Drew Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The discovery of the jaws resolved, at least for most scientists, any doubts that the creature was apelike and not, as Weidenreich had argued, humanlike. Based on the fossils, Gigantopithecus is now placed among the Asian apes, a descendant, along with the orangutan, of the earlier ape ancestor Sivapithecus, best known from an 8-million-year-old skull discovered in Pakistan. Its size and ape affiliation suggest Gigantopithecus was a ground-dwelling, fist-walking creature. http://www.uiowa.edu/~bioanth/giganto.html Bill Munns might be able to answer better, but I believe the consensus is, that Giganto was a knuckle walker. There are some in the Bigfoot field who have said that it walked upright, but I believe science has placed it as a knucklewalking ape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 http://www.uiowa.edu/~bioanth/giganto.html Bill Munns might be able to answer better, but I believe the consensus is, that Giganto was a knuckle walker. There are some in the Bigfoot field who have said that it walked upright, but I believe science has placed it as a knucklewalking ape. They believe that because of it's large bulk and close relationship to Orangs. Krantz disagreed because of the jaw flare, I really don't know if any other scientists take this position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Here is my take. As I understand it, the following advantages have been suggested as the impetus for the evolution of bipedalism 1. Better Vision. (seeing over the grass in the Savana) 2. Better able to tolerage heat in the middle of day. (decreasing the surface area of the body exposed to the sun) 3. Long distrance running (hunting animals by chasing them to the pont of exaustion) 4. Free the arms to carry resources (carry food instead of eating where hunted or gathered) There are several disadvantages such such as decreased speed, back pain It seems to me the biggest advantage to bf for bipedalism would be the carrying of resources. I am not aware of a lot of reports of bf carrying food. Efficiency in travel might be another advantage. It would make sense to me that bf would use all fours for speed or steep terrain and 2 legs for carrying resources or long distance travel. Maybe bf are the opposite of great apes in that they primarily walk on 2s but can go to four if needed for short periods instead of vice versa. Just my rambling thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Woodenbong Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The faces of the ones that are here. I got a good look at one, & there are a few pictures. Jodie, thanks for that link. Could you attach the pictures or PM them to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Squatch if you hang here long enough and read enough.. you will run into that. Not saying everyone believes everything all the time however. That is fractionized.. as are many of the possible ideas and reports. It is like fishing and hunting.. different techniques and beliefs across the board.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 And those are good ones Bigfootnis, particularly the effieciency of bipedalism, it burns fewer calories than quadrupedal locomotion. Having longer legs coupled with bipedalism are appropriate adaptations for long distance travel (relatively speaking) than what would be observed in other great ape behavior. This would allow them to hop scotch from forest to forest at night and reach resources in areas presumed unsustaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Your link above is to Artistic portrayals of Biblical figures, with hair all over them. So it was definitely implied, that is why I asked for clarification. While simultaneously throwing a touch of incredulity/ridicule by using the term "biblical creatures" (implying supernatural/spiritual creatures) as opposed to "creature mentioned in the bible"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I'm here more to read than to speak, so perhaps I should keep my mouth shut (but I'm no good at that): I have yet to read of a credible account of sasquatch going on all fours. I don't know how you all feel about Grover Krantz's (IMO far-fetched) theory that bigfoot is a relic population of Gigantopithecus blacki, but I do know that the general consensus amongst scientists is that gigantopithecus was probably a devoted quadraped. How they can be so sure from jawbones and teeth is beyond me Meldrum goes into this in Legend Meets Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 D, just a heads-up. What allows a cheetah to maneuver in sharp turns the way it does are the 2.5 ft tail that acts as a rudder and claws that never retract... Plus a highly flexible spine that doesn't have to support a 500 lb frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 On the other hand, I have hair, vocal recordings, & have seen BF here at least 30 times, probably more. Is it possible you have mistaken the identity? 30 times or more seems like a bit much to come up empty handed while trying to gather proof. I can see how someone can get bigfoot on the brain if they have an encounter. If you're mistaken by bear tracks, it might be time to reassess the source of the other 30. What large animals are in your area? If I learned anything form being an armchair researcher, bigfoot is never that obvious. If you have had 30 chances, that means bf is getting sloppy. Evolution dictates that the sloppy ones would get caught which hasn't happened. It's time they re-ninja up before you catch one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Is it possible you have mistaken the identity? No. 30 times or more seems like a bit much to come up empty handed while trying to gather proof. Where did you get the idea that I'm empty handed? If I learned anything form being an armchair researcher, bigfoot is never that obvious. Not being an armchair researcher, I guess I never learned that. If you get out & look around & learn to believe your eyes & ears, lots of things become more obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted January 11, 2011 Admin Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) Furious, Sasfooty is not out to prove anything to anyone. So she doesn't feel the need to collect or share any evidence at all. She's happy just knowing herself they exist. This allows her to describe many of her exploits without providing any proof, you either take her word for it, or don't. A very convenient position. Edited January 12, 2011 by gigantor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Where did you get the idea that I'm empty handed? My bad. It was assumption based on the fact that you have not been on the cover of Scientific American with these great discoveries. Try to see it from where I'm sitting. 30 times? c'mon. And the armchair researcher part; I did go out in the field. I did look and listen. I have drawn the conclusion that I am not kindred spirits with bf. I am not the chosen one. I don't get to wear a cool costume with maybe a cape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Furious, Sasfooty is not out to prove anything to anyone. So she doesn't feel the need to collect or share any evidence at all. She's happy just knowing herself they exist. This allows her to describe many of her exploits without providing any proof, you either take her word for it, or don't. Convenient, isn't it? I understand. I don't mean to make anyone upset. If it's written here for me to read, I have to ask questions. Edited January 12, 2011 by FuriousGeorge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted January 12, 2011 Admin Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) If it's written here for me to read, I have to ask questions. Knock yourself out, but be warned, Sasfooty is THE unsinkable rubber ducky. and feisty ... Edited January 12, 2011 by gigantor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts