Biped Or All Fours?

[southernyahoo]

So is this is what the so called midtarsal break is all about, the ability to bend the foot enough to walk on all fours?

I'm sure it would help, and in conjunction with reported proportionally shorter legs, longer torso and arms makes for going up hills or mountains a reasonable adaptation. It puts more body mass forward of the driving foot. More of the hind foot in contact with the substrate would provide better traction, as well as conform better to irregular terrain. I hate it when I step on a rock right in the arch of my bare foot, it hurts.

[Guest]

Has anybody here seen the Mike Greene Thermal vid? It is claimed that this creature moves on all fours to sneak up to the stump. But on the subject of quadrupedal movement, look at chimpanzees, they possess extreme upper body strength, more so than any human, their muscles are stronger than a humans' No? Why wouldnt a BF, which is often reported to have a barrel chest, and muscles like a bodybuilder, be able to go to all fours?

[Guest Thepattywagon]

If they possess similar strength for their size as that of a Chimp, Gorilla, or Orangutan, then comparing their ability to run, jump, crawl, etc to ours is not fair to us humans.

Humans do, however, go to a 4x4 stance to obtain an optimal initial burst of speed combined with balance. Examples are sprinters, football players, Sumo wrestlers etc. My feeling is that if we had the extra arm length of BF, chances are we would stay in the 4x4 mode for a longer duration.

I'm totally on board with the quadrupedal thing. It makes perfect sense to me that they would use it for stalking, ambushing, traveling in open exposed areas, or thick brush, where walking upright is not a viable option.

[Guest]

Has anybody here seen the Mike Greene Thermal vid? It is claimed that this creature moves on all fours to sneak up to the stump...

I've seen the video...

And while you can imagine the creature must have gone down on all fours to approach the log, there is no visual verification of that conjecture... it may have done the belly crawl for all you can tell...

I suppose Jon Eric would have insisted it entered a worm hole to make it's stealthy approach...

But I can't imagine something going to all the trouble to conjure a wormhole just for a zagnut bar... they ain't that good...

[bipedalist]

For a Snickers, it would be worth the conjure! JMHO

[Guest BartloJays]

Skunk-

Mike's a friend and is with me in the BFRO, comparing what he captured on video to my own thermal sighting with a sister unit two years prior, the behavior is what is so telling to me more so then what we are able to discern about the anatomy of the filmed subject (such limited view). The subject I witnessed (BFRO report 26065#) moved in a very similar cautious manner and I was able to see it on the ground and standing up "in the clear." To me personally, I think Mike Greene's video is better then the P/G, and that's not so much as a researcher, but more as a witness from my perspective under somewhat similar circumstances and visual tool used (personal experience with black and white thermal). However, if I were a skeptic (for purposes here, defining as complete non-believer in bigfoot phenomenon based on perceived lack of evidence) MG's video does not show nearly enough to sway me an inch because of the limited view and blurriness of the subject and video.

I think Mike's footage will be more important later (possibly validated) with better thermal footage down the road that will hopefully show a clearer "naked" animal and would be virtually impossible to manipulate. B&W thermal under the right circumstances may not be as "sexy" to look at on the surface like color, but it's potentially scientifically damning as within a certain threshold distance (very key) and proper comparisons you could not successfully explain away a naked, hirsute subject....period.

[kbhunter]

"In the meantime, if the PGF shows an actual bigfoot, I see no similar body structure to a cheetah or any other 4x4 critter."

RayG

Hey RayG, I don't think using the PGF as an example, since it is fake and all.

[Doc Holliday]

I dunno... I tried to check and almost ended up engaged... not doin' that again...

doggone it,you beat me to my "stick shift/dont wanna go there" line

oh well,back to the ?,i figure if the gorillas can move quickly w/the "knuckle walk" why not,heck, ive done it sneaking around while hunting.

[Guest]

Bart,

I have always found your thermal experience to be interesting. With reference to Patty, it would seem that the majority of folks reporting bigfoot sightings don't describe a creature that looks like Patty. She seems to be rather unique when it comes to bigfoot type creatures.

I find it interesting, from your description of the creature that you saw in your thermal, that the creature was more associated physically with the more common reports of bigfoot, from around the country, than with Patty. Seeing as how your thermal sighting is closer to the area where Patty was filmed.

I just don't see Patty as a creature that would go down on all fours.

Splash

[Guest]

^But one DOES see a body structure similar to an ape, who definitely DO go 4x4...

[Guest]

I just don't see Patty as a creature that would go down on all fours.

Splash7,

You have one representative creature on film, and you can't base your entire way of thinking on that one creature. The animals further south, do go in 4X4 mode quite often, and have leaner bodies to aid this. For all we know, Patty may have just given birth and still carrying the weight of her pregnancy on her, keeping her from able to get into 4X4 mode easily.

[BobbyO]

Skunk-

Mike's a friend and is with me in the BFRO, comparing what he captured on video to my own thermal sighting with a sister unit two years prior, the behavior is what is so telling to me more so then what we are able to discern about the anatomy of the filmed subject (such limited view). The subject I witnessed (BFRO report 26065#) moved in a very similar cautious manner and I was able to see it on the ground and standing up "in the clear." To me personally, I think Mike Greene's video is better then the P/G, and that's not so much as a researcher, but more as a witness from my perspective under somewhat similar circumstances and visual tool used (personal experience with black and white thermal). However, if I were a skeptic (for purposes here, defining as complete non-believer in bigfoot phenomenon based on perceived lack of evidence) MG's video does not show nearly enough to sway me an inch because of the limited view and blurriness of the subject and video.

I think Mike's footage will be more important later (possibly validated) with better thermal footage down the road that will hopefully show a clearer "naked" animal and would be virtually impossible to manipulate. B&W thermal under the right circumstances may not be as "sexy" to look at on the surface like color, but it's potentially scientifically damning as within a certain threshold distance (very key) and proper comparisons you could not successfully explain away a naked, hirsute subject....period.

Go the Bartman...;thumbsup;

[Guest Biggjimm]

The arm length is proportionately longer and helps a great deal. Surprisingly

on a related note, one might want to read the book "Last Human" It is published

by the Smithsonian Institute and features some good discussion on the biomechanics

and locomotor capability of known fossil hominids. Surprisingly, recent studies of

the genra Australopithecus, Paranthropus as well as Homo habilis, H.

georgicus, H. ergaster all strongly suggest that the afore mentioned species

possessed the mid tarsal-joint ( all the paleontologists involved reached this

conclusion independently) and the academic body that wrote the book felt that

this was an adaptation for a animal that occasionally drops to all fours. Meldrum

has demonstrated that the feature is found in known fossil footprints as well.

The main point is this: A feature described in a creature that modern science does

not accept as reality is now being described in fossils of confirmed similar animals.

If the feature did allow for the fossil specimens to drop to all fours, then it

is reasonable to assume that it would aid a sasquatch in this manner as well.

Edited September 12, 2010 by Biggjimm

[Guest]

^And once again, obscure technical information shows up to help authenticate BF evidence!

[Guest BartloJays]

Splash-

I apologize it took me so long to respond as I've been obsessively watching football all weekend on my free time (LOL).

Anyway, yes and no regarding Patty imo. Before getting to know Bob Gimlin personally, I was always about 50-50 on the reality of the film subject (many concerns) being what it's purported to be and contrary to what some people would falsely assume in attempting to generalize people associated with the subject, I've *never* had a huge emotional attachment to the film. More or less, the consistent sighting reports, plus passive interest by my older brother and cousin, was much more influential in facilitating my interest in the subject as a whole 30+ years ago..... before actively researching and participating in the field about 7-8 yrs ago. A passion for the subject and having personal vindication 3 yrs ago is what drives me now.

Thanks to many one on ones face-to-face with Gimlin over the years (much of which having nothing to do w bigfoots) I have much more confidence in it being genuine, but still would not be "shocked" if one day the film is somehow proven to be a hoax. For what it's worth, most people who know me, including Gimlin, know where I stand in regards to the authenticity of the film.

Having said that, as far as "tale of the tape" comparing Patty to the subject I witnessed that night in WA through the therm...assuming Patty's biological of course. Although there were perceived similarities, there was no doubt some major anatomical deviations between subjects, including the likelihood they were not of the same sex. I say that because I saw nothing indicating female through the subject profile....modest hips, no discernible breasts etc... Furthermore, other noticeable deviations included what appeared to be no sagittal crest, a disproportionate body (hourglass) and uneven weight distribution favoring the subject's upper extremities 2-1 in my estimation....for all intents purposes, I consider Patty proportioned not uniform exact, but fairly evenly. The similarities with Patty to me were mostly upstairs with size and absent neck. Arm length was significant and very prominent for the one I saw, where Patty's appear fairly long but I concede it may also be a bit of an illusion.

I see what you mean regarding the unlikelihood of Patty being comfortable on all fours, but to be honest, my subject after the fact (seeing clear body profile while standing in the clear after seeing it transition on ground) didn't appear as if it could move on all fours the way it did either; hence, that's what blows me away to this day was its agileness and ability to maneuver naturally using body leverage.

Also, no that it matters, but Bluff Creek and the location of my sighting in WA are about 450-500 miles apart respectively, as the crow flies.

If you haven't seen it yet, The pic below is a commissioned digital artist rendition I recently had Canadian artist Brian Cundle (artwork is on ebay) create as a commemorative poster-piece for me. He used my anatomical description, my half-ass re-creations with limited artistic ability (my re-creations were meant more to show different positioning), photographs of the immediate area where I saw it, pics of other animals through the x200xp unit etc.....based on my memory, he pretty much nailed it aside from maybe needing to slightly manipulate both the arm length and traps just a hair...but not enough for him to continue tinkering with. He did a great job!

Bart Cutino's Thermal sighting POSTER.pdf

Edited September 14, 2010 by BartloJays