Are Other Hominins (Hominoids) Alive Today?

[salubrious]

Most of the squatchy action is, I assume, in western Yakima County. There is BLM land, National Forest land, and, of course, Mt. Rainier National Park. So sure, there's lots of "wilderness" there, and there is definitely some rugged terrain, but it's also federal land. It's been surveyed 9 ways to Sunday by the Feds -who are mandated to conduct inventory and monitoring. Then you've got two major research universities in the state, and a few dozen smaller colleges scattered around and within striking distance of all that squatchiness. There are definitely multiple "Saskeptics" working at colleges and universities in Washington, with grad students doing field work every day in squatch-central. So far, none of them have hauled in a bigfoot, nor have any of them even managed a decent photo on their phone.

This of course says nothing about existence or not. I admired scientists a lot in my youth, but as I have grown older I have come to realize that they are human like the rest of us and prone to the same failings.

Back in the late 1970s the Peregrine Falcon was supposed to be extinct in Minnesota and Wisconsin. But I flew hang gliders (still do) and hung out a lot on hills that created lift that soaring birds like. We saw Peregrins all the time. The reason 'scientists' did not see them was because they did not understand that the bird likes to soar in lift rather than sink (you can't soar in sink ), and did not know where to find lifting air anyway. So they essentially did not know where to look. Of course it didn't help that the species was already rare. So we greeted the announcement that they had "successfully re-introduced" the Peregrins by hatching them on the top of a Minneapolis office building with a certain disgust; disgust in seeing their arrogance.

BF is a similar problem. There seems to be an assumption that if you just go out and look, you'll find it. BF is not like a rare rock that just sits there. Or like a fox I caught in my headlights last night that did not seem to mind being flooded with light. BF is rare and crafty. In addition, humans practice an arrogance of having seen it all. To that end, the first impediment is shoes. As long as you wear shoes that have a cushy sole, you will lead with your heal with each step (transmitting your presence to every animal in the forest) and in addition you will look down at a 45 degree angle to watch where you are stepping; essentially you will see *nothing* in the forest...

I can get a lot more in depth about the walking thing, but- the main point is that arrogance functions exactly the same way as stupidity. IOW we are stupid in the forest, and easily evaded **by an entire population** that is crafty in the forest and is motivated to avoid us.

Additionally, I point you to the '3-mile trackway in northern Minnesota'. This video poses a much more serious problem for any skeptic than they realize. It also points to why we won't find a body anytime soon. To understand why, you have to know something about tracking and I find that most skeptics are completely in the dark on that subject (none that I have met knows what a pressure release is or what they mean). The significance however is simple: we humans stick to trails for the most part, and avoid walls of brush and places that look hard to get through. So easily 90% of the land is not really experienced- we stick to trails! From that video, BF does not. It goes where it wants and *even miles from the nearest human* is careful to practice what is called 'counter tracking' technique. I can explain this in a lot more depth if desired!

Edited April 21, 2012 by salubrious

[Guest Jodie]

Even if there was evidence of a cataclysm 10,000 years ago, why would the entire homo genus be wiped out worldwide except for a single species? Most of the potential "relic hominoids" are said to live in mountainous environments, which would preclude demise by flooding. If there were some meteor impact with fire raining from the heavens, then that wouldn't be a worldwide phenomenon and there isn't any evidence that I know of that would support that kind of claim.

If there was interspecies mating, then we should be able to determine that from DNA research, which is still ongoing. However, it still wouldn't make sense for an entire species to be absorbed by another species. It does raise a question that would need further investigation, but I can't think of anyone proposing that such an event has happened with any other species.

I'm thinking we are an amalgamation of the surviving variations. There is evidence of some kind of intermingling in our DNA with the new studies for neandertal and the denisovans. Up until now, it might not have occurred to anyone to ask the question, but with the new discoveries in the last three years that might change.

