What Caused the Mysterious Extinction of ‘Giganto,’ the World’s Largest Ape?

February 18

11 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

We are slow, can't jump and relatively weaker than our animal neighbors. I just assume that our ancestors were carrion eaters.

Smaller animals need less food. Pandas can swim and climb trees.

You would assume wrong. It turns out language which enables us to organize into large groups and opposable thumbs which allows us to create ever increasingly sophisticated weapons TRUMPS teeth, horns, claws and tusks……

Pandas also need bamboo. And if the theory is correct and Giganto starved because of the changing biosphere in which bamboo was non existent? Then Pandas should not be here either.

I think my theory is at least as plausible as yours. And if we look at what’s going on globally? Probably more probable.

February 18

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/homo-erectus-not-humans-invented-barbed-bone-point-tool

Here is the oldest barbed spear point found. It’s 800,000 years old. Erectus.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/20/homo-erectus-may-have-been-a-sailor-and-able-to-speak

Here is a theory Erectus had language and sailed to islands that were indeed islands in their time.

They had fire, language, spears and boats. That’s basically what Sapiens have had in most of our history. Albeit more sophisticated.

February 18

3 hours ago, norseman said:

You’re contradicting yourself. Ok, well if you knew such hunts took place? Then you should be well aware of theories that pack of humans with pointy sticks caused mass die offs.

No, I said "Perhaps". Then I said "I don't know".

The first sentence in the article you posted states: "10,000 to 50,000 years ago, hundreds of the largest mammals went extinct. It’s likely that humans were the key driver of this."
There is debate about the extinction of Giganto (of course), but the consensus seems to be that that occurred 200,000+ years ago. Megafauna extinction driven primarily by humans, or human ancestors hunting them to extinction is a far more modern calamity. There are many studies and articles from reputable sources (including the Smithsonian article in the OP) indicating that Gigantopithecus most like went extent due to environmental changes:

"G. blacki is thought to have succumbed to extinction after cooler temperatures in the region reduced and later eliminated the forests upon which it depended for food."

https://www.britannica.com/animal/Gigantopithecus

"We show that from 2.3 million years ago the environment was a mosaic of forests and grasses, providing ideal conditions for thriving G. blacki populations. However, just before and during the extinction window between 295,000 and 215,000 years ago there was enhanced environmental variability from increased seasonality, which caused changes in plant communities and an increase in open forest environments. Although its close relative Pongo weidenreichi managed to adapt its dietary preferences and behaviour to this variability, G. blacki showed signs of chronic stress and dwindling populations. Ultimately its struggle to adapt led to the extinction of the greatest primate to ever inhabit the Earth."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06900-0

You are convinced that G. blacki were driven to extinction (or, to near extinction, if they still exist) by cave-men with spears and that's ok. I just don't think that's what happened. :thumbsup:

February 18

46 minutes ago, xspider1 said:

No, I said "Perhaps". Then I said "I don't know".

The first sentence in the article you posted states: "10,000 to 50,000 years ago, hundreds of the largest mammals went extinct. It’s likely that humans were the key driver of this."
There is debate about the extinction of Giganto (of course), but the consensus seems to be that that occurred 200,000+ years ago. Megafauna extinction driven primarily by humans, or human ancestors hunting them to extinction is a far more modern calamity.  There are many studies and articles from reputable sources (including the Smithsonian article in the OP) indicating that Gigantopithecus most like went extent due to environmental changes:

"G. blacki is thought to have succumbed to extinction after cooler temperatures in the region reduced and later eliminated the forests upon which it depended for food."

https://www.britannica.com/animal/Gigantopithecus

"We show that from 2.3 million years ago the environment was a mosaic of forests and grasses, providing ideal conditions for thriving G. blacki populations. However, just before and during the extinction window between 295,000 and 215,000 years ago there was enhanced environmental variability from increased seasonality, which caused changes in plant communities and an increase in open forest environments. Although its close relative Pongo weidenreichi managed to adapt its dietary preferences and behaviour to this variability, G. blacki showed signs of chronic stress and dwindling populations. Ultimately its struggle to adapt led to the extinction of the greatest primate to ever inhabit the Earth."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06900-0

You are convinced that G. blacki were driven to extinction (or, to near extinction, if they still exist) by cave-men with spears and that's ok. I just don't think that's what happened.

I understand. I used the NORTH AMERICAN mega fauna extinction article to bolster my case.

I just think it’s interesting that Giganto went extinct from lack of bamboo when the Panda Bear did not.

🫡

February 19

10 hours ago, norseman said:

Pandas also need bamboo. And if the theory is correct and Giganto starved because of the changing biosphere in which bamboo was non existent? Then Pandas should not be here either.

There is a book "Who Moved My Cheese?" The basic message is the ability / capability to adapt to varying degrees of change. When the cheese is moved, find it.

Guessing about the adaptions of Giganto and pandas is boring. Pandas are bears, can run faster than most humans and will attack humans. Don't be fooled by the cute and cuddly appearance. They can tear you up. They are solitary, not a pack animal. Ape versus bear adaptions will be argued ad nauseam.

February 19

57 minutes ago, Catmandoo said:

There is a book "Who Moved My Cheese?" The basic message is the ability / capability to adapt to varying degrees of change. When the cheese is moved, find it.

Guessing about the adaptions of Giganto and pandas is boring. Pandas are bears, can run faster than most humans and will attack humans. Don't be fooled by the cute and cuddly appearance. They can tear you up. They are solitary, not a pack animal. Ape versus bear adaptions will be argued ad nauseam.

The other cool thing about bears? Is they are not as closely related to the genus Homo and therefore are not as tightly in conflict with attempting to occupy the same space as two terrestrial primate species.

I could be very wrong about a Erectus vs Giganto conflict. But what I am absolutely 100% right about is that there are NO terrestrial bipedal apes left on the planet except for Homo Sapiens. This is not happenstance…. (Barring some relic population unknown to science clinging on to their existence in some remote region of the planet by a thumb nail) The genus Homo was kicking ass and chewing bubble gum long before Sapiens came on the scene. Thats why we find them almost everywhere in the old world. And it’s still quite possible we may find them in the new world as well. It’s also why they spawned new species of Homo that were also very successful spear wielding, stab dinner to death and then kick the cave bear out so we have a place to live Billy bad asses. 🤷‍♂️

February 19

8 hours ago, norseman said:

The other cool thing about bears? Is they are not as closely related to the genus Homo and therefore are not as tightly in conflict with attempting to occupy the same space as two terrestrial primate species.........

In terms of competition, I still see no difference between humans and other predators to this very day. If thevrest of society didn't mediate and legally force protections, people would kill off the bears and wolves in order to horde the ungulates and protect their own crops and livestock, and human tribes would just as cheerfully kill off their cousins for the very same reasons. Alaska hunting and fishing politics is as ugly as it gets. Nothing has changed in millions of years except political pressure with conservation.

February 19

Honest question.

I think what some are driving at is that Giganto still exists as Bigfoot in North America. Which brings me back to the bamboo question. Necause at least in the Pacific Northwest no bamboo is native. So logically speaking? Either Giganto was not completely reliant on bamboo as conventional wisdom thinks? Or Bigfoot is not a descendant of Giganto?

February 19

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Honest question.

I think what some are driving at is that Giganto still exists as Bigfoot in North America.........

I am not one of those. That said, the gigantopithecus mandible is an appropriate size to fit a sasquatch sized hominin who eats roots and roughage.

Quote

........Which brings me back to the bamboo question. Necause at least in the Pacific Northwest no bamboo is native. So logically speaking? Either Giganto was not completely reliant on bamboo as conventional wisdom thinks? Or Bigfoot is not a descendant of Giganto?

Bamboo has nothing to do with the question. The fact that there is a bear species in China (where the gigantopithecus mandible was found) that has specialized on a bamboo diet does not mean that everything in the region ate bamboo........including pandas. They are an omnivore. Asian black bears eat bamboo, too, along with lots of other things. All bears primarily eat vegetation. The requirement for bamboo in the New World in order for a sasquatch to be here is the precise kind of ideological requirements that needs to go the way of gigantopithecus.

February 19

31 minutes ago, Huntster said:

I am not one of those. That said, the gigantopithecus mandible is an appropriate size to fit a sasquatch sized hominin who eats roots and roughage.

Bamboo has nothing to do with the question. The fact that there is a bear species in China (where the gigantopithecus mandible was found) that has specialized on a bamboo diet does not mean that everything in the region ate bamboo........including pandas. They are an omnivore. Asian black bears eat bamboo, too, along with lots of other things. All bears primarily eat vegetation. The requirement for bamboo in the New World in order for a sasquatch to be here is the precise kind of ideological requirements that needs to go the way of gigantopithecus.

So you reject that Giganto went extinct because of a lack of bamboo?

Do you think different species of Homo had a impact on the local fauna as they were encountered?

February 19

21 minutes ago, norseman said:

So you reject that Giganto went extinct because of a lack of bamboo?

Wasn't asked of me, but answering anyway.

Cavities found in their dentition indicates they consumed fruit, in addition to the bamboo in their diet. It's entirely possible the bamboo consumption increased as favored fruits decreased in their surrounding habitat.

Changing environments likely led to Giganto's demise.

As for the likelihood Giganto is a bigfoot direct ancestor, there is another possible candidate., Paranthropus could fill that role. Bigfoot is presumably physically larger than Paranthropus, but the timeline allows for the differences.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/10/world/largest-ape-gigantopithecus-blacki-extinction-scn/index.html

Edited February 19 by Incorrigible1

February 19

14 minutes ago, norseman said:

So you reject that Giganto went extinct because of a lack of bamboo?........

No. I maintain that nobody knows why they went extinct, or even if they went extinct if, indeed, sasquatches and/or yeren are relic gigantipithecus.

Quote

........Do you think different species of Homo had a impact on the local fauna as they were encountered?

The common belief today is that Homo sapiens render everything extinct whether that was in the past, today, or in the future. That's even true in the Abrahamic religions with Adam's and Eve's sin turning all of Creation topsy turvy. It us quite clear that man has a habit of waging war on all competition, including other men. So yeah, they have an affect on other flora and fauna.

February 20

Per the reading I have done thus far there were 3 separate Homo species in China 300,000 years ago.

Homo Erectus

Homo Denisovans

and this new species

https://phys.org/news/2023-08-china-human-lineage.html

February 20

2 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

Wasn't asked of me, but answering anyway.

Cavities found in their dentition indicates they consumed fruit, in addition to the bamboo in their diet. It's entirely possible the bamboo consumption increased as favored fruits decreased in their surrounding habitat.

Changing environments likely led to Giganto's demise.

As for the likelihood Giganto is a bigfoot direct ancestor, there is another possible candidate., Paranthropus could fill that role. Bigfoot is presumably physically larger than Paranthropus, but the timeline allows for the differences.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/10/world/largest-ape-gigantopithecus-blacki-extinction-scn/index.html

There is a lot of conflicting information out there. This article says they primarily ate bamboo.

https://anthropology.iresearchnet.com/gigantopithecus/

Because of its massive teeth and jaws, scientists originally believed that the diet of Gigantopithecus consisted of hard objects such as nuts and seeds. Later, analyses of residue left on the teeth led scientists to conclude that their diet probably consisted primarily of fibrous leaves. The fact that many of the Gigantopithecus fossils are found together with remains of ancient pandas suggests that they inhabited and exploited bamboo forests. Their predominantly leaf diet was most likely supplemented by fruit, based on the high rate (10%) of dental cavities found in G. blacki.

Gigantopithecus Fossils of G. giganteus are known from deposits in the Siwalik Hills of India. They have been dated to the Miocene approximately 6 to 7 million years ago. Fossils of G. blacki have been found in China and Vietnam and are much younger. Here, it appears that the species may have lived up to 500,000 years before becoming extinct.

It is possible that the species became extinct when climatic changes caused large die-offs of the bamboo forests they inhabited. It is also possible that competition with giant pandas or early hominins, such as Homo erectus, may have caused their extinction. Since their discovery, Gigantopithecus has been interpreted variously as a human ancestor, as an overspecialized side branch of human evolution, or as an unusual fossil ape that had nothing to do with human evolution. Most scientists now recognize Gigantopithecus as an extinct ape that was more closely related to orangutans than to African apes or humans.

February 20

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Per the reading I have done thus far there were 3 separate Homo species in China 300,000 years ago.

Homo Erectus

Homo Denisovans

and this new species

https://phys.org/news/2023-08-china-human-lineage.html

They're finding them in every nook and cranny they investigate..........except any nook or cranny near sasquatchery.........because they aren't investigating there.

Sign In

What Caused the Mysterious Extinction of ‘Giganto,’ the World’s Largest Ape?

Recommended Posts

norseman

norseman

xspider1

norseman

Catmandoo

norseman

Huntster

norseman

Huntster

norseman

Incorrigible1

Huntster

norseman

norseman

Huntster

Browse

SSR

Policies

Activity