Steering Committee
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,997 Mythical

About norseman

  • Rank
  • Birthday 11/01/1970

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • Have you ever had an encounter with a sasquatch-like creature?

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Mule packing, hunting, fishing, reenacting.....and sasquatch. Have seen tracks but no Squatch as of yet......

Recent Profile Visitors

6,390 profile views
  1. I suggest we go back to the ignition point of the debate, in which some forum posters believe incorrectly that Danny Vendramini's theory is as good as any other. When the evidence simply does not support it. Neither archeology nor geneticists. I find it funny your trying to hold sciences feet to the fire for being "incomplete" and yet have said nothing about Mr. Vendramini's theory which is not "incomplete" but "incorrect". But I guess boring old normal looking cave man Neanderthal doesn't sell as many books as cat eyed super predator Neanderthal does. This actually kinda ties into the original post. If people think Vendramini's book is on par with peer reviewed science? Then it's no wonder Bigfoot related material is sub par.
  2. Its a minuscule stretch. If you can name a species of Homo that is more closely related to Homo Sapiens than Neanderthals? Im all ears! I can see differences between Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthals, absolutely. But when compared to say a Homo Sapiens skull and a Gorilla or a Gigantopethicus skull? It's minuscule. A Neanderthal unlike a Gorilla could walk into any bar in the US and order a beer without causing a riot. Danny Vendramini is not a scientist and his theory is fantasy. It's that simple. If he would like to state how he got to the conclusion Neanderthals possessed cat eyes or any of his other supposed super attributes? State them in a peer reviewed article. The only conjecture concerning Neanderthals is his theory. The rest? Is backed by science's best evidence to date. There is a massive difference between pure fantasy and science. Science by definition can and will change based on the newest evidence at hand. But it's based on real current evidence that is the best at any given moment in time. Just because science has blank spots in its vision doesn't mean we can just prop up anything we want with nothing to support it.
  3. It's not a stretch. And yes Neanderthals belong to the genus Homo. Not only that? Non African Homo Sapiens are the result of hybridization with Homo Neanderthal and in some populations Homo Altai (Denisovians). What Bigfoot is, is yet to be seen. But we have a good handle on Neanderthals.
  4. People who live in far northern latitudes, where solar radiation is relatively weak most of the year, have an advantage if their skin has little shielding pigmentation. Nature selects for less melanin when ultraviolet radiation is weak. In such an environment, very dark skin is a disadvantage because it can prevent people from producing enough vitamin D, potentially resulting in rickets disease in children and osteoporosis in adults. Contributing to the development of osteoporosis in older people is the fact that their skin generally loses some of its ability to produce vitamin D. Women who had prolonged vitamin D deficiencies as girls have a higher incidence of pelvic deformities that prevent normal delivery of babies. The Inuit people of the American Subarctic are an exception. They have moderately heavy skin pigmentation despite the far northern latitude at which they live. While this is a disadvantage for vitamin D production, they apparently made up for it by eating fish and sea mammal blubber that are high in vitamin D. In addition, the Inuit have been in the far north for only about 5,000 years. This may not have been enough time for significantly lower melanin production to have been selected for by nature.
  5. That's because facial reconstruction is a science. And it gets dang close.
  6. They do it all the time. The humanlike foxp2 gene has been found in Neanderthals and I believe denisovians. Which makes it extremely likely that our ancestors had some form of speech. Neanderthals had the ginger gene (MCR1) which makes it very likely that a good portion on the population had red hair and pale freckle skin. On top of this there are other clues. Evidence points to the fact Neanderthals made clothing..... Lastly looking at the "killer Neanderthal" hypothesis. It's bull manure, that the genetic and archeological evidence doesn't support it. And not all of the junk DNA in the world will save it.
  7. We do not have complete genomes of earlier ancestors! Its quite simple. They can look at African and Non African Homo Sapiens genomes and then the Neanderthal genome and identify the genes that overlap. They can also look at what Neanderthal genes in modern humans are associated with. The above is science. Cat eyed super ape is pure fantasy.
  8. I can do better than that.
  9. We know what illnesses we inherited from Neanderthals, freckles, red hair.....the Neanderthal genome is mapped. NO WHERE do we find cat eyes in the Neanderthal genome. Your claim that both pictures are just conjecture is absolutely false. Your a smart guy Gig, I challenge you to dig further.
  10. Your European right? Are you saying your 8% of the creature in the bottom picture? A cat eyed nocturnal super predator ape? How would Homo Sapiens even produce offspring with such a thing? It might as well be a two legged Gorilla. Ten million years of evolution seperate Gorillas from Humans! But 40,000 years ago cat eyed super ape mixed genes with us? No way, this is crackpot conspiracy stuff.
  11. Don't we have a CURRENT ACTIVE skookum cast thread pinned at the top of the forum right now!?
  12. Being a mod sucks....dont beat yourself up.
  13. There are Federal restrictions. Lots of them.