Leaderboard

I made a reference in a post back several ago that mentioned it is not so much the number of chromosomes that is the enigma as that info was intact in regard to many files when recombined or fused. Of course, something switched on in the form of epigenetics and/or turning genes on/off through regulation as well. A mutation here or there and then natural selection takes over from there. I can guarantee you that one of those mutations was increased neural folding of cortex to make more room for convolutions (gyri and sulci) (along with your FOXP2 language gene). Maybe a bottleneck, maybe not but hard to imagine not. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12733395 Of course, there are those that disagree with the role of mitochondrial DNA, Ancestral Eve and just what a Homo sapienis is too.

I'm going to disagree with that. As the report reader I expect you recall earlier DNA tests done on samples that were believed to have been handled properly regarding gathering forensic evidence, yet were tested and dismissed when first round of testing suggested they were contaminated with human DNA so testing was suspended and the samples discarded / disposed of. (I wish I had an example I could cite right off the top of my head rather than just providing what might be scoffed-aside as a vague reference. Apologies in advance.) It's not a huge reason, it's not proven, but one should suspect the possibility those weren't contamination at all. Perhaps it is not MUCH, but it is more than zero. If I had a sample that I was truly convinced was bigfoot, at this point, I'd push forward whether it appeared to be contaminated or not. I don't think "them is us", but if there is hybridization, the markers examined for first pass might be similar, we might have to go into more in-depth testing to find the differences. Cost being what it is though, I'd have to have collected the sample myself, handled only myself, and seen it, whatever it was, left behind by the bigfoot, so the bar has to be set pretty high before I ever start. MIB

SWWA, what we see, and what is there have nothing to do with each other. Long range recon teams of five to six members are accustomed to ingressing to a well used line of approach and identifying and counting vehicles and personnel - without any of the five or six ever being detected. For days. Hundreds and on occasion thousands pass by in close proximity - and never see a thing. Folks assume since they're smarter, they'll automatically see anything in their area - but they're also assuming a dumb animal not having enough sense to actually hide from them. Throw in a built-in ghillie suit, and these things can look like a rock, blend with a tree, and even lay low in grass and low shrubbery. Everyone expecting to see something over six feet tall, likely in a semi-open area is going to be mighty disappointed. I just don't think these are dumb animals. Sorry, but I really don't understand your point .................... I need more coffee. I like the idea of trained recon teams living in the bush for weeks. They need to be trained in 'bigfoot friendly' tactics and not aggressive methods that may upset BF family units causing them to move and build more weather proof dens. My bad, Geo. My point is this. A lot of outdoorsmen will say words to the effect that "I've spent my entire life outdoors, decades even, and I've never seen no Bigfoot. They can't be that common, they can't be that many, or I'd have seen one." Well I was in the same camp - definitely spent a lot of my life outdoors - and I never saw any either. Until one day, in a very high, very remote area. The one that was growling at me was less than 30 feet away, and to this day, I never saw it among a small cluster of five or six trees only five to seven inches in diameter. The one I saw was running at me across open ground. The one I was closest to - I tried and tried to see what could only be a mountain lion growling at me - and it was right in front of me - but I couldn't see it. Just because an outdoorsman hasn't seen one doesn't mean diddly squat. It has nothing to do with BF population, it has nothing to do with BF concentrations - it means nothing. If five and six men can hide successfully just off roads and trails - multiple times without being discovered - imagine a BF with his natural ghillie suit - how much harder to see him, especially if he's hiding.

Audio analysis is very tedious and time consuming. I listen to any where from 50 to over 100 hours a month of audio. Both mine and one of my friends. With audio you gotta listen to every second, not minute. If not, your gonna miss the best stuff. You will hear some of the most crazy animal sounds. I have a vast catalog of recorded animal sounds I've kept over the years we've recorded. For example, owls just don't always "hoot". They can make some of the most crazy scary sounds. If you were out in the deep woods late at night and heard them, you would think some demon from the fourth dimension was about to physically rip your soul out. We leave our audio recorders out for a week and then pick them up. I can get a full 5 to 6 nights of audio at a time with 2 AAA's with the recorders we use. I have time to listen to all this audio in the evenings on my side job when I'm in my shop building custom guitars and doing local setups and repairs for local musicians. I listen back through a program called ProTools with a pair of special isolation headphones so I hear nothing on the outside.