The nephilim

[Meadmaker]

In Genesis 6, there's a discussion of the origin of the Nephilim. It says that the sons of heaven bred with the daughters of men to produce the race of giants known as the Nephilim.

(This is from memory. My apologies if I make a mistake on this. I'll try to correct it when I have a bibile in front of me. Whatever it says, it's weird.)

I'm curious if anyone has ever confronted a literalist with this infofmation, and what their reaction has been. We're used to discussing the young Earth, and Noah's flood, and various minor historical inaccuracies. The fundies have their pat answers for all of those things, but the Nephilim strikes me as one that would give them fits. It asserts that spiritual beings had sex with human females and ended up producing real, presumably human, offspring. I would just love to see a typical literalist response to questions about them.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

There seems to be a lot of tap dancing around the Nephilim among Xian litteralists.

See:
http://www.claudemariottini.com/blog/2006/03/rereading-genesis-64-were-they-really.html
for a reasonably rational discusion.

[icantlogoff]

In Genesis 6, there's a discussion of the origin of the Nephilim. It says that the sons of heaven bred with the daughters of men to produce the race of giants known as the Nephilim.

(This is from memory. My apologies if I make a mistake on this. I'll try to correct it when I have a bibile in front of me. Whatever it says, it's weird.)

I'm curious if anyone has ever confronted a literalist with this infofmation, and what their reaction has been. We're used to discussing the young Earth, and Noah's flood, and various minor historical inaccuracies. The fundies have their pat answers for all of those things, but the Nephilim strikes me as one that would give them fits. It asserts that spiritual beings had sex with human females and ended up producing real, presumably human, offspring. I would just love to see a typical literalist response to questions about them.

I know the answer i got from when i was a JW.

The angels' took on earthly bodies and got busy with earthly women.

The one things that stuck me about this comment was:
a) another species i.e angels found a completely different beings attractive, kinda like getting turned on and wanting sex with say...gas?
b) why would size have anything to do with angels, if that is the only trait passed on that would suggest angels were psychially large? yet but the bible definition they are spiritual beings.


but i guess that the problem when you try and prove stories

[PixyMisa]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.
Dustin, you have said elsewhere that you accept evolution. What do you call this?

[KingMerv00]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.

I tried responding in your "Proof" thread but accidently erased it before I replied. I was going to try again today but considering the quote above...I won't bother.

[Complexity]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.


Sure. Why not? Makes as much sense as anything else you've said.

[triadboy]

The term "Sons of God" did not infer 'angels' when it was written. It most likely meant something like "Heroes from the old days".

The term came to reference angels after Xian Angelology took hold. Then there was a search through the OT to prove the 'fallen angels' theory.

Don't forget angels aren't sexual beings. Their genetalia has been spackled over.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I tried responding in your "Proof" thread but accidently erased it before I replied. I was going to try again today but considering the quote above...I won't bother.


I find that a bit hard to believe. You can't repudiate my proof of God therefore you lie and makeup having responded but erasing it. Now you're making up more excuses for having not responded to it? Please...

[prewitt81]

Another interesting point is that, according to the bible, the Nephilim existed before and after the flood (see Numbers 13:33 for an example of post-flood Nephilim).

How did they survive the flood? I thought only those on the ark were spared.

[triadboy]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.

I can't tell if this is a joke or not. Please start using smiley faces.

If it is a joke: "Heh heh...giants....heh heh"

If it is not a joke: Please submit a urine sample to the site administrator.

[triadboy]

Another interesting point is that, according to the bible, the Nephilim existed before and after the flood (see Numbers 13:33 for an example of post-flood Nephilim).

How did they survive the flood? I thought only those on the ark were spared.

If they stood on their tip-toes, they could still breathe.

[prewitt81]

If they stood on their tip-toes, they could still breathe.

Or really really long straws. :)

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I'm simply saying that we rely on Fossils too much to tell us about ancient times. It's more than possible that a race of giant beings existed but who's bones were made out of quickly degrading material that could not fossilize and so we have no signs of them. There have been tales of Giants from all societies and it's no surprise. The Nephilim probably did exist.

[TheAntiLuddite]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.


Yeah. Fairy dust doesn't fossilize too well.

[Molinaro]

And let's not forget the invisible fossils left by invisible unicorns.

[LibraryLady]

I'm simply saying that we rely on Fossils too much to tell us about ancient times.

Yes, that pesky hard evidence....

[Dustin Kesselberg]

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another. We should never concluded that something NEVER existed simply because there is no evidence it ever existed. Do you disagree with that?

