Leaderboard

I have always thought our opinion on what is sapien, or not, is informed much more by our own self-serving criteria than anything else. Do winners get to write the history? Well, in all probability we sure did. So, the definition of all non-sapiens as "anything not us" is a handy but completely useless classification, in my book. The first casualty of a BF confirmation is going to be this idea. We can't help it though. We do it by classification of our own superficial racial characteristics and convince ourselves such a division is meaningful. I suppose it makes us feel some better, on some level, but it sure gets in the way of seeing things clearly.

That strikes me as extremely ironic every time I look at that face in your avatar.

F/A, tell me you've not slipped into the 19th century expectation that succeeding evolved species were improved and superior to their predecessors.

Wait. We don't have any certainty that BF has a midtarsal break. That's where I seriously differ with Meldrum. They may have a midtarsal break, they may not. If there were a midtarsal break, you'd think it would show up in at least a significant majority of prints - and we don't see that. I'd not say that no witness has ever seen a Squatch packing a weapon. And the first thing that comes to mind is the Woodwose in Europe - frequently depicted with a club or healthy looking stick. The DNA is not indicative, until we have a body, get a DNA profile to compare with, and only then can make some determinations. You'd think that humans, being more complicated, more intelligent, and more creative would also be more complicated - and yet we have only 46 chromosomes while the apes, monkeys, etc., have 48 chromosomes. Obviously, we did not descend from monkeys - no higher animal reduces chromosomes and simultaneously improves. We don't even know how many chromosomes these things have - unless you know something I don't. You know how many pairs of chromosomes the Neanderthal has? That's right. No one does. Yes we do. Neanderthals had the same number of chromosomes as we do. Why? Because remember from my article the female hybrids survived and bred back into the Homo Sapien population? This proves it. If the number of chromosomes were different then either the mating would not have been successful or the offspring would have been sterile. And if you deny human evolution then there is not much more we can discuss. Divine creations do not need to follow any sort of rule book....they can just appear. If thats your feelings on human history.....thats ok, its just not mine. Didn't deny human evolution. Stated you don't reduce variables numerically, and get a more complicated, more capable creature. If we came from apes, who have 48 chromosomes, you'd think we'd have to have at least 50 chromosomes, at least something to account for our somewhat superior intellect, creativity, and self awareness. Not less chromosomes. And another thing. I'm not convinced that the fossil record has been fully discovered or determined. And I'd further suggest that is obvious.

How long did it take to get you at this stage with the options that you have placed? They are all possible and yet can be wrong, but how long did it take to get to this point in time? You have never had a sighting and there is no fossil record out there to prove that these creatures came from the three extinct linage you have mention? Two of the extinct linage we do know about which are Paranthropus or Gigantopithecus. We know them since there is some fossil record of them and yes if they were alive today they could fit the bill of them being these creatures. But DNA of them would be in the gene bank would it not be? and if DNA is in the gene bank then these creatures would have shown up by now with what ever DNA has been collected. The one common theme that keeps coming up within the DNA of these creatures is Human but the sample gets thrown out for contamination. The Giganto is a possibilities and I believe that what they found of this creature was a tooth and a lower jaw. So it would be hard to conclude what the capabilities of this creature would be with what has been found. Mostly all speculative and suggestive. But what has been observed by many witnesses is not suggestive of a monkey, Ape, Gorilla, Bamboo. I do not say Primate since primate is a wide spectrum and I want to narrow this down to a Human behavior then what we see in Jungles and mountains. I respect your answer and I agree that there is still a fossil specimen that has not been found that may very well be living in our back yards. I would call them a living fossil that has evaded us, while every so often letting us know it's out there. This is not ape like nor does it act ape like, if apes were like these guys we would have never have found apes or gorillas. Yet here we are with apes and gorillas in zoos locked in cages, but not one Bigfoot in a zoo. So does this show some thing of a higher intelligence? If we as humans are the only ones on earth with high intelligence and it is in grained with in our DNA, then is it not possible that they might share the same DNA that we do? It can be the only explanation for how well they have adapted to live around us rather then live among us. Do you have any other explanation for this other then they do not exist? The do not exist excuse is getting old and to many people have seen these creatures up close or close by. Science needs to except that we might not be the only homo erectus still alive. That there might be a mixed breed of Homo erectus still alive living in our wilderness a man beast.

And that's why, if I ever got my hands on one, the world would not know a thing about it for another year or even two - the time it takes to prevent such an occurrence. They're not going extinct anytime soon. Too many of them, too tuned into their environment, and too widespread.

He does not assume its a "total ape". If by that you mean chimps, bonobos, orangs and gorillas. Bigfoot lacks a divergent big toe, but has a midtarsal break.....something between man and ape (homo vs pan) is Meldrum's position and yours as well yes??? Regardless of where exactly we place Bigfoot on a scale between man and ape, the purpose of this thread was to displace the notion that Sasquatch is the product of a recent mating of a unknown primate and a human woman.....and somehow became its own distinct species. I think its safe to say that idea is dead, with the news of the dna research done. What it is I dont know, but no witness Ive ever talked to has claimed sasquatch was wearing animal hides, packing a spear or a stone tool. Nor was he seen starting a fire. So as far as our scientific knowledge of the Homo genus? Sasquatch does not fit in that regard. Orangs are called "wildmen of the woods" for good reason, they look human and are very smart. I do suspect Sasquatch to be even closer to us than Orangs. Its a incremental discussion. BTW, and off topic....who works out the hard stuff for the engineers? Stuff like atmopsheric pressure on Mars, its gravity? distance to the red planet, etc, etc? Scientists do. Do not think for two seconds that without scientists? Engineers would be blind. No different from the Engineer to the Welder. Without a set of blue prints the Welder is blind. Scientists calculate things that their eyes will never see and their hands will never touch. From a electron to a black hole and every thing in between.

Odd that the leading authorities have no close, personal observation of any kind or duration. Never seen them run. Never seen how fast they run. Never seen their stride. Never seen the odd knee and ankle structures that cause the odd way they run - or should I say "ski." Never seen them running toward them, never seen them passing by them, never seen them running away from them. Never seen their face. Never seen their eyes. Never seen how they lean forward, never seen their unbelievable mass, and never seen their skin and hair. But they're the experts. I want my aircraft mechanic to have never turned a wrench, never wired anything, and whose only experience is considering reports of planes flying over others. How many scientists have been to Mars? And yet they can land a rover on the surface and take soil samples, and send back the data.Ive watched shuttle launches too.....but that doesnt make me an aeronautical engineer. I'm not attempting to belittle your experiences, far from it. But we should be rejoicing that scientists like Krantz and Meldrum take your sighting seriously and are attempting to understand it. Versus discrediting them because they are not eye witnesses. (Krantz - RIP)

Or even the genus Homo. Have you two actually seen one up close?