Is Bigfoot Related To Neanderthal?

[Guest]

I vaguely remember a topic like this based on foot morphology a while back. Are there any other theories floating around out there that link bigfoot to Neanderthal? If so, I'ld love to hear about it.

[Huntster]

I suspect Old World sasquatch variants (for example, the Almas) may be sized more like Neanderthals, but New World sasquatches are usually described as much larger than the Neanderthal fossils found in Europe and Asia.

Did you see this?

[Guest]

I suspect Old World sasquatch variants (for example, the Almas) may be sized more like Neanderthals, but New World sasquatches are usually described as much larger than the Neanderthal fossils found in Europe and Asia.

Did you see this?

What is it? If I saw it, I don't think I would necessarily think it was sasquatch because it has cat eyes.

[norseman]

I vaguely remember a topic like this based on foot morphology a while back. Are there any other theories floating around out there that link bigfoot to Neanderthal? If so, I'ld love to hear about it.

Non African Homo Sapiens carry Neanderthal genes with us. I'm Norwegian and German.....so that would include me.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703686304575228380902037988.html

The burly Ice Age hunters known as Neanderthals, a long-extinct species, survive today in the genes of almost everyone outside Africa, according to an international research team who offer the first molecular evidence that early humans mated and produced children in liaisons with Neanderthals.

So if WE are Neanderthals (or a portion of us, with a portion of our genes) I highly doubt that there is any immediate relation between Sasquatch and Neanderthals. Other than we both occupy a spot within the ape family tree of course.

[norseman]

What is it? If I saw it, I don't think I would necessarily think it was sasquatch because it has cat eyes.

It's a bunch of hogwash.

If the "NP THEORY" was correct, we wouldn't have 4% of their genes in us.........they would have 4% of our genes in them. We were the dominant species, not them, as genetics shows us.

Edited December 16, 2010 by norseman

[Guest]

So where are we with the Alms, that Igor B. likes to call them in potential association with Neandertals.. (in Asia?) Which poses the question what association do they have with sasquatch or ....our ABSMs as Ivan T Sanderson liked to call them ? Man.. that spear looks sharp.

[Guest]

Descriptions of BF are just not consistent with Neandertal IMO.

Neandertal were about half a foot shorter than modern Humans, but are projected to have had a very human appearance when compared to reported characteristics of BF. Simply put, BF is just too big and animalistic in physical terms to be directly related to Neandertal I think.

Neandertal also used bone and stone tools, built complex structures, used fabricated traps, hunted in groups (likely with spears), buried their dead at least part of the time, are believed to have had a language, and are believed to have lived in social groups more complex than simple family units.

Most importantly, Neandertal had control of fire.

There are few mainstream accounts of BF that include any let alone several of those elements (and none in a consistent and contemporary manner). Of course most reported encounters are momentary and not in the BF's home, discounting Ostman of course, and even then, the only fire mentioned are the ones he made.

I just don't see it, but I could be wrong.

Edited December 16, 2010 by infoman

[Guest]

In my opinion, Neanderthals were early humans, related to the Almas of Eurasia. Bigfoot, sasquatch, seatco etc. is different and in many ways an opposite of man. We developed with technology, fire, tools, and shelter. Bigfoot didn't utilize technology at all. Perhaps their development followed a totally different course.

[Guest]

Yes Norseman, czech/russian here so I'm sure that I have that same 4% you have. Well what do you think of the scans they did of the neanderthal baby's skull where they found that the brain had smaller frontal lobes and larger parietal and occipital lobes? Do you think this was a common trait among proto humans or just specific to neanderthal? I can't recall reading anything about brain structure on earlier versions of homo.

The reason I am asking is that this is indicative of a brain structure that thinks very differently from the way cro-magnon and modern humans do. Based on what I've read the person would be someone who doesn't do much future planning, would be more musically inclined, a concrete thinker but analytical, and lacked imagination. They see this same brain shape in autistics and those with autism spectrum disorders, like asperger's. Ironically enough, these disorders show up in caucasians more so than asians, amerindians, and not often in black africans. They are thinking these disorders are linked to the neanderthal genes we inherited.

Whether it's a different hybridization of neanderthal genes with an earlier version of a proto human, or just an off shoot with a similar brain structure, bigfoots reported behaviors sound like someone with traits similar to those on the autism spectrum to me. They are now saying that autism is not a disorder but more of a different way of being since it is pervasive. If the genes are present in bigfoot they may express in a way that is more beneficial for his survival and environment than they do for us. The size disparity doesn't bother me so much because of what is called hybrid vigor. It was the behaviors of those that are Aspie's/autistic, the connection with the neanderthal genes, and some of bigfoot's reported behaviors that made me wonder about it. Or is that too big of a leap to suspect there might be a connection?

Here is an interesting link to the autism/neanderthal theory. If you scroll down to the part about longevity it says neanderthal had a life spans up to 150 years. I hadn't heard that before.

http://www.neanderthalproject.com/?p=32

[Guest]

Interesting question. I'm not too sure we actually understand Neanderthals well enough to say just what they were. If Neanderthals, who share so many traits with modern humans, also share our human range in morphology (pygmies to samoans, tassadai to vikings) we might be surprised to see just how varied neanderthals could be, so from the standpoint of morphology (size, hair patterns, skin tones, skeletal features) and presumably from the standpoint of instinctive behaviors (aversion to social groups, sleep patterns, territoriality, hunting and foraging strategies)maybe some populations resembled what we typically identify as BF, or some other expression of wild ancestral hominin just managing to hand on in relic populations in geographic refugias. Much of our understanding of what neanderthals were is as a result of field researchers finding their remains and artifacts within the context of their occupation sites, usually in caves and protected rock shelters, and presumed to be intentionally burried or stashed/protected in caves for the most part. If there were neanderthals living in areas without caves, or groups who didn't use them, we don't know much about those, and that could be the major expression of a living population while these cave dwellers whose remains we occasionally uncover, were the exception to the normal range of neanderthal populations' behaviors worldwide.

But whether a presumed BF is 'neanderthal' or an expression of some other ancestral cousin such as h. erectus or an as of yet undiscovered ancestral branch, the most likely perspective from my point of view would be that BF would be part of that great radiation of bipedal hominins that radiated into eurasia a few million years ago and adapted to the wide variety of niches that eurasia offered, ranging from woodlands, mountains, and vast grasslands with abundant grazers, if only they could exploit those resources over hundreds of thousands of generations, just like our ancestors did.

[Guest]

Where in the hell did you get that pic, Huntster? That thing practically screams "shoot me with your 338 first, then pet my carcass and take photos at the end of the blood trail later"...

Edited December 16, 2010 by NDT

[masterbarber]

That was pretty cool Hunster.

Here's a video of this guy's theory. I found it very interesting:

ETA:

Infoman,

We know that early humans were much smaller than "modern" day humans and this video appears to show that neanderthals were significantly larger (judging by the skull sizes he presents at about 04:05 on the video). If there were a survivng population of neanderthals, it may be possible that their size increased over the years also. So potentially they would still be larger than humans. Just a thought.

Edited December 16, 2010 by masterbarber

[Drew]

To answer the opening thread question:

Neanderthals were tool makers, we have no evidence that Bigfoot fabricates tools.

[Wheellug]

Another excellent theory. It seems to fall in place very well.

With the rib cage design I've often wondered how they were always placed in line with humans.

Now it seems they are being placed into a different branch on that tree of life.

Wish they would not have drawn it out to be so horrific. The cat eyes and the snarl.

Put Patty's face on it, or put the neanderathal skull into the image of Patty and see what you get.

[Guest]

dog4u I think you brought some things to the table that might be bf applicable with present day claims. Nice. There simply is a lot we do not know so.. neat to hear some of what we do...

I am with you NDT whoaa