[Darat]

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another. We should never concluded that something NEVER existed simply because there is no evidence it ever existed. Do you disagree with that?

Yes.

[KingMerv00]

I find that a bit hard to believe. You can't repudiate my proof of God therefore you lie and makeup having responded but erasing it.

My post was made of a quickly degrading material and left no evidence. Therefore is probably existed.

[LibraryLady]

Yes.

Seconded.

[Mashuna]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.

Are you sure you mean probably?

'm simply saying that we rely on Fossils too much to tell us about ancient times. It's more than possible that a race of giant beings existed but who's bones were made out of quickly degrading material that could not fossilize

Hmm, still a bit too sure here.

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another.

Well, you're moving in the right direction at least :rolleyes: .

Do you know of anything else that probably existed that we have no evidence for? I'll start a list, if you like.

[Correa Neto]

Thirded.
The fossil register -as well as some basic biology knoweledge- can be used to inferr if a given creature could or not have existed in this planet.

Example:
Terrestrial vertebrates with six limbs, such as some dragon conceptions (four legs plus a pair of wings) never existed. Nothing in the fossil records supports their existence. No such creatures exist nowdays, not even with vestigial third pair of limbs.

Lets check, for example, some creatures from Greek mythology:
Harpyes-like animals never existed
Gorgon-like animals never existed
Hydra-like animals never existed

Giants with bones that can not suffer the proccess of fossilization never existed. BTW, such material would be?

[TheAntiLuddite]

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another. We should never concluded that something NEVER existed simply because there is no evidence it ever existed. Do you disagree with that?


You're invoking the oft-used:

"Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence."

It's also not evidence of evidence. This oh-so-cute statement so beloved by the religious and conspiracy-minded means absolutely nothing. The only thing that counts when you're whittling down the nearly-infinite "Things That Could/Would/Should Be" list is hard evidence.

[Darth Rotor]

Giants with bones that can not suffer the proccess of fossilization never existed. BTW, such material would be?
Unliklium. ;)

DR

[Dancing David]

I'm simply saying that we rely on Fossils too much to tell us about ancient times. It's more than possible that a race of giant beings existed but who's bones were made out of quickly degrading material that could not fossilize and so we have no signs of them. There have been tales of Giants from all societies and it's no surprise. The Nephilim probably did exist.

Sure, but just for the sake of argument, what was that quickly degrading material? Could you reference another large mega fauna like it? Are they related to humans?

You do realize that the window for preservation of bones and wood is around 14,000 without them being fossilized, even longer in just the right arid conditions.

Did this race of giants exist in the last 14,000 years? And what was their bone structure made of, it must have been very hard to support their weight, unless they were really skinny.

Has any other evidence been found for their existence, like houses or tools?

[Dancing David]

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another. We should never concluded that something NEVER existed simply because there is no evidence it ever existed. Do you disagree with that?

It depends upon the time frame and the numbers of the critters in question.

Fossilization events are rather scarce and hard to come by, usually river deposition is the best way. Although swamps do a good job.

There is evidence outside of traditional fossilization, peat bogs and tar pits come to mind where preservation may extend to fossilization through mineralization of bones but not necessarily. Peat bogs, caves and glaciers are a really good way to preserve things if the conditions occur properly.

Yet, if there was a really small population that was not widespread then it is possible for a species to arise and no preservation to occur.

However, the stories of giants (except for the Duatha D'ann, who became smaller after becoming less dominant, they became ants) would have required human contact for the stories to be transmitted, archaic homo sapiens sapiens is about 150-60,000 years old, truly 60 or less for gracile homo sapiens sapiens. Their bones have been found unfossilized in several situations in dry caves.

So the outside window for the existence of giants and humans to co-exist if 60,000 years. We have stone tools made by gracile homo sapiens from that time period.

Why haven't any remains of the giants been preserved from that time period, if normal bones and tools can be preserved, without fossilization, from that time period?

[andyandy]

My post was made of a quickly degrading material and left no evidence. Therefore is probably existed.

:D

[Beanbag]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.
Hoss, they find fossils of jellyfish. You know? Like, no bones at all? Just a gelatinous blob? Forget the "bones that quickly degrade" theory.

Beanbag

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Yes.

What do you disagree with?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Thirded.
The fossil register -as well as some basic biology knoweledge- can be used to inferr if a given creature could or not have existed in this planet.

Example:
Terrestrial vertebrates with six limbs, such as some dragon conceptions (four legs plus a pair of wings) never existed. Nothing in the fossil records supports their existence. No such creatures exist nowdays, not even with vestigial third pair of limbs.

Lets check, for example, some creatures from Greek mythology:
Harpyes-like animals never existed
Gorgon-like animals never existed
Hydra-like animals never existed

Giants with bones that can not suffer the proccess of fossilization never existed. BTW, such material would be?

You don't know that either. What % of living creatures were fossilized? What % of those that were fossilized have we discovered? There could have been entire phylogenic trees that we don't know about simply because they either never fossilized or we haven't yet found their fossils.. Monkeys with 8 arms and 2 heads or Giants who were birthed from Angels and Men.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Sure, but just for the sake of argument, what was that quickly degrading material? Could you reference another large mega fauna like it? Are they related to humans?

According to the Bible they're half human.

You do realize that the window for preservation of bones and wood is around 14,000 without them being fossilized, even longer in just the right arid conditions.

I didn't realize that.

Did this race of giants exist in the last 14,000 years? And what was their bone structure made of, it must have been very hard to support their weight, unless they were really skinny.

How could I know what their bone structure was made of if I don't have their bones?

Has any other evidence been found for their existence, like houses or tools?

No.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Hoss, they find fossils of jellyfish. You know? Like, no bones at all? Just a gelatinous blob? Forget the "bones that quickly degrade" theory.

Beanbag


Probably different situations of fossilization.

[Kariboo]

Unliklium. ;)

DR

Or:

Unobtainium;)

[athon]

You don't know that either. What % of living creatures were fossilized? What % of those that were fossilized have we discovered? There could have been entire phylogenic trees that we don't know about simply because they either never fossilized or we haven't yet found their fossils.. Monkeys with 8 arms and 2 heads or Giants who were birthed from Angels and Men.

Still pretending to be a scientician, Dustin ol' son? It never stops being funny.

The thing is, you're correct in that a tiny percentage of all living individuals have been fossilized. A small section of all life forms are represented by fossils, and we can infer from those a sizeable percentage of other species which probably occured in a diverse ecosystem. There still remains the big 'unknown' fraction. So...how do we know giant cephalopods never walked the earth claiming dominion?

We don't. But that's not how science works. We don't label the speculative as 'probable' until we have due cause, such as an observation that can't be rationalised by a more reasonable inference. Then it can accrue evidence until we deem it to be a probable claim.

Walking humanoid giants which leave no evidence are like Sagan's invisible flying dragon. One can never claim 100% that it doesn't exist, yet that in no way confers any evidence to supporting it being likely to exist, any more than any other wild speculation.

So, the false part of your claim is in the use of the word 'probable'. 'Possible' is more correct, but even still it is a claim that has no weight until there is due cause to consider it further. Which there isn't.

Athon

[PixyMisa]

Probably a race of giants did exist several thousand years ago. Most likely their bones were made of a quickly degrading material that does not fossilize and thus there is no evidence they ever existed.
I've bolded the problem words.

If you had written We can not be certain that a race of giants did not exist... you would merely have been teased, rather than ridiculed.

You are (a) making claims based on no evidence at all, and then (b) to support those claims, making further claims based on no evidence at all. That might be the keystone of theology, but it will get you nowhere in the real world.

[slingblade]

Unliklium. ;)

DR

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Care for another round? I'm buying this one.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Still pretending to be a scientician, Dustin ol' son? It never stops being funny.

The thing is, you're correct in that a tiny percentage of all living individuals have been fossilized. A small section of all life forms are represented by fossils, and we can infer from those a sizeable percentage of other species which probably occured in a diverse ecosystem. There still remains the big 'unknown' fraction. So...how do we know giant cephalopods never walked the earth claiming dominion?

We don't. But that's not how science works. We don't label the speculative as 'probable' until we have due cause, such as an observation that can't be rationalised by a more reasonable inference. Then it can accrue evidence until we deem it to be a probable claim.

Walking humanoid giants which leave no evidence are like Sagan's invisible flying dragon. One can never claim 100% that it doesn't exist, yet that in no way confers any evidence to supporting it being likely to exist, any more than any other wild speculation.

So, the false part of your claim is in the use of the word 'probable'. 'Possible' is more correct, but even still it is a claim that has no weight until there is due cause to consider it further. Which there isn't.

Athon


Since when was Carl Sagan's invisible dragon able to fly?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I've bolded the problem words.

If you had written We can not be certain that a race of giants did not exist... you would merely have been teased, rather than ridiculed.

You are (a) making claims based on no evidence at all, and then (b) to support those claims, making further claims based on no evidence at all. That might be the keystone of theology, but it will get you nowhere in the real world.


I've stopped taking your posts seriously several days ago after your incessant circular arguments and baseless accusations. Ever wonder why I've stopped responding to you? Save your energy and go read a book instead of posting in my threads.

[prewitt81]

No. . . guys. . . seriously. . .

How did the nephilim survive the flood?

[KingMerv00]

...Monkeys with 8 arms and 2 heads or Giants who were birthed from Angels and Men.

So they PROBABLY existed?

Think of the posts I made that PROBABLY existed!

[PixyMisa]

I've stopped taking your posts seriously several days ago after your incessant circular arguments and baseless accusations. Ever wonder why I've stopped responding to you? Save your energy and go read a book instead of posting in my threads.
You have never taken anyone's posts seriously when they disagreed with you. The only change is that you have stopped even pretending to dispute my points.

[triadboy]

How did they survive the flood? I thought only those on the ark were spared.

And there we saw the giants."
And we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight." This statement may have been figurative, hyperbole, typical biblical exaggeration, or an actual description of the sons of Anak, in which case they must have been about 100 meters tall. These are the same giants (the Nephilium) that resulted when the "sons of God" mated with "the daughters of men in Gen.6:4 Of course, these superhuman god-men should have been destroyed in the flood. So what are they doing still alive?

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/13.html

Here is the answer:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/flood_die.html

[Complexity]

I've stopped taking your posts seriously several days ago after your incessant circular arguments and baseless accusations. Ever wonder why I've stopped responding to you? Save your energy and go read a book instead of posting in my threads.

Umm... You're still responding to her posts - you just did.

You invigorate us, you silly dude - energy to spare.

I will read soon, however. Something wicked about science.

[athon]

Since when was Carl Sagan's invisible dragon able to fly?

Haha, that's our Dustin. Can't address any of the other points, so uses humour instead.

Funny man, funny man.

Now, I guess that means you acknowledge the fact you're a little poor on the science side of your claim. Something being ultimately possible (in that it isn't physically impossible) does not in any way contribute to it being probable.

Athon

[The Great Hairy One]

I'm wondering if I should post the biological impossibilities of severe gianticism... How tall do you think these nephilim were, chaps? Three metres? Four?

And I'd point out that their bones most definitely would fossilise, unless they were made from some sort of completely non-natural material. We're getting back into the magic side of things again!

RRrrraaaaahh! (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/giant.htm#hillGiant)

;)

Cheers,
TGHO

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Haha, that's our Dustin. Can't address any of the other points, so uses humour instead.

Funny man, funny man.

Now, I guess that means you acknowledge the fact you're a little poor on the science side of your claim. Something being ultimately possible (in that it isn't physically impossible) does not in any way contribute to it being probable.

Athon


Confusing "Possible" with "Probable" isn't a scientific problem but a semantic or rhetorical problem.

[Zep]

No. . . guys. . . seriously. . .

How did the nephilim survive the flood?Breaststroke.

[Zep]

Confusing "Possible" with "Probable" isn't a scientific problem but a semantic or rhetorical problem.Confusing "probable" with "definitely" is a bigger problem. For you. Here.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Dustin is probably the most intelligent poster on these boards.

[slingblade]

tj49V13Iv-4

[noblecaboose]

I've stopped taking your posts seriously several days ago after your incessant circular arguments and baseless accusations. Ever wonder why I've stopped responding to you? Save your energy and go read a book instead of posting in my threads.

*ring ring*
"Hello?"
"Hi there, may I speak with the kettle?"
"Speaking. Who is this?"
"I don't know if you remember me, but I'm the pot."
"Oh yes, of course I remember you, pot. What's the matter?"
"Well, I just thought you ought to know something..."

I think you can guess where I'm going with this. :rolleyes:

[gnome]

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another. We should never concluded that something NEVER existed simply because there is no evidence it ever existed. Do you disagree with that?

Perhaps not, but isn't it a bit hasty to speculate on how tall they were?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Perhaps not, but isn't it a bit hasty to speculate on how tall they were?

Because the Bible tells me so...

[quixotecoyote]

Because the Bible tells me so...

I prefer "Row row row your boat" myself, but I recognize the validity of your musical prespective.


<and quixotecoyote lopes merrily away to pick at some other dead end threads>

[athon]

Confusing "Possible" with "Probable" isn't a scientific problem but a semantic or rhetorical problem.

Huh? Probable means it is statistically likely to occur/have occurred. Possible means there's no current understanding of nature which prevents it from being true. They are not the same word, even if you play one of your 'semantics' games, Dustin. Not even close.

No, you just don't understand science very well. As you've shown time and time again.

Athon

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Huh? Probable means it is statistically likely to occur/have occurred. Possible means there's no current understanding of nature which prevents it from being true. They are not the same word, even if you play one of your 'semantics' games, Dustin. Not even close.

No, you just don't understand science very well. As you've shown time and time again.

Athon



Probable-affording ground for belief.
Likely but uncertain; plausible.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Probable

Possible-Of uncertain likelihood.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Possible

[prewitt81]

Because the Bible tells me so...

Does the Bible tell you why they existed after the flood? I thought only what was on the ark was spared.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Does the Bible tell you why they existed after the flood? I thought only what was on the ark was spared.

No. It doesn't. Some things the Bible leaves out for unclear reasons. Possibly the Nephilim were exempt from the persecution of God during the flood.

[prewitt81]

No. It doesn't. Some things the Bible leaves out for unclear reasons. Possibly the Nephilim were exempt from the persecution of God during the flood.

But the Bible is quite clear:

Genesis 7:21-23 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/7.html#21) And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

[Marquis de Carabas]

But the Bible is quite clear:

Genesis 7:21-23 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/7.html#21) And all flesh died that moved upon the earth...
Well, there's your answer. The Nephilim stood stock-still for the entire duration of the flood.

[prewitt81]

Game?

Set?

Match?

[athon]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Probable

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Possible

I was waiting for Dustin's Dictionary Display TM. If nothing, you're predictable.

Now I'm sure you'll play your other game, where you select the word 'uncertain' while ignoring the rest of each definition.

Yes, both don't carry 100% certainty. Step past that, and they are two different words. Probable means statistically likely to occur, short of certainty. Possible means it is anywhere in the statistical field. Science is needed to sort the probable from the possible.

It's laughable how you keep trying and keep coming up short, DK.

Athon

[thomps1d]

Well, there's your answer. The Nephilim stood stock-still for the entire duration of the flood.

...and they haven't started moving again since, hence the proliferation of larger-than life "statues" from ancient civilizations. They're really just Nephilim that didn't realize the flood had ended!

[PixyMisa]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Probable

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Possible
Every time you refer to a regular dictionary to argue a point in a scientific debate, your argument loses 1d6 points.

You're currently running negative.

[PixyMisa]

...and they haven't started moving again since, hence the proliferation of larger-than life "statues" from ancient civilizations. They're really just Nephilim that didn't realize the flood had ended!
And that explains why they don't fossilize - statues have no bones!

[thomps1d]

And that explains why they don't fossilize - statues have no bones!

Brilliant hypothesis! I suggest that we co-author a book on this stunning phenomena! The two of us will write it, and shall turn it over the the Marquis de Carabas for peer review (as he is the only other known Nephilim-statuologist in existence), and then we shall be hailed as revolutionary minds by the masses!

[prewitt81]

Brilliant hypothesis! I suggest that we co-author a book on this stunning phenomena! The two of us will write it, and shall turn it over the the Marquis de Carabas for peer review (as he is the only other known Nephilim-statuologist in existence), and then we shall be hailed as revolutionary minds by the masses!

Excuse me, but if you're going to be teaching this to my children one day, I demand equal time for Really Really Long Straw Theory (RRLST - see page 1 of this thread).

[Zep]

I think Dustin is just having a chuckle, because this whole thing is obviously a gee-up, or leg-pull. No-one who can actually spell and use a dictionary (albeit badly) can make such claims as go totally against his own "book of all knowledge" and not be having a laugh.

very funny, Dustin, very funny! :D

[thomps1d]

Excuse me, but if you're going to be teaching this to my children one day, I demand equal time for Really Really Long Straw Theory (RRLST - see page 1 of this thread).

*sigh*

Fine. I'll accept that, when used as a textbook, we will include a small sticker on the inside cover of our book that will read:

"The theory of Nephilmic Statuatization is only a theory, and should be considered critically. Other theories about the flood-exemption of the Nephilim exists, including the crackpot theory known as the Really Really Long Straw Theory."

[prewitt81]

*sigh*

Fine. I'll accept that, when used as a textbook, we will include a small sticker on the inside cover of our book that will read:

"The theory of Nephilmic Statuatization is only a theory, and should be considered critically. Other theories about the flood-exemption of the Nephilim exists, including the crackpot theory known as the Really Really Long Straw Theory."

I'll concede the "crackpot" but you forgot to italicize the second "really". It makes the promotional materials I'll be selling look absolutely stupid if you don't get it right on the sticker.

[athon]

I think Dustin is just having a chuckle, because this whole thing is obviously a gee-up, or leg-pull. No-one who can actually spell and use a dictionary (albeit badly) can make such claims as go totally against his own "book of all knowledge" and not be having a laugh.

very funny, Dustin, very funny! :D

I've often said Dustin is a comedian. I find him extremely funny. Although it's only funny because nobody takes him seriously. The thought that one day somebody could see merit in what he says suddenly takes the humour out of his posts.

Good thing that's unlikely to happen.

Athon

[PixyMisa]

Brilliant hypothesis! I suggest that we co-author a book on this stunning phenomena! The two of us will write it, and shall turn it over the the Marquis de Carabas for peer review (as he is the only other known Nephilim-statuologist in existence), and then we shall be hailed as revolutionary minds by the masses!
Alas, Tim Powers got there first, in his classic 1991 monograph The Stress of Her Regard (http://www.amazon.com/Stress-Her-Regard-Tim-Powers/dp/0441790976/).

[thomps1d]

Alas, Tim Powers got there first, in his classic 1991 monograph The Stress of Her Regard (http://www.amazon.com/Stress-Her-Regard-Tim-Powers/dp/0441790976/).

Which only goes to show that, in his infinite wisdom, God placed a primitive understanding of the basic tenets of Nephilic Statualizationification into the mind of Tim Powers, allowing him to draw upon that knowledge for use in his novel.

Therefore we have achieved even further independent confirmation of our research. Huzzah!

[prewitt81]

Why did you leave this thread Dustin? You're still posting in a few others. You can pretend that I didn't make post #61 if you want to.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Why did you leave this thread Dustin? You're still posting in a few others. You can pretend that I didn't make post #61 if you want to.


I don't know how to explain that to tell you the truth and I don't feel like thinking about it either. Perhaps Jesus_Freak has an answer. This thread is boring me so I'm going to bid adieu.

[brodski]

Alas, Tim Powers got there first, in his classic 1991 monograph The Stress of Her Regard (http://www.amazon.com/Stress-Her-Regard-Tim-Powers/dp/0441790976/).

I believe that Shakespeare got there sooner; in The winters tale.
Perhaps Hermione was one of the “daughters of men” who mated with the sons of god?
There’se no evidence for this- so it is probable.

Either way, this proves that Nephilim-statuology has a long, and distinguished history- predating the Authorised (“King James”) version of the Bible by almost two decades!

Not like this upstart RRLS theory!

[Darat]

What do you disagree with?

Your post.

[Darat]

...and they haven't started moving again since, hence the proliferation of larger-than life "statues" from ancient civilizations. They're really just Nephilim that didn't realize the flood had ended!

Actually those are "Weeping Angels" a race that are as old as the universe according to the Doctor who is the leading authority on them. There was a documentary (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/episodes/2007/310.shtml) on UK TV about them last Saturday.

[Mashuna]

Actually those are "Weeping Angels" a race that are as old as the universe according to the Doctor who is the leading authority on them. There was a documentary (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/episodes/2007/310.shtml) on UK TV about them last Saturday.

Unless I see them move, I won't believe you :p

[KingMerv00]

Because the Bible tells me so...

(And you wonder why I don't want to post in the "proof" thread.)

What about the gospels that were made of quickly degrading material, left no evidence, and probably existed? The gospel of Snoopy was quite interesting I heard.

[TheAntiLuddite]

Some additional questions for Dustin, if he's still checking in:

First, forget the Nephilim; you've got bigger problems:

A worldwide flood that covered all the land and killed all of the fauna not on Noah's boat would also have killed a large percentage of the flora, and would have destroyed the planet's ecological balance. Also, such an event would have left copious evidence in the fossil record. (Please don't cite the Grand Canyon as evidence of the flood; you'll look more foolish than you already do.)

If the omnipotent (and deranged) superbeing wanted to destroy all life on earth, why the flood? Why didn't he just snap his divine fingers (so to speak) and wink all life out of existence? Did the god want to watch its creatures paddle around helplessly in a screaming panic until they became exhausted and drowned? I wouldn't do this, and I'm an ordinary mortal. This is a deity you worship?

Second, consider this: the tale of the flood is a so-called moral fable that teaches you'd better kiss Hank's arse or he'll kick the [rule 8] out of you.