There is no doubt that a mass extinction event happened 12,000 years or so ago, most probably from some extraterrestrial event. If you don't buy the supernova theory the other one floating around is the galatic superwave theory.

http://www.starburstfound.org/YDextinct/p3.html

So the demise of the megafauna would have been due to a number of factors: • Death or illness due to an excessive dose of ionizing radiation, both UV and cosmic ray, due to elevated solar flare activity and a ground-contacting solar proton event. • Death due to famine since vegetation would have withered during the cool arid Younger Dryas climate and preceding Intra Alleröd Cold Peak. • Death due to heat stroke and smoke inhalation from exposure to the firestorm that produced the black mat layer evident today in North America and Europe. • Death due to drowning in the glacial meltwater deluges that swept across the continent. • Death due to poisoning by noxious fumes released from the meteoric ice vaporized in the atmosphere.

[Guest COGrizzly]

IMO, some very good posts here.

salubrious for one, plus one in fact.

[Guest BFSleuth]

COG, I agree this thread has been generating some excellent discussion and food for thought.

Salubrious has a +1 from me. Well thought out presentation and I concur with your position that most people that go into the woods are unaware of how easy they are to identify from the noise they make. Yes, most people are also looking down at the ground where they are going to step to keep from tripping or twisting an ankle. Another factor is that while there are a lot of people that get out for hikes, they are almost always on a trail. Very few venture into off trail hiking or pure "bushwacking". That leaves the great majority of the great outdoors untouched and unseen.

Jodie, this starburst theory is a new one for me, and I'll also need to study more from your links on the deluge theory, but it still wouldn't account for selective total extinction of what we like to call the highest order of genus. This is I think the crux of the conundrum. It is difficult to believe that the most intelligent and well equipped collection of species would dwindle to a single species. No other higher order of genus seems to have suffered similar decline. The recent discoveries confirming that we had "brethren" as near as 10,000 years ago begs the question of whether all they really did die off, or whether we have really "overlooked" (or ignored) the fact that they are still here. Go back and read through the Bayanov paper I referenced in the OP and note that up until about 300 years ago hairy wild men were catalogued as the highest order of animal by the best minds of the time.

Denisovan and Neanderthal DNA, if I remember correctly, account for about 5% of current homo sapiens sapiens DNA in select populations. We live in very exciting times as DNA helps map out our ancestry and relationships between species.

I'm of the opinion that there are several species of hominoids that still exist throughout the world.

[Guest MikeG]

Salubrious.

It's a little unfair in my view to hold scientists in lower regard because of a mistake over the existence of a falcon. Ornithologists (plus zoologists and other biologists) rely on a combination of field studies and reports from the public and from bird-watchers, wardens, guides, etc. This isn't a perfect system, as you can imagine.

Did you ever report the existence of these birds? No? Well, don't you think you ought to have done, particularly if you were going to base your view of all scientists for the next 30 or 40 years on this? Did you ring up a university, or an ornithology club when you heard that the bird had been declared extinct in the area?

The reason that scientists didn't see them wasn't because they didn't understand about soaring in rising air. That is assigning your thoughts to their actions without evidence. It is much more likely it was because they either didn't know about the existence of this particular piece of regular rising air, or because when they visited there were no peregrines visible.

I am the proud holder for the most northerly ever sighting of the African Black-footed Cat, some 400 miles out of its previously known range (in the northern Kafue National park, Zambia). All the books showed the species to exist south and west of the Zambezi river. I had a clear unambiguous sighting from a distance of 5 yards for at least 5 minutes, and am very familiar with the alternative possibilities, such as a juvenile African Wildcat. It was a 100% certain sighting. Does that mean I hold the scientists who defined the range in contempt for having got it wrong?

Of course not.

I was delighted to be able to find the South African based Black-footed Cat research group and make a full field report to them. They were thrilled to receive it. If I had followed the logic of your actions and position I would have kept the sighting to myself, but told everyone on an internet forum that the scientists were useless because they didn't know what I knew.

The rest of your comments are very fair and insightful, which leaves me even more puzzled by the peregrine falcon thing.

Mike

[Guest Kronprinz Adam]

.

...Bayanov, in Historical Evidence for the Existence of Relect Hominoids (http://bigfootforums...lect-hominoids/), notes that throughout history there are references to wild hairy men of a variety of shapes and sizes around the world. A common theme among them is their dwelling in remote areas such as mountains or bogs or deep forest, places that are difficult and fearful for men to go.....

Hi Bfsleuth!! Bayanov's document is a very good one!! I remember some travel program about Syria or Lebanon (I do not remember very well), and they mentioned a very beautiful water spring, which now is some kind of natural park.. They mentioned that in antiquity, the place was called "the satyr cave" for obvious reasons: ancient legents that there were, satyrs were living in nearby caves...

I liked a lot the description of these satyrs made by Bayanov, and the controversial topic of the "hairy ones" mentioned in biblical times. I also enjoyed the traditional russian stories...and I noticed immediately a parallel between some of these stories and the few stories I collected about guatemalan Sisimites. Are these universal myths? According to Bayanov, the russian creatures were considered sobrenatural wood devils, and the words they used to describe them are synonim of devils.

Same issue happens with the central american creatures...they were also considered wood devils and the word used for them (Tzitzimitl) was a generic name for any mythological aztec evil apparitions...the meaning evolved and was used to describe large apemen and mischievous "goblins"....

What was the description of these "Sisimites"...some recent books state it simply "mythical gorilla-like creatures"...

Some legends in Southeast Asia and Himalayas seem also very similar....

Greetings.

K. Adam.

[Guest BFSleuth]

Very interesting KA. I think the phenomenon of "boogy men", to put a general term on it, is distributed worldwide. If you haven't had a chance to read it, you should also read Sanderson's Abominable Snowmen, Legend Come to Life (1961). It is available to read here on the web: http://www.sacred-texts.com/lcr/abs/index.htm

In this book he documents similar myths, legends, and evidence of wild hairy men and apes scattered throughout the world. Every continent except Antarctica has these stories.

Since the scientific revolution these stories have been ascribed to myths and legends only, a product of over active imaginations from deep in the psyche of humans. However, it may very well be that these myths started because of active interaction with other species and as humans advanced in technology, agriculture, and changing the landscape (deforestation, etc.) they were likely pushed back to pockets of forest and mountains. Over time I'm sure they were greatly reduced in numbers and so faded into myth.

[Guest Cervelo]

Interesting point about the Coelacanth and technology....

Some dude with a row boat and a hand line found a known species that was thought to be extinct but we can't find Bigfoot in our own backyard... wow talk about having your head buried in something for sure

Edited April 22, 2012 by Cervelo

[Guest Jodie]

Jodie, this starburst theory is a new one for me, and I'll also need to study more from your links on the deluge theory, but it still wouldn't account for selective total extinction of what we like to call the highest order of genus. This is I think the crux of the conundrum. It is difficult to believe that the most intelligent and well equipped collection of species would dwindle to a single species. No other higher order of genus seems to have suffered similar decline. The recent discoveries confirming that we had "brethren" as near as 10,000 years ago begs the question of whether all they really did die off, or whether we have really "overlooked" (or ignored) the fact that they are still here. Go back and read through the Bayanov paper I referenced in the OP and note that up until about 300 years ago hairy wild men were catalogued as the highest order of animal by the best minds of the time.

Denisovan and Neanderthal DNA, if I remember correctly, account for about 5% of current homo sapiens sapiens DNA in select populations. We live in very exciting times as DNA helps map out our ancestry and relationships between species.

I'm of the opinion that there are several species of hominoids that still exist throughout the world.

I don't disagree, but it may be why in combination with other things, that they aren't commonly known now. They very well may be on their way to extinction, if not already there, in some areas of the world. The mystery to me is why this remains an unacceptable hypothesis when there could be many contributing factors for pro-existence now or in the past.

If the world population dwindled after a series of catastrophes, and the different versions of homo were even remotely compatible, it only makes sense that the different species would intermingle. Genetic compatibilities would determine which admixture would be the most predominant. There could have been more than one successful type of intermingling depending on how many compatible types were left to mingle, with the resultant population or populations going in one direction and the other in the opposite. In other words, de-evolution from our POV might have occurred. I really found this book to be very interesting exploring that topic:

http://www.uprightape.net/

[Guest Cervelo]

Guys here's a great example of a parallel that you might be able to get your head around.

Canines, felines in the wild they will hunt each other down in a heart beat and eliminate the other and one will dominate the landscape (wolves, lions)

Which begs the question how did puney old us dominate one so smart and strong as Bigfoot?

[Guest Jodie]

Wrong forum, what I said was extremely profound, concise, and funny, but I guess I'll have to save it for the PM section...oh well, the moment passed. Timing and place is everything.

Edited April 22, 2012 by Jodie

[Guest Cervelo]

Hah I'm glad thats over I was certain I'd be the first!!!!

Whew thanks for taking that bullet for me, I think you could have left it up.

My response was going to be you could "handle" that part of the autopsy when we get a body LOL!

[Guest]

Guys here's a great example of a parallel that you might be able to get your head around.

Canines, felines in the wild they will hunt each other down in a heart beat and eliminate the other and one will dominate the landscape (wolves, lions)

Which begs the question how did puney old us dominate one so smart and strong as Bigfoot?

Superior numbers and knowledge would be my best guess.

BF may be very "wood wise" and cautious/crafty/etc, but it has shown little to no evidence of any technology beyond the most basic sort or clubs and other blunt instruments, and virtually no evidence of fire use, indicating a high-order, but sub-human level of intelligence.

Edited April 22, 2012 by slabdog

[salubrious]

Salubrious.

It's a little unfair in my view to hold scientists in lower regard because of a mistake over the existence of a falcon. Ornithologists (plus zoologists and other biologists) rely on a combination of field studies and reports from the public and from bird-watchers, wardens, guides, etc. This isn't a perfect system, as you can imagine.

Did you ever report the existence of these birds? No? Well, don't you think you ought to have done, particularly if you were going to base your view of all scientists for the next 30 or 40 years on this? Did you ring up a university, or an ornithology club when you heard that the bird had been declared extinct in the area?

Actually we *did* report the presence of the Peregrin several times, once when someone gave a presentation from the Raptor Center (rehabilitation program for injured birds, at that time at the University of Minnesota) gave a presentation to our club and we also reported it to the DNR in both Minnesota and Wisconsin (our flying sites were on the boarders of both states). We were categorically ignored in spite of the fact that several people in the club at the time were avid bird watchers and the like, with in-depth descriptions of the bird they were seeing and its flying habits. We fly with soaring birds all the time so you would think they would be interested in our observations. But we were 'unqualified' although I might be unfair in that latter comment; we never got an inquiry from any of the organizations.

Imagine- you put a lot of work into bringing the species back and a bunch of crazies that jump off hills are telling you "Aw shucks, we see them down here all the time....". The most powerful human motivator in the world is the need to look good, failing that, to not look bad. We were an inconvenient truth- bad for the career. That's my take anyway- I don't see them as any more or less human than the rest of us.

Now of course this is not about a bird. I'm calling 'scientists' out on this BF thing. I was **8 feet** from one that was nearly 10 feet tall so *I* know they are there... The reason 'scientists' can't find one is they don't know how to look (lacking the skills required and especially the understanding) or where to look. Instead they are treating BF like any other so-called 'dumb' animal, IOW exercising human arrogance, which is a poor substitute for what is needed for success.

Which begs the question how did puney old us dominate one so smart and strong as Bigfoot?

See: "Born to Run" by Christopher McDougall, in a nutshell our ability to run long distances is the answer to that. It may not seem obvious right now but if you read the book its obvious in spades. Or you could take my word for it.

Edited April 23, 2012 by salubrious

[Guest]

Yes, I recall reading a little something on that. The ability to run long distances for long periods of time, gave us an advantage in range, plus it enabled us to run prey down. The animal would run in panicked bursts, and exhaust itself. William Shatner's show, weird or what covered the barefoot runner thing not to long ago.