Leaderboard

Technology as proof of human intelligence is human arrogance. Our technology mostly amounts to human baggage. I have posted this in another thread but it is food for thought. https://knowledgeutopia.wordpress.com/2014/08/28/the-cetacean-brain-and-hominid-perceptions-of-cetacean-intelligence/

So Bob is to pop back up on Sasquatch Chronicles? Wow. What a huge surprise. Just wonder what the feds will make of that. I'm sure they won't give him a second chance. It will either be Guantanamo or a long walk out in the desert for poor old Bob! I'll be passing on listening to his big comeback show. Let's hope though at least one of these guys can get their story straight for once. If you are charging for this nonsense it's the least you can do.

They don't need fire because they have hair, which would also make it dangerous to work with fire. I like technology too FWIW; I hold a couple of patents, but I'm not sure I would call the whole thing 'smart'. Technology is something that we made- it comes with us. I'm not sure that makes it 'smart'; its simply part of who we are. I'm not sure of that. My own personal experience suggests that there is much more to BF than a simple brute! I'll put it this way: we can associate with gorillas. But BF- if there is an encounter a very common aspect is the BF leaving, ducking out of sight, etc. Gorillas are very secretive too, much more so than humans, but they will allow us near them given enough time. That does not seem to be the case with BF. My theory is that we demonstrated to them long ago that we are pretty dangerous, meaning only the reclusive ones survived. Just a theory mind you and I'm not going to defend it on that account, but it does explain a lot. Squatchy, just for the record people like you that do work to reinvigorate the environment are rare and you are to be commended. I'm sure how BF feels about you is nothing personal and I explained it (in theory only) above. Not that it makes any difference- none of it will unless we achieve contact, which I do not expect in my lifetime.

Well, here's one point. She stated that the divergence which has led to her purported hybrid occurred 15,000 years ago which is simply not enough time. Hence, skewed. I thought that the "unknown primate" thing was incorrect, I've heard Dr. Disotell explain that what would be reported is an animal similar to "x" it wouldn't be reported as "unknown primate". I always chuckle when I see/hear people passing on that story of 'unknown primate". But two things. Q: Is there any example in nature of a species which went through a sudden non-evolutionary change - as a group so they could all interbreed? Q: Are you positing that a breeding population of humans went feral? It couldn't be just one random guy or gal obviously, and in light of purported sightings it would have had to have occurred all over the continent.

The knower was there when it happened...doesnt always mean what is reported or experienced is accurate or even proof, however your claim to hoax because you know is flawed because you werent there to observe the hoax, you just assume it is because the put up as evidence is not so easy to explain...unless you conclude a hoax which again is and assumption and your opinion only. Fair enough and I am not looking for an argument, I said what I meant to say there and there is not place really to go. However I am going to challenge the reverse false claim to a hoax where there is no evidence to support the hoax. It is a direct assault to a persons credibility and that I will always challenge. As to your other question you are correct regarding Piltdown man and I commend you for your search for truths in that regard here are couple others from memory. Evidence is evidence ..placing the workd extraordinary on it is all relative. facts are facts not matter how colorful the word play is. Piltdown Man: Was the fusion of a human skull with an apes lower jaw in a blatant hoax.... they filed them down and fooled everybody. In 1912 they discovered the Piltdown man. It was in the New York Times: “Darwin Theory Proved True†from the Piltdown Man. It was gonna be used in 1925 at the Scopes monkey trial as part of the evidence for evolution [The World's Most Famous Court Trial, Tennessee Evolution Case, 1925, p. 278] , but the judge said: “The question is not, is there evidence for evolution; the question is, did he violate the law of teaching?†So he was found guilty of breaking the law. The teacher was John T. Scopes down here in Dayton, Tennessee. Nebraska Man: Was built from a single tooth and later they even built him a wife. They build a whole missing link from a tooth and were able to determine what his wife looked like also.. Later they determined the tooth was from a pig. Cro-Magnon: still used in the textbooks, yet it's a perfectly normal human. Why on earth is that considered a missing link? Lucy: No hand or foot bones were found other austilapithisthines that were found had curled toes and were obviously knuckle walkers and had a grasping foot or seperated toe. Not human like at all, just an unusual monkey. One knee was found at the site and another was found a year earlier (called the Hader Knee) and nearly 70 meters lower and a mile away ..Yet National Geographic called it Lucys knees five times in the Nov 5, 1985 issue. The Washington Universtity has a display (misrepresentation) (hoax?) of Lucy showing human like feet and hands when none were found.. When confronted with the evidence of the curled feet and monkey likehands of everything else found in the areas The Professor had this to say: " We cannot be updating every exibit based on every new piece of evidence that is found. We look at the overall exibit and interpretation it creates. We think the overall impression this exibit creates is correct ... ummm ok, there that We again intillectual types love that Orce man: O-r-c-e, They were gonna put a big party for the Orce man they discovered. Till they discovered it's actually a piece of a skull fragment from a donkey. A skull found in Spain and promoted as the oldest example of man in Eurasia Homo erectus: is still in the textbooks. Homo erectus used to be called Java man, then they changed it to Pithecanthropus erectus, and now called Homo erectus. It was found by Dr. Dubois, a Dutch anatomist who went to Indonesia purposely, to try to find missing links. He hired a bunch of prison convicts to go dig for him. He wasn't even there when they found it. What they found was an ape's skull cap, three human teeth, and a thigh bone found a year later 50 feet away. Dubois put them all together and said: “We have a missing link here.†You don't even know those animal bones go together. Three teeth, thigh bone, and a skull cap from an ape! This was also gonna be used in 1925 as evidence for evolution at the Scopes monkey trial. [The World's Most Famous Court Trial, Tennessee Evolution Case, 1925, p. 277] Peking man: was used for years as evidence for evolution. Everything disappeared during World War II; but they found a cave, with a bunch of crushed monkey skulls in there. The skull had been smashed, and they found a bunch of human tools. And so some brilliant scientist said: “Wow, these monkeys are learning to make tools...they didn't tell anybody that they found 10 normal humans in the same cave. Skeletons of humans. In many cultures Monkey brain is a delicacy, the humans were more than likely eating the monkeys and using the tools to bust open the head for the brain delicacy. The Hobbit : was just found here in 2004. The Hobbit was an little bitty, tiny human. Probably a result of secondary microcephaly dwarfism. Just a normal human, about 3½ feet tall! There are people like that today running around the planet Nothing was proven except that it looks to be a fish eye of a species that is known. other than that as strange and bizarre as that is admittedly we dont know what caused that to say case closed its a hoax, although you personally may have reached that conclusion. its still just an assumption.