah (whose existence you cannot prove) was doing?
      As we have no direct writings of "Jesus," how do you know "Jesus" regarded Noah?
      In short, another ignorant post.

    21. You do know that the discussion is about giants who lived in Biblical times. Your post is irrelevant to the topic at hand and is the type of proselytizing that I find quite irritating. Don't preach at me. It is both rude and arrogant.

  16. It would have been nice if the film maker had any kind of expert, i.e. medical doctors, geneticists, to support his claim that a human would be unable to live at, say, 15 feet tall. Without independent verification, what he said is nothing more than an opinion. Further, I think it's inappropriate to compare biblical giants to what we now call gigantism, which is a hormonal disorder. If there were a race of giant humans, it's inconceivable that they all suffered from a hormonal disorder and were able to thrive as a race or species. I mean only to point out problems in the film's argument without regard to my personal beliefs; although I think it's unlikely to be seen this way, I intended my comments as an objective observation.

  17. I wish the makers of this film had delved a little deeper into those pictures of giant skeletons. Had tried to find the source of those pictures and then go on to actually find those skeletons. I'm sure they would have found nothing but I think a solid discrediting of those pics are warranted. This video did not prove hoax, only stated that they were photoshopped. Somebody took those pictures. Find them and talk to them and force them to show us the skeletons. I doubt they will ever find the photographers but it would sure be funny to watch some of those who use those pics as evidence squirm when confronted and asked to verify the authenticity of those pics. That way we can finally put those foolish pictures to rest.

  18. believers beware as this documentary acts like a prick to your bubble & if you want your bubble unscathed then you have to be that prick!

  19. I'm sorry for the people that take bible even a littlebit - real.