Thread 40892412

how can neanderthals be shorter than humans if their skulls are this big? it doesn't add up and i think they're intentionally lying to us. i think neanderthals were some of the "nephilim giants" humans fought against. denisovans are much more closely related to neanderthals than humans, google says, so im lumping them in with neanderthals. if you google "denisovan height" you will see mainstream science claims they were 6'0 tall but also admits "there is limited skeletal data". on the very first page there's also claims of 7-9 feet and one claim they are 18 feet tall: https://www.drishtikone.com/denisovans-18-foot-human-giants-who-lived-40000-years-back-in-asia/

could anything i said be true?

>>40892412 (OP)
>how can neanderthals be shorter than humans if their skulls are this big?
the size of the skull is largely dictated by the necessities of the sensory organs jaw muscles and variable brain functionality, the size of the body is a function of how quickly biological stresses switch prepubescents endless growth to reprobatious reproduction and death.
> it doesn't add up
is your metric big = big?
h8 to break it to ya m8 but giants are mans ancestors who live in hermetic fortresses underground that emulate the conditions of the earth from and older higher density state.
>could anything i said be true?
>there is limited _ data

one denisovan was found with a 40,000 year old bracelet made of chlorite which typically is not just laying around and has to be mined within certain depths of the earth

>>40892412 (OP)
Is this a lie then?

>>40892412 (OP)
Reminds me of this
Bigger isn’t always better

Neanderthals were stocky and would've needed over 4000 calories a day, almost all of which was MEAT.

>>40892412 (OP)
Pay no attention to science. They are autistic fools.