Guest Sallaranda Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 The first hominids known for sure in Asia are about 1.8 million years old. It very likely extends to well before 2 million years ago and it is certainly possible that some of them were more distantly related or to put it another way, they weren't all necessarily our ancestors. Homo floresiensis has features that suggest that it is much more distantly related than erectus so it is even likely that much more distantly related hominids have lived in Asia for more than 2 million years. Modern humans are rather unique in that our lineage is almost certainly from Africa from a small group that left about 60,000 years ago. That is confirmed by the mitochodrial DNA that is inherited from mothers. Recent studies do show that some populations do contain the genes of more ancient hominids that probably left Africa maybe 800,000 years ago and became genetically isolated by about half a million years ago. Melaneasians have Denisova and Neanderthal DNA and probably all non Africans have some Neanderthal DNA. There were populations of hominids that lived in Asia long before the ancestors of Denisova and Neanderthal probably left Africa. It is entirely possible that some cold adapted hominid could cross into North America when the oceans were much lower from the last ice age or even an earlier ice age. So this "bigfoot" might not be as closely related to homosapein as I may have once thought? I've always assumed it would be a relatively close ancestor. I suppose it's also entirely possible that there are fossils of million year old apes in NA that haven't been discovered due to lack of excavation efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 So this "bigfoot" might not be as closely related to homosapein as I may have once thought? I've always assumed it would be a relatively close ancestor. I suppose it's also entirely possible that there are fossils of million year old apes in NA that haven't been discovered due to lack of excavation efforts. Sallandra, it is my belief that the hominid fossil record is but a fraction of what there is to know.. it takes special conditions to make the fossils and in most situations I suspect it does not happen. So really, we may only have a percentage of what there is to know.. We cannot seem to get a handle on the big guys at all and that does not make sense to me either lol. There is some question about capability of movement from Europe to NA that way rather than the standard from Russia to Alaska.. so many mysteries !! And disagreement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sallaranda Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Sallandra, it is my belief that the hominid fossil record is but a fraction of what there is to know.. it takes special conditions to make the fossils and in most situations I suspect it does not happen. So really, we may only have a percentage of what there is to know.. We cannot seem to get a handle on the big guys at all and that does not make sense to me either lol. There is some question about capability of movement from Europe to NA that way rather than the standard from Russia to Alaska.. so many mysteries !! And disagreement Yeah, it's a pretty gaping skeptical argument. It's so difficult to say for certain that apes couldn't live in North America at a certain time period. It was just an argument I had heard from a skeptic and wanted to know how to rebut! Thanks for the reply. PS I agree with your assessment on fossil records. They are remarkably incomplete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 (edited) Another thing that really bugs me that I do not get is how hard it is to get some people to tell their story. Sometimes, its like they tell it to everybody but you. lol I get that it is traumatic.. but if people are looking so hard to find someone who will listen then HEY!! Right here !! Looking to talk to as many people as I can.. hopefully that helps you and it sure helps me. Just want to see one. & learn baby learn.. And what I could have or should have wrote is: I am really interested in animal behavior. Also the physical look these creatures have and their variability. Love to hear more stories and if you have one glad to talk private. Edited February 15, 2011 by treeknocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Imagine this.. makes you think twice about entering cover.. it was always a worry when I was in grizz country, so I have a special appreciation for those of you out there who are.I prefer quiet but with bear that is not such a great idea. For these guys in this case it does not sound like it either. Good points Xion. SY Can I ask what time of day or night that was when tht situation happened ? Now with more cat, bear and possibly these big fellas, expeditions in certain parts of the country seem to get a bit more intense regarding the term watch. So.. I guess what does not make sense here to me is... how can I be secretive and get close to wildlife for observation and possible pic taking or just not disturbing anything if I need to be watching constantly for grizzly? Or sleeping sasquatches ? TK, that incident happened between 9 AM and 12 noon. We were just hiking & scouting around. Several of us went back into that area with cameras