Guest Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 There is "twin speak" but they can understand english when their parents speak to them. There was one case that Southernyahoo had included that had two girls that were feral. They were 7 and 2 when found, that means the 5 year old should have been talking, I don't believe they developed a language for themselves. Speech development starts in infancy with the stimulation from the mother or father that seems to jumpstart the ability, to put it simply. If the stimulation does not continue they regress so in the case of the two girls, maybe the age difference was too great? The bad thing about these kids is that you don't know if they had issues before being abandoned. A lot of times on MRI that area of the brain is smaller than normal but they attribute that lack of development to a lack of stimulation. That's why they never get that ability back. Well I wonder how they can tell if it's an adult bigfoot mimicking a baby or an actual infant? But that would be the best indication to me if they were capable of speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I guess it wasn't clear, but I meant kids as in plural who are not exposed to language will develop their own language. I doubt that any of the feral children were feral together. There are examples of kids that invent their own language when not exposed to it from parents. There are several examples of kids inventing their own languages but I meant in the case of seriously neglected kids together so it was similar to the feral children. I was aware of some kids, as in single kids, that were completely isolated and had a very difficult time learning a language. The same thing is true about vision. People who gain their sight as adults often have seriously impaired vision like not being able to tell where curbs are. It wouldn't surprise me Bob if children were apt to develope their own language if raised in an isolated group of other children. The interesting thing with a single feral child is that it adopts the behaviors of their serrogate parents be they gazells , dogs , monkeys, or birds. It is a mimicry function that is hardwired into us to insure survival. They way these kids are described to attack and eat a wild animal is eye opening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 It wouldn't surprise me Bob if children were apt to develope their own language if raised in an isolated group of other children. "Kill the pig! Cut her throat! Do her in!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shelley7950 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Thanks for the English major joke I've done some reading on feral children, have read the book on Amala and Kamala, and as far as I can recall the general consensus was that most of these children had severe developmental and/or mental health issues BEFORE they were abandoned--in fact these issues may have led to their abandonment or a failure to search for them....certainly Amala and Kamala appeared to be autistic and possibly retarded. The point is, I think it's hard to draw any conclusions from these children because of other issues; it becomes a chicken-or-the-egg situation---did the child become autistic/schizophrenic/retarded as a result of being socially isolated, or was the child socially isolated because of its mental/emotional issues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Thanks for the English major joke I've done some reading on feral children, have read the book on Amala and Kamala, and as far as I can recall the general consensus was that most of these children had severe developmental and/or mental health issues BEFORE they were abandoned--in fact these issues may have led to their abandonment or a failure to search for them....certainly Amala and Kamala appeared to be autistic and possibly retarded. The point is, I think it's hard to draw any conclusions from these children because of other issues; it becomes a chicken-or-the-egg situation---did the child become autistic/schizophrenic/retarded as a result of being socially isolated, or was the child socially isolated because of its mental/emotional issues? If the members will read the attached report from Clarke County Alabama and wish to know a detail that was deliberately left out, and why that omission may be related to this thread, and its present sub-topic, let me know. It will be a thought provoking response. http://www.alabamabigfoot.com/bigfoot/reports/RFPreport1.htm Edited January 12, 2011 by Branco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 If the members will read the attached report from Clarke County Alabama and wish to know a detail that was deliberately left out, and why that omission may be related to this thread, and its present sub-topic, let me know. It will be a thought provoking response. I would like to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 12, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted January 12, 2011 Hey Branco I'd like to know the missing tidbit and what impact it imparted to the incident reports? You can reply to the thread or to PM, whichever you intended. Don't tell me the squatch was relieving itself as well and going "ahhhhhh", lol. Thanks, biped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knuck Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Branco, do tell, do tell! I would love to know what was omitted. Did the squatch whistle at the guy as he wizzed? Just kidding, but the squatch DID do something in particular to attract the guy's attention didn't it?-Knuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I've done some reading on feral children, have read the book on Amala and Kamala, and as far as I can recall the general consensus was that most of these children had severe developmental and/or mental health issues BEFORE they were abandoned--in fact these issues may have led to their abandonment or a failure to search for them....certainly Amala and Kamala appeared to be autistic and possibly retarded. The point is, I think it's hard to draw any conclusions from these children because of other issues; it becomes a chicken-or-the-egg situation---did the child become autistic/schizophrenic/retarded as a result of being socially isolated, or was the child socially isolated because of its mental/emotional issues? In the case of Oxana Malaya, she was exiled from her home at age three, and there is no mention she had any developmental problems before that. It was her alcoholic parents that couldn't care for her. Dr.'s agree that it stunted her developement being left to befreind the dogs in their backyard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxana_Malaya Oxana's alcoholic parents were unable to care for her, and at three years of age she was exiled from her home. They lived in an impoverished area where there were wild dogs roaming the streets. She took refuge in a shed inhabited by these dogs behind her house. She was cared for by them and learned their behaviors and mannerisms. The bonding with the pack of dogs was so strong that the authorities who came to rescue her were driven away in the first attempt by the dogs. She growled, barked, walked on all fours and crouched like a wild dog, sniffed at her food before she ate it, and was found to have acquired extremely acute senses of hearing, smell and sight. She only knew how to say "yes" and "no" when she was rescued. When she was discovered, Oxana found it difficult to acquire normal human social and emotional skills. She had been deprived of intellectual and social stimulation, and her only emotional support had come from the dogs she lived with. Oxana's lack of exposure to language in a social context made it very difficult for her to improve her language skills. Today, Oxana can speak and many of her behavior problems have been remedied. Whether she will be able to form strong relationships and feel part of any human community remains to be seen. In the British Channel 4 documentary, as well in the Portuguese SIC channel documentary, her doctors stated that it is unlikely that she will ever be properly rehabilitated into "normal" society. As of 2010 at the age of 27, Oxana resides at a home for the mentally handicapped, where she helps look after the cows in the clinic's farm. She has expressed that she is happiest when among dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shelley7950 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Couldn't you just print it here on the forum? I'm sure most all of us would like to know.. Thanks.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Couldn't you just print it here on the forum? I'm sure most all of us would like to know.. Thanks.... Do you mean the whole report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 How about just the detail that was left out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Branco, do tell, do tell! I would love to know what was omitted. Did the squatch whistle at the guy as he wizzed? Just kidding, but the squatch DID do something in particular to attract the guy's attention didn't it?-Knuck Before I do that, I'll try to post something that was posted on Alabama Bigfoot a few years ago. The Reclusive Forest Primate Chronicles By Tal H. Branco About thirty years ago I heard the continuous yelling and animalistic bellowing of an unknown creature from atop a very rugged and remote mountain in the Ouachita National Forest. It was about 11pm on a very cold, clear December night. Five other deer hunters who sat with me around a roaring campfire were silent and motionless as the awesome volume of the sounds literally vibrated throughout our bodies. The sounds projected anger, frustration and a deeply troubling poignancy. Everyone sat in stunned disbelief for several seconds before the other older person in the group turned to me and asked in a very subdued tone, "What in the name of God was that?" After thinking for a few seconds I replied, "I don't know, but whatever it was, it was not a human, and it is not an animal that I know of." Those sounds would not leave my mind. I had to try to learn their source. After spending the intervening years forsaking all other hunting, prospecting and fishing, and after spending what I now feel was an inordinate amount of time, travel and expense trying to unravel the mystery of those disturbing sounds, it now seems apparent to me that my reply to my fellow hunters was in error. The animal was no doubt some type of a human. What I am about to propose is not new. These opinions will not be read or even considered by those that have already convinced themselves that the creature we call Bigfoot is a monster. And the opinions expressed will certainly not alter the opinions of those who believe one of the creatures "should be killed and presented to science to document their existence." There are compelling reasons to believe the creatures are already known to science, and reasons to believe science has chosen to ignore them for reasons that may become obvious to the public very soon. I am not an anthropologist, biologist or paleontologist, but one does not have to be an expert in any of those fields to reach the same conclusions about the possible lineage of these seemingly enigmatic creatures. While seeing one of these creatures would congeal any objective person's "belief" in their actual existence, thanks to the Internet and its enormous trove of condensed knowledge, there is no reason a rational person cannot access that information and at least concede there is a good possibility that Bigfoot is an enigma because we have chosen to make it one. For about 25 years I accepted the possibility that Bigfoot was, as described by other researchers, North America's great ape. But what I had learned about their traits and habits while doing field research and investigations in eleven States during that time did not indicate these animals were apes, but more like physiologically underdeveloped and physically overdeveloped human. But, I could not understand how that could be possible. Now I think I know what these creatures are, and why they should not be killed or mistreated. (There are situations developing in many parts of this country which may require that individual creatures be taken from the wild, but unfortunately, someone will have to be injured before those situations are recognized and taken seriously.) First I would like to ask the readers that have done field research and investigations