Concerning the origins of Humanity; viz. the many differing opinions of who the 'giants' were: I don't believe they were Neanderthals, but many do believe so. I've heard that although Neanderthals were built very ~wide and stocky (barrel chests, short legs, massive, heavy bones and large skulls) -- they weren't very ~tall, nevertheless.
There are lots of theories about the 'giants' of legend and paleontology, some of them way out there, of course -- but I maintain a belief that they were in fact the ~true, original Human beings (the distinct, early species: Cro-Magnon or Homo Sapiens sapiens)...
... And that what we are now, in modern times, is a mostly ~devolved species (some more so than others obviously, depending on the level and types of DNA corruption / damage sustained, due to random mutations triggered or catalyzed by past inter-species hybridizations).
It should be readily apparent to most readers, that I take issue with much of 'Darwin's Theory of Evolution'. I don't believe the Human species "evolved" from lower primates such as apes or macaque monkeys (although there are naturally biological relationships, as with all mammals); but I do believe that many (if not all) modern Humans are ~descended from them.
My issue is in the usage of the words: "evolution" and "descent". I understand that they're not the same exact phenomena; whereas many people use them interchangibly, as if they have the same definition.
So, I think it's just a matter of the ~degree of the many biological, genetic relationships; the different ~varieties of hybrids; and the ~types of random mutations -- which have produced the present panopoly of Human variation known as 'ethnic groups' or 'races'.
In fact it is the extremely broad variation of Human genes, which is the very source of the great ~demand for DNA testing. People are searching for their own, unique ~identities.
I recently learned that even after spending some cash on my mtDNA analysis (in 2006, through Family Tree DNA and the Genographic Project sponsored by National Geographic, and headed by Spencer Wells at the time), I still need further testing to pin down the ~exact subclade or even the precise ~Haplogroup, lol. It appears that I might have any one of the following types: W1e, X, X1'2'3 (? don't know what that is), X1'3 (? again), H1, H1q, or H1g.
X, X1, and H1 are all mostly associated with cultures such as the Basques and Tuareg, who are reportedly descended from Cro-Magnons. W1e seems a much more recently developed clade, compared to the others. W1e is basically 'Indo-European' or 'Eurasian'.
Are 'Indo-European' and 'Eurasian' the exact same thing, I wonder? Because, there are so many different 'tribes' or subcategories of either one...
As luck would have it, the HVR1 markers of my personal mtDNA evidently straddle the division boundary between X and W, somehow; and hold many similarities to H1, too. In other words, it doesn't seem very easily categorized or classified. Hence my need for further testing.
I also learned practically simultaneous to the above, that my father's yDNA was almost certainly R1b1a2, very Western European (highest concentration among the Basques, Welsh, Scottish and Irish), yet it traces back to the time and region of King Tut(?, lol).
I had guessed prior to getting confirmation on it, that he would have been either that, or maybe an "I". The administrator of the Denman yDNA Project knew of only one 'match' for my father's DNA, based on his family pedigree; so I consider myself fortunate to have reasonable assurance that it is as I had assumed.
I would like to share the link for the most recent Coast-to-Coast AM radio show, which last night had interesting discussions about the 'Giants' of legend. Maybe you will enjoy it (I'm about to try to find a recording of it online, right now, so that I can hear it myself). Although much of their content sounds like propaganda (to me), I still sometimes enjoy hearing many of their guests and callers speak. (It's almost like an 'open forum')...
(Maybe you already subscribe to their emails; if so, my apologies for quoting today's notice here for you. I just think it timely, appropriate, and germaine to this discussion):
"Giants & Lost Civilizations:
On Thursday's show, independent researcher Pat Chouinard presented information and theories about an ancient race of giants, as well as lost civilizations and their artifacts. There are numerous cross-cultural references to giants, as well as creation myths that involved them. "I think they were a highly advanced race," and they were said to have a lifespan of hundreds of years, he noted. Mesopotamia and Atlantis were not the first civilizations, "I believe there were hundreds, thousands of civilizations going back to a very very remote and early time in our history," he said. Sanskrit writings of India refer to civilizations that existed hundreds of thousands of years ago, "and I think the giants go back to this time," he continued.
One of the mysteries he's explored concerns the finding of ancient out-of-place Caucasians in such countries as New Guinea, China, and Japan, as well as in North America, far before the Europeans had arrived. Some of these were described as "red haired giants," and the Native Americans have myths about light-skinned giants, called the 'Bright White God,' and Quetzalcoatl, he detailed.
Chouinard suspects that this race, which might have been as tall as 15-18 ft., gradually died out from epidemics or other factors.
He talked about the demise of the Atlantean civilization, suggesting that primitive groups that co-existed on the fringes of Atlantis as it was fading, picked up some remnants of their advancements, and eventually rose up to become the historic civilizations that we know from ancient history.
Chouinard also spoke about ancient megalithic structures like Gobekli Tepe and Baalbek, as well as the anomalous discovery of the " X Woman of Siberia," in which a finger bone was found that came from a separate, unknown evolutionary line that dated back some 50,000 years."
I would be interested in learning from all others who might have serious opinions or knowledge about what I have presented here (the legendary 'Giants', etc.), relative to DNA and genealogy. However I'm not prepared to enter into any heated or controversial debates about it with anyone, myself; I only wish to make here a simple presentation of the subject for others more knowledgeable than I am, who may desire to debate it, or who may have interesting opinions or facts to share with us.