rolling shortly after but didn't hear or see anything further as to what it was. We don't have Grizzleys, and Black bear are rather scarce as well but Cougar, Bobcat, Coyote and Red Wolf could have been candidates. I'd say if you have access to private or restricted areas which satisfy the criteria discussed earlier and just walking beaten paths that aren't as noisey alone or with a partner but not talking loudly, it would be possible to come upon one sleeping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ThePattyArcade Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 One thing that I do not understand....how can skeptics dismiss all the evidence and sightings of Bigfoot? Of course, there are definitely some people who have told have told lies to get attention and whatever... I understand how it could be easy to mistake a bear or other animal for a Sasquatch from a long distance away, and when it's concealed by trees and stuff, but what about people who have claimed to see Sasquatch up close, and have been able to describe it's facial features, build, height, etc? Unless you were drunk/on drugs why would you imagine something like that? I am no wildlife expert, but up close, bears and apes look very different to me. I am not trying to bash skeptical thinkers, I am just genuinely curious of how something like Bigfoot could be rationally explained as being the product of an overactive imagination, hoaxes etc for so many years And don't get me started on the footprint stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Patty, The face to face (so to speak) sightings are the reason I'm actively looking. In those cases there are only a few possibilities. The tracks I'll bite. The only time they matter is the context they are found. Remote location, off trail in the middle of nowhere, you got my vote. Anywhere else highly suspect IMO. Everything else imagination run amok while wandering around on the woods at nite. When you go on a witch hunt you find witches...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ThePattyArcade Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Patty,The face to face (so to speak) sightings are the reason I'm actively looking. In those cases there are only a few possibilities. The tracks I'll bite. The only time they matter is the context they are found. Remote location, off trail in the middle of nowhere, you got my vote. Anywhere else highly suspect IMO. Everything else imagination run amok while wandering around on the woods at nite. When you go on a witch hunt you find witches...... What strikes me as I browse the Bigfoot Forums is that there are many people who argue passionately for the existence of Bigfoot- surely they must be very confident in and have a strong belief in what they have seen to do so On the subject of footprints, may I ask what is your opinion of the Bossburg cripplefoot tracks? Do you think they could have been faked? Thanks for replying to my post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 What strikes me as I browse the Bigfoot Forums is that there are many people who argue passionately for the existence of Bigfoot- surely they must be very confident in and have a strong belief in what they have seen to do so On the subject of footprints, may I ask what is your opinion of the Bossburg cripplefoot tracks? Do you think they could have been faked? Thanks for replying to my post If you haven't seen it already, check out this article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) I'm very confident and passionate about my experiences but that doesn't make it true to anyone but me. You find on this froum and others all types of people some are here just to debate, some on their own crusade, some actually doing field work and exchanging information and some just looking for attention. Their all welcome. But some people were very passionate about the world being flat. I think Bigfoot could exist but I struggle with some of the assumptions people make who IMO have very little real outdoor experience. The track you mention IMO could be real, it would be very unlikley that a hoaxer would go to that much trouble to fake a track. Edited February 20, 2011 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) If you haven't seen it already, check out this article. Hi PattyA, two sets of comments from me: This is my opinion from reading about it over and over decades ago: Any film associated with Ivan Marx is entertainment only. The tracks were observed of cripple foot by many people and there were a lot of them. (Ha ha, the tracks ) There were written descriptions, possibly in that reference but I did not see them, (admittedly I have not the time to thoroughly review it now) about how the maker of the tracks went over a fence easily and out on to the ice of the river. Apparently there were significant numbers of people awed by the trail of the tracks due to certain elements I do not recall.. that along with what Krantz stated suggests they were real. I believe Doc Meldrum also felt this way but I do not know for sure. Regarding why some people feel so strongly about bigfoot being real is because they may have seen it well enough to discern it from being a bear or a person. If this happens to you .. just imagine the consequences. Some of the folks who