regarding the wild and enigmatic primates we call Bigfoot (or Sasquatch or any of the many names bestowed upon them by different groups of people throughout the world) to take a short quiz. OK? The questions are: What freely roaming primate reportedly displays a multitude of unusual features that include differences in the shape of the skull, great body development, bodies covered in hair, and arms that are proportionately longer than those of an ordinary human? What wild primates reportedly show they have the same keen sense of smell, hearing, and sight, including night vision, as that of predatory animals? What rare primate appears to have no perception of either hot or cold weather or rain, and when reportedly captured, refused to sleep in shelters, even in bitterly cold weather? What rare bipedal primates are reported to have unusually offensive odors? What forest primate reportedly travels both in bipedal quadrupedal fashion, and shows great speed when running on two feet? What seldom seen primate is reclusive, wary of humans, makes sounds that may be a form of primitive communication, imitates sounds made by other animals and birds, and can be aggressive when confronted by people or situations that are unusual to it? What fierce, uncivilized primate has been reportedly seen in the wild accompanied by other species of wild creatures? If yours was not a multiple answer which included both Bigfoot and feral children, you failed the test. What does "feral children" have to do with Bigfoot? What do these common traits and abilities mean? Maybe nothing, but consider the recorded facts. You be the investigator. You decide. Here are historical and extrapolated information to ponder. Since the early stages of the development of the human race, there have been children born which, for a multitude of reasons, were accidentally or deliberately abandoned and set free in the wild. Some of the children were at birth, no doubt afflicted with, or later developed conditions that we now identify as autism. History records that in the past many such children with more uncontrollable manifestations of this condition were confined like animals, or cast out of their family group. Such incidents have been recorded all over the world. Many fanciful stories have been written about children being raised in the wild by animals, but there are documented cases of such events that are more sobering. Some of these children were adopted and cared for by animals that we consider to be predators. No doubt some, if not most, of the abandoned children died because they were unable to fend for themselves. In many documented cases wherein the outcast children survived and became like the animals that adopted them, the children were later captured by humans and brought back into civilization. No one knows how many of these abandoned children actually survived in the wild. What if, in the very distant past, early humans bore children that had the special traits and limitations which we now identify as autism, and, lacking the knowledge, ability and/or resources to properly care for those children, their parents allowed them to, or purposely caused them to become feral children. And suppose that on their own, or with help from animals or other feral children, they survived. Suppose that in time, there were feral children from other human groups or tribes that formed family units that in time multiplied naturally. And suppose such outcast children from the different tribes and races survived and grew to adults in small groups, and chose to live near their more adept family and kin to try to learn their ways, or to scavenge and steal from them. Suppose that nature, in ways we do not yet understand, took over to protect these cast-out humans by quickly adapting them to their needs. It is remarkable that children that have become feral have shown certain adaptations in many aspects of their entire bodies in a matter of a few years. Nature, in her infinite wisdom, in many cases provided these feral children with a thick growth of body hair to help protect them from the ravages of cold weather. (Hypertrichosis is a condition which causes an unusual growth of hair over a human's body. Scientists believe the condition can be caused by infection or malnutrition. The condition is reportedly a common symptom of anorexia nervosa, a somewhat common eating disorder in modern humans.) And suppose, as a part of the adaptations they needed to survive, they grew to be massive in body proportions and strong enough to protect themselves and their family members from large predators by using only primitive weapons such as clubs, and unmodified stones as projectiles. Would it not also be understandable that nature modified their feet to support their bulk? Would it be hard to believe that because of their linage and the absence of experienced teachers their offspring would fail to progress in knowledge as did the children of the other humans? During the millions of years that mark the changes in mankind, many phases of development have obviously occurred. Is there a possibility that the descendants of these outcasts have successfully survived alongside modern man, secretly watching, trying to learn from them and at times striving unsuccessfully to gain attention and acceptance from those that cast them out? If so, there is no singular creature in the Bigfoot category. These creatures would exhibit the same diversity in form and appearance as does the modern humans in the various areas of the world. And in the event that definitive DNA evidence is extracted from one of these creatures anywhere in the world, we will likely find that Bigfoot, Sasquatch and the other enigmatic primates are really not monsters or aliens at all because their tracks pass underneath our family tree, and not far from the trunk. © December 1, 2006. Edited January 12, 2011 by Branco 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knuck Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Interesting concept Branco. I already know (for myself) that Sasquatchs are a form of human. JMO-Knuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 PM me the omitted details when you get the chance Branco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts