>On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Bill Dozier wrote:
>
>> <wild speculation>
>> Genesis 6:
>> 1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were
>>born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were
>>beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
>>
>> Could the answer be here?
>> </wild speculation>
>>
>> I've always found this passage to be very curious.
>>
>> Bill Dozier
>> Scatterer at Large
>> dozier@radix.net
>>
>Bruce Waltke speculated that the result of this union--the "Nephelim" of
>v. 4, the "heroes of old, men of reknown"--might be the Neandertals,
>whose average cranial capacity (if I remember correctly, and if the
>skeletons found are typical) is somewhat larger than H. sapiens.
>"Nephelim" was often translated "giants" in older versions. Your wild
>speculation is in good company.
>
>Garry DeWeese
While this speculation may be in good company, I am afraid that it is
contradicted by the evidence. Neaderthal was a shortie, not a giant. I
quote:
"Populations living in higher(cold) latitudes tend to be both larger brained
and larger bodies, probably because in the past such physiques were selected
for efficient heat conservation, than those living in lower (warmer)
latitudes."-Christopher Stringer and Clive Gamble, _In Search of the
Neanderthals_,New York: Thames and Hudson, 1993, p. 82
Large bodied does not mean tall. It means round. On page 92 of the above
book is a plot of the crural indeces of modern and neanderthal beings. The
index is a measure of body ratios. It is plotted against the average
temperature of where the populations live. The colder the climate, the more
"neanderthal-like" the body is. The plot shows that neanderthal probably
lived in a world much colder than even the Lapps or the Inuit do today. Their
body proportions may be nothing more than an adaptation to cold.
Secondly, the measured and estimated heights of Neanderthals range from 5 ft.
1 in. to 5 ft 10 in. (see Stringer and Gamble, p. 91-92. Estimates of the
height of Australopithecus Robustus are about the same as present day humans
(see Victor Barnouw, An Introduction to Anthropology:Physical Anthropology and
Archaeology, Vol. 1, (Dorsey Press, 1982) p. 130) And the estimated adult
height of a 12-year old Homo erectus is 6 feet tall (see Johanson and
Shreeve, _Lucy's Child,_ (New York: William Morrow and Co., 1989, p. 208)
There is nothing wrong with speculating but people like Waltke, who I presume
write articles or books, should test their speculations against the hard data.
Failure to do this allows speculations which have already been falsified to
enter into christendom.
glenn