TAL

[Beerina]

We have no idea if some creatures existed in ancient or prehistoric times who never fossilized for one reaosn or another. We should never concluded that something NEVER existed simply because there is no evidence it ever existed. Do you disagree with that?

Not true. We know what the skin of various dinosaurs was like, and whether some early bird-like proto-birds had feathers or not, because they die and fall into a mud flat, and the imprint of their skin then fossilizes.

So in some instances, it is indeed possible to detect creatures and features that otherwise would not fossilize by themselves.

Wood also rots away, but we've no shortage of petrified forests.

Of course this race of "giants of old, men of reknown", was just a leftover tale from some earlier religion that was still floating around in popular consciiousness back then, and hence the writers of the Bible felt they had to account for it, either by direct inclusion, or, as more likely, by excising as much as was necessary to bring the earlier works into alignment with the current theology.

Depending on the fussiness level of the Christian apologist, they are not the leftovers from when Yahweh's Canaanite pantheon members mated with mortal women, but (since Yahweh's pantheon was converted to a pantheon of size = 1) they are either children of mortal women and angels, or just really big but otherwise normal humans.

But in no circumstances may a Christian interpret that as Yahweh and his existing god-buddies pounding on some lucky human females.

[Beerina]

You remember what he did in the time of the flood (http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/twainlfe.htm). There were multitudes and multitudes of tiny little children, and he knew they had never done him any harm; but their relations had, and that was enough for him: he saw the waters rise toward their screaming lips, he saw the wild terror in their eyes, he saw that agony of appeal in the mothers' faces which would have touched any heart but his, but he was after the guiltless particularly, than he drowned those poor little chaps.

Dare if you will...

[prewitt81]

I believe that Shakespeare got there sooner; in The winters tale.
Perhaps Hermione was one of the “daughters of men” who mated with the sons of god?
There’se no evidence for this- so it is probable.

Either way, this proves that Nephilim-statuology has a long, and distinguished history- predating the Authorised (“King James”) version of the Bible by almost two decades!

Not like this upstart RRLS theory!

Blasphemer! I don't see how you could disagree with this theory. Have you ever tried to stand still during a global deluge? I don't think so. And it's not like they were using ordinary straws - not even long ones. They were Really Really Long! One day you will understand, but it will be too late.

[brodski]

Blasphemer! I don't see how you could disagree with this theory. Have you ever tried to stand still during a global deluge? I don't think so. And it's not like they were using ordinary straws - not even long ones. They were Really Really Long! One day you will understand, but it will be too late.

Sorry, your so called “theory” is full of holes. I may not be able to stand still throughout a global flood, but the I am not the grandson of god, as the Nephilimare.

Furthermore, not only would the straws have to be really really long, the Nephilim must have known, well in advance, just how deep eth flood waters would have been. And if god was going to give them this information and then provide them with supernaturally long straws (over 5,130 metres!) why not just do the more simple- and more impressive- miracle, and turn them into stone for the duration.


Stone giants have grace, majesty and a sense of occasion, straws are just a bit naff, no matter how really long they are. No all powerful god would chose straws over statues!

And even if He did, have you thought how heavy a self supporting straw over 5KM long would be? Holding that for almost 6 months would tire anyone’s arms- it’s just not possible!

Therefore Nephilim-statuism is the only logical choice!

[strathmeyer]

I'm sorry, what evidence do we have that the nephilim can't breathe under water?

[KingMerv00]

I'm sorry, what evidence do we have that the nephilim can't breathe under water?

Or fly...or walk through walls...or crap ice cream...

[Dr Adequate]

There have been tales of Giants from all societies ... True.

http://www.northridge.org/images/bible.jpghttp://www.coliseum.org.uk/images/Jack%20Beanstalk%20Final.jpg

[grayman]

There have been tales of Giants from all societies and it's no surprise. The Nephilim probably did exist.

They might be giants:

73TtWwPkPFM

[brodski]

I'm sorry, what evidence do we have that the nephilim can't breathe under water?

We have no evidence that they can't breath underwater, therefore they probably can't breathe underwater, and their bones were almost certainly made of some water soluble, quick decaying material anyway.
The clear lack of any evidence for this whatsoever is all the proof we need!

[Dancing David]

According to the Bible they're half human.



I didn't realize that.



How could I know what their bone structure was made of if I don't have their bones?



No.


Well if they are half human then why would their bones disintegrate so rapidly? Especially as they are likely to be larger bones than human bones.

Oh well, no evidence does not mean that they didn't exist. However for them to have existed proof would be nice. Perhaps there were much fewer of them and they didn’t actually crossbreed with humans?

[slingblade]

Well if they are half human then why would their bones disintegrate so rapidly? Especially as they are likely to be larger bones than human bones.

I have a different problem with the statement you're answering.

If they're half-human, doesn't that really mean they're all human? In that the DNA would have to match in order for reproduction to occur?

How do you get a "half" human? Isn't that like saying your pet is literally half-dog and half-cat, which as far as I know is impossible?




<waiting now for a cute picture of Catdog. :p>

[Piscivore]

How do you get a "half" human?

Ask Shemp or de Carabas. I'm having no luck at all with "Project Ariel". :(

[Piscivore]

It's more than possible that a race of giant beings existed but who's bones were made out of quickly degrading material that could not fossilize and so we have no signs of them.

Sounds a bit like our Mr. Kesselberg has been reading "The Whisperer in Darkness".

[Meadmaker]

Does the Bible tell you why they existed after the flood? I thought only what was on the ark was spared.

I really like that question.

Maybe Nephilism is a recessive gene carried by one of Noah's sons' wives?

[jimbob]

Dustin is probably the most intelligent poster on these boards.

Very nearly nominatable...

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Dustin Kesselberg
It's more than possible that a race of giant beings existed but who's bones were made out of quickly degrading material that could not fossilize and so we have no signs of them.
Sounds a bit like our Mr. Kesselberg has been reading "The Whisperer in Darkness".

But not speed reading (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=77454) it.

Claims that reading speeds above 350 wpm are impossible, despit the Guinnes Book of records having the fastest talker at 600 wpm...

Evidence schevidence

[Beanbag]

Or fly...or walk through walls...or crap ice cream...
Uh-oh... Should I be suspicious of the soft-serve ice cream machine at the Golden Corral? Man, that would explain a lot of things. Though I'm still wondering how you can get chocolate out of one side, and vanilla out of the other .... No, on second thought, let's just forget it altogether.

How 'bout them Yankees?

Beanbag

[The Grave]

Yes.


Thrice! There is no evidence for a god, but do you think IT existed?:rolleyes:

Whereas...Sherlock Holmes has an address and a very 'close' friend...Oh er Dr.W leave that alone...

Griff...

[The Grave]

I have a different problem with the statement you're answering.

If they're half-human, doesn't that really mean they're all human? In that the DNA would have to match in order for reproduction to occur?

How do you get a "half" human? Isn't that like saying your pet is literally half-dog and half-cat, which as far as I know is impossible?




<waiting now for a cute picture of Catdog. :p>


Well spotted! A totally ludicrous statement exposed...But then this is exactly the mentality of creationists in that they think a fish morphs into a rhinoceros which then morphs into a whale...

The problem being that Stone-aged men [who wrote the bible] didn't know a cat's arse from a bats farce!

They were but simple folkers!:eek:

Griff...

[Correa Neto]

You don't know that either. What % of living creatures were fossilized? What % of those that were fossilized have we discovered? There could have been entire phylogenic trees that we don't know about simply because they either never fossilized or we haven't yet found their fossils.. Monkeys with 8 arms and 2 heads or Giants who were birthed from Angels and Men.
Argument of ignorance...

Tell me how likely would be for a complete linneage of terrestrial vertebrates with six limbs to be completely "hidden" from our knoweledge? Tell me how lilely would it be for an entire chordate-like phyllum with notochords made of some unkown substance be completely hidden from our knoweledge?

Please tell me why I should consider things that are not supported by the slightest piece of evidence could be real or even plausible.

Your "entire phylogenic trees that we don't know about", for example...

Would you consider giant jellyfishes living in the upper atmosphere as possible? I rule out such possibility, just like I rule out a race of giant humanoid creatures whose bones made of unliklium or inobtanium can not be fossilized and that also never left any other archeological vestigies, such as tools, habitations, etc.

There's no evidence, there's not even room for the possibility of existence of such a race of giants. If you were talking about some extinct species of tall hominids with limited geographic distribution could be the "root" of the myth, that would be plausibe. We have fossils of giant apes, such as Gigantopithecus and the controversial Meganthropus fossils (the last ones considered by some as evidence for the Nephilim). But these were real creatures, whose evolutionary linneage can be traced. Their bones were not made of unliklium or inobtanium.

Not to mention that since there's no evidence for the existence of angels, thus considering the possibility of existence of a race created by interbreeding between angels and humans is...