do not do much outdoor may well have friends or family members that they know who they believe. Others just believe.. I believe I will have another beer. Edited February 21, 2011 by treeknocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I would say that PEEKIES don't make sense, but they really kinda do. We are bar none, the shiniest thing in the woods these days from the big guys perspective. Beats a jay fight by a country mile. I think it's the fire. I mean, fire...like WOW....that's the primal human baseline of "how the hell did you do THAT?!?!". Control FIRE?!?! It's probably like a Prometheus moment for em when they are young and see us. They probably think other stuff that we do is weird, but I'm thinking PRIMAL now and fire is the heart of it. It factors into why they don't just eat us...lol....LORDS OF FIRE HAVE BACKUP! I'm just riffin now, and trying to put my mind into proto. Results may vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What they do makes perfect sense to them. The problem seems to come in when they don't do as we expect. In truth our way of thinking is still a fairly "new" and evolving construct. Look at the difference between people born in the 1930's and the young adults of today. I think, I heard something yrs ago regarding the difference between a Neanderthal's mind and ours. (not saying BF is a neanderthal!) Just that the difference is in more than physical years or brain development. I would tend to think, to find one you'd have to think like one. That may be almost an impossibility in this day and age. Unlearning is almost as difficult as unhearing. Just a random thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) What they do makes perfect sense to them. The problem seems to come in when they don't do as we expect. In truth our way of thinking is still a fairly "new" and evolving construct. Look at the difference between people born in the 1930's and the young adults of today. I think, I heard something yrs ago regarding the difference between a Neanderthal's mind and ours. (not saying BF is a neanderthal!) Just that the difference is in more than physical years or brain development. I would tend to think, to find one you'd have to think like one. That may be almost an impossibility in this day and age. Unlearning is almost as difficult as unhearing. Just a random thought. Lets just say communication is key Also it is interesting what likebluepez sez. The fire thing.. I recall some reports with them messing with a fire pit and that actually does make sense.. but the status we give them generally does not seem to.. Edited February 21, 2011 by treeknocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I would say that PEEKIES don't make sense, but they really kinda do. We are bar none, the shiniest thing in the woods these days from the big guys perspective. Beats a jay fight by a country mile. I think it's the fire. I mean, fire...like WOW....that's the primal human baseline of "how the hell did you do THAT?!?!". Control FIRE?!?! It's probably like a Prometheus moment for em when they are young and see us. They probably think other stuff that we do is weird, but I'm thinking PRIMAL now and fire is the heart of it. It factors into why they don't just eat us...lol....LORDS OF FIRE HAVE BACKUP! I'm just riffin now, and trying to put my mind into proto. Results may vary. If all that "floats BF's boat" our X-mas lights must be the icing on the cake!!! Going to point out, different physical descriptions, so behavioral variences ect....it's time people work with WHAT IS, instead of trying to make the evidence fit our expectations. People report what they see to the best of their ability. Deal with it. It's very likely there actually are several different types of BF running around. Who cares if their sub-species...try working with the behavior demonstrated in each geographical region. The southern Boogers behave like the Almasty The LBL boogers act more aggressive, seem to fit the wisconson dogmen type The PNW grayish furred are found all across northern zones Deal with WHAT IS. No one I know of can make BF's act to spec.....that leaves us the evidence...too bad if the evidence to date doesn't suit you. None of it ,if taken in context ,is all that confusing or nonsensical. In the southern states as well as russia BF will take a food handout....People do it all the time. The PNW type, for lack of better name, are more self-sufficent and reclusive... so what? The unaptly named baboonish nosed dogmen display a shocking lack of social-intelligence skills and will mess you up. Hense they must be a lot wilder. This comes from listening to reports, looking at the geographical areas of the sightings. NONE of this is rocket science. Ask yourself, does other animal behavior confuse you? Just because the name is BF doen't change much....raccoons, bears, homeless people ALL DUMPSTER-DIVE....during the depression folks went door-to-door for handouts. Each Bigfoot is an individual and will act accordingly. Despite what YOU think it should of, could of , would of done. JMO it's time for self-proclaimed "researchers" to grow-up and just follow the evidence. ALL of it. (if anyone was offended by this post, go watch a George Carlin marathon) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts