VAfooter Posted September 9, 2012 Admin Share Posted September 9, 2012 I used to think that the dogmen stories were either misidentifications of normal BF or some sort of deformed BF. Now I am not so sure. I think that they may be a separate species altogether, and much rarer (fortunately!!!) than the typical BF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 We'd be better to get proof positive of one species before thinking about multiple species of BF. I agree, it doesn't matter whatsoever if there is or isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 I am of the opinion that the varied reports show at least three kinds of relic hominids of sorts. The classic bigfoot, descended from gigantopithecus, more human-looking kinds related to Neanderthals and baboon-like creatures called dogmen. That's the "big three" that I envision when I read the varied reports. The classic is most commonly sited, dogmen around the Great Lakes area and Wisconcin and the Neanderthals elsewhere - it seems to me that there were tons of "wildmen" sightings in the 1800's. I'd hazard a guess that these were the Neanderthal types - really, if one sat down a dozen feet from you while you were fishing and tried to have a conversation with it.... you weren't talking with a 900-lb hairy primate, right? Or if was wearing the remnants of clothing, it wasn't related to a huge gorilla. It's actually unusual that there is only one species of human right now on the planet (unless you could chimps, orangutans and gorillas), at other times there were up to three species running around the world in our large extended family bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 I hear all kinds of possibilities. I was wondering if anyone already has access to a database and already tried to sort them by size or demeanor. If not, I could see if I can manage something, but I am not that excel friendly Databases drive me up the wall. I don't really LIKE databases, unlike the nerd's Nerd type. Not mentioning any names. I don't mean anyone in particular. Not referring to anyone on here who has a database fetish or anything. mmm oh come to think of it, I might be married to one of those...... > I am not sure about color--as has been pointed out, it might vary within a species. I think gibbons come in different colors, for example. Quoting wiki on gibbons: Depending on species and gender, gibbons' fur coloration varies from dark to light brown shades, and anywhere between black and white. It is rare to see a completely white gibbon. So I would really hesitate to use color as a major criterion in this case. Although, after reading about gibbons, a lesser ape, they sound sort of similar to BF in some ways, but that is another thread. I mention gibbons also because my post on blobsquatches picture looks like a dang gibbon to me. And it's about medium sized, as far as I can tell without anything reliable for scale in the pic. The pic was taken inside Fresno city limits, near a tree lined canal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 I hear all kinds of possibilities. I was wondering if anyone already has access to a database and already tried to sort them by size or demeanor. If not, I could see if I can manage something, but I am not that excel friendly Databases drive me up the wall. I don't really LIKE databases, unlike the nerd's Nerd type. Not mentioning any names. I don't mean anyone in particular. Not referring to anyone on here who has a database fetish or anything. mmm oh come to think of it, I might be married to one of those...... > I am not sure about color--as has been pointed out, it might vary within a species. I think gibbons come in different colors, for example. Quoting wiki on gibbons: Depending on species and gender, gibbons' fur coloration varies from dark to light brown shades, and anywhere between black and white. It is rare to see a completely white gibbon. So I would really hesitate to use color as a major criterion in this case. Although, after reading about gibbons, a lesser ape, they sound sort of similar to BF in some ways, but that is another thread. I mention gibbons also because my post on blobsquatches picture looks like a dang gibbon to me. And it's about medium sized, as far as I can tell without anything reliable for scale in the pic. The pic was taken inside Fresno city limits, near a tree lined canal. Bobby O posted the database link a few threads ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 9, 2012 SSR Team Share Posted September 9, 2012 I just wish whatever the " Dogman " is, it would get a name change.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 I just wish whatever the " Dogman " is, it would get a name change.. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I'd speculate that there would be different species or subspecies etc, but obviously that is just speculation. For me, the reports vary so dramatically, from large "ape" like creatures (stereotypical pacific north west Sasquatch), to smaller, more aggressive creatures in the south (skunk ape etc), to so called "wild men" who are described as being eerily similar to humans in many ways. Also, these don't even begin to take into account the reports from other areas of the world, other continents etc! All in all, as someone said, it will be an inevitable question that will be asked even more once the existence of one species is proven without doubt. However, it is still an interesting question to pose, and for me, I'd suspect there are different "types". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mudder Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I would only assume that there are different races of BF just as there are humans. Humans come in different shapes and colors. This makes me wonder -- If BF is the missing link, can BF and humans breed to make a crossbreed? -- (This would only hopefully take place in a test tube, of course, lol.) Different "species" of BF -- I don't know. The manwolf, if it exists, is a totally different species, I would believe, especially if its legs are bent backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) If they each have 26 pairs of chromosomes, then yes. Edited September 10, 2012 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mudder Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 ^ Imagine the elite athletes. lol. Football will never be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 -- If BF is the missing link, .............. -- There is no such thing as a missing link. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) Why 26 pairs of chromosomes, is this a magic number? Humans have 23 pairs, chimpanzees have 24. If it has 26 pairs of chromosomes, it MUST be a squatch! lol Edited September 10, 2012 by wudewasa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jack Wild Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 The classic is most commonly sited, dogmen around the Great Lakes area and Wisconcin and the Neanderthals elsewhere - it seems to me that there were tons of "wildmen" sightings in the 1800's. I'd hazard a guess that these were the Neanderthal types - really, if one sat down a dozen feet from you while you were fishing and tried to have a conversation with it.... you weren't talking with a 900-lb hairy primate, right? Or if was wearing the remnants of clothing, it wasn't related to a huge gorilla. It's actually unusual that there is only one species of human right now on the planet (unless you could chimps, orangutans and gorillas), at other times there were up to three species running around the world in our large extended family bush. Let me propose something that I myself consider implausible. I offer it only because, for me, it's more plausible than dogmen and it aligns with Madison's comments. The traditional (non BF) belief among those who study and teach about hominids is that humans for at least thousands, if not tens of thousands of years, have been the sole bipedal primates around. Yet before this time there were various branches of hominids living contemporaneously. They possessed varying degrees of intelligence, and its possible that some of those with lessor brain development could still learn from, or at least mimic hominids of greater intelligence (and yes I know intelligence is a relative term). One example would be Neanderthal art in areas were biologically modern humans were coexisting. The Neanderthals may have been mimicking more so than creating art. Now let's assume BF does exist and that for millennia they coexisted with Native American hunter gathers. Could they have learned, possibly through their own crude form of mimicry, the spiritual practices of animal mimicry performed in Native American rituals. Certainly a bipedal primate the size of BF would most likely possess a brain capacity that surpasses chimpanzees. If so, more complex mimicry would not be out of the question. Further, Bonobo chimps have been documented teaching their young tool use. Could BF's pass down socializing activities originally learned centuries ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BastetsCat Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 (edited) In my opinion...That always loads it up...LOL. The theory of the four pre-human fossils being human is debatable. They all look like apes and if you look at the variances in the skeletal structures and bone mass you can see this. Not my original idea but one that makes sense to me. Lloyd Pye makes a good argument in his youtube video so much so, that I have looked into this a lot more and find it to sound as credible a theory as any....up to covering that point. I am not one for aliens so not adding that part of his equation to my belief system. If it is correct that all four Pre-human fossil types are apes then it stands to reason that there are four types (in the least) of bi-pedal apes on the planet. Not including man. They are already in the fossil record. We know a little about them and they are not the precursers to humans....they are the precursers to different breeds of BF. The Native Americans had varied stories about Many different types of giants. Some of them similar some not so much to BF. Some of the old stories told of how they killed particular ones off because it was too dangerous to live among them. Yet there are so many stories that talk about different ones. This is a difficult subject to cover because no written language and...many tribes will not share the True story with outsiders. They come up with a similar story that is not the real story. Dogmen. I think there is another name for them....It's werewolf....LOL Just kidding. Some say it is a Windigo. I find it interesting that with the Native American belief; by some tribes; that the Bear gave them life that there is not a Bear man. You could follow a bear through the woods and eat what it ate and live forever... follow a wolf through the woods and eat what it eats and you would live a while. Bears being Omnivores are more like us than wolves and even gorrillas. I doubt that a modern human could eat the plants that a gorilla can. I do know that there are lots of medicinal herbs that the NA used and learned about from the bear. One being Osha or bear root. I would gander to guess that there are alot of as-of-yet "undiscovered" things in the woods ranging from the neat but very explainable Forest Giants(Sasquatch)/cryptids to really really weird stuff that would probably blow a person's mind if they knew about it. I have myself though heard about a few weird things concerning the Sasquatch, like having pronounced snouts and running on all 4s. I have also heard of a anthropomorphic creature, in multiple places, that was basically a werewolf. It was a quite large, 6-7 foot canine that could go on all 4s or walk like a person. Leaves very large canine prints. One researcher said it is not the same thing as the Snouted Sasquatch. I would love more info on this strange non BF version. I am failing at finding much on it or the snouted BF either one. Can you give me more specifics as to good web sites and maybe researchers name? I can only look at the picture of the beast of 7chutes so many times before I have to puke. Reading the same story over and over about the beast of Bray Road is getting old too. I need better stories or more info. Would love to find things written by researchers instead or some fresh stories. Could BF's pass down socializing activities originally learned centuries ago? That BF is putting a skin of another animal on its body is an interesting idea. Chilling is the idea of what the Native American may have been trying to achieve by doing the same thing. To the Navajo it was a ritual that involved shapeshifting and in the current age it is illegal to own the pelt of anything other than a sheep. Because they believe that the people that would shapeshift would do evil against the people. Talk about modern day witch trials if you are caught with one, bad Juju. I did find it interesting that the area of the Bray road beast coincides with the pictograph mounds of the wolf that represents a water spirit. In many Native American cultures Bigfoot is considered a water spirit. So did they choose the wolf for that area because the beast was already there? Edited September 30, 2012 by BastetsCat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts