Guest Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) Our evolution went down the technical mind path, how can we make life easier by manipulating our environment? Maybe theirs went down the , how can we make life easier by being more in tune with our environment? We have made some great progress in manipulating our environment how much progress do you suppose they have made on their path? No wonder they are hard to find. Edited October 13, 2012 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Owl Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Based on my first hand experience, they are much more than just an animal....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Why would they need to make a basket or chip out a knife from flint, when we leave things lying around everywhere? Need to carry water? Pick up a bucket from a farm. Farmer thinks it got lost. Somebody finds it in the woods? Who would think a BF left it there? Life can be simple if you know how to make it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 You know, I have found a lot of way ward buckets in the woods over the years...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I say there apes just like Chimps and Gorillas, obviously very closely related to us but animals nonetheless. I think this because they have never been observed too build fires or settlements or wear clothing. There's no denying if they exist they're very human like and intelligent, but are they humans. In my opinion no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) Seeing videos of possible young sasquatches and their ability to breakiate through trees.... and how older ones travel from all fours to upright seem more ape/chimplike. Chimp and other apes can't speak because their anatomy isn't designed for speech. However, their intelligence makes it possible for them to understand words. Could this be true for sasquatch? Maybe. I go back and forth on the issue of human vs. ape. I sometimes think we will find out they are somewhere in between but not quite one or the other. But what do I know....I wish I could see one up close. Or, it would be nice if a DNA study would publish so we would know (hopefully) one way or another. Edited October 14, 2012 by AaronD 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Somewhere on here I read that not as squatches are essentially the same--meaning they vary within their own species. Some may have more apelike characteristics/behaviors while others are more like thinly disguised humans. And I have chatted with folks who claim to have first hand knowledge that they are capable of speech and even have their own language. Who am I to disagree with any of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Noppie Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I "believe" they are human like and not "ape". I believe they could be feral humans who have lived multi generations as bigfoots. I can imagine that hair gene in those who have lived multi generations in the wild without clothes could become have more body hair. I also could imagine that growth genes and their diet without all the chemicals we add to our food could be responsible for them growing taller. I believe from the "internet" wood knocks and shelters are signs they have human like intelligence/wisdom. Living in the wild would change what we might consider human like behavior. My own personal sighting several years old the female bigfoot did not have the completely hair covered that is seen in various films on the internet. Behavior wise, while in the Marines in 1980 I went through my 30 day jungle survival in Okinawa. After 22 days they called me on the radio and asked if I was all right. I said yes. They left me out there for 42 day before coming to pick me up. I was told afterwards I had learned all the wrong lessons. Jungle survival class was not about surviving in the jungle but teach us importance of living in a civilization with the benefits of our society. Though we as modern humans might find too difficult to live in the wild, Bigfoot does not find it difficult. Noppie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 See, my opinion is and has always been--giant hybrid humans whose centuries in the wild have adapted their bodies (hair, resilience to cold, raw meat diet), and for whatever reason they have never joined civilization---it appears they have gone to great pains to avoid it. JMO, and of course, I have nothing to back it up Maybe someday, someone will record an Interview with a Sasquatch http://www.online-literature.com/donne/3300/ Being a modern human is all about cranial capability and early learning. If you were unfortunate to leave a very young child in the wild, and that child was fortunate enough to survive somehow to adulthood either with the help of other animals or on its own (very unlikely but not impossible), then it is unlikely that the resultant adult would behave anything like you and I. Its behaviour might resemble an animal, perhaps. For me, bigfoot is a Homo Erectus descendant of some sort: my guess would be a Denisovan / HSS 'crossbreed'. I base this partly on footprints (very like what we have for Homo Neanderthalensis), partly on the small but useful migratory evidence we have for the last 100K years, but chiefly on the fact that there is excellent 'crossbreed' evidence in all of us today who are not of contemporary African origin. Being hairy and not acting 'human' is not enough for me to think BF is an ape. Africans too: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/342711/title/DNA_hints_at_African_cousin_to_humans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 Near-human, but still ape. Paranthropus/Oneofthempithecus probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 ^ why was hemp the first thing I saw in this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 Interesting read, antfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 (edited) Mulder said.... I agree that Sasquatch are wild and uncivilized, but their life style might not be the best indicator of where exactly on the tree of life they are. I question why you believe Sasquatch are wild and uncivilized... is it because they don't use tools (often) or have weapons or build shelters? Or because they don't have clothing and agriculture and have needs similar to ours? They don't look or act like you/HSS? They don't NEED any of these things. They have no need of shelter, light, heat, security, food storage, formal education, trade, or transportation. They don't need to carry anything, they don't need tools or weapons and they don't need art or adornment. They are completely self sufficient and well matched in their environment. HSS is the inferior ape physically - we need all the above mentioned things (and call them "culture") in order to survive. Drop us into the forest naked and we die off because we are ill adapted to our world - I don't know how this can be called a more successful species. Calling them uncivilized and wild because they will get by just fine is making negative judgments of a most positive natural adaptation compared to HSS. We ARE superior intellectually - we have had to be to survive and that is our only advantage over them, other than the fact that there is little competition between our two species because we occupy two completely different habitats and so we don't run into each other all that often. We each fit our niche. They do not need our lifestyle and the accomodations of "civilization" - their food hunting & gathering is likely their first priority (physical survival), followed by social life, just like apes and monkeys, maybe more (and Jane Goodall speculates that chimps have some feelings of a kind of primitive spirituality). Speculation, of course - but what do you do after you've gotten enough to eat and you have no need of shelter, jobs/work, home upkeep, cooking etc). You have free time for the pursuit of happiness. Not saying they are "better" than us, just very very different, with different priorities. They have their own civilization and have no need of ours because it does not/would not/could not meet their needs. Ours meets ours and theirs meets theirs. One is not better than the other, just different. Edited October 19, 2012 by madison5716 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBeaton Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 I'll have to say more ape like. When it comes to reports of people sayin' it sounded like they were talkin', maybe to another, we know other animals communicate through vocalizations. Be it warnin' alarms of danger, or to matin' calls. I recall seein' a program on gorillas, the gorillas were fed certain things, the sounds recorded, the lady doin' the tests played the recordin' of a different gorilla bein' fed gummy bears or somethin', played that recordin' to a different gorilla, an the gorilla pointed out the gummy bear. The intelligance of animals may be beyond what we currently know. An it's not just that animals can show similar traits to humans, lets not forget how we humans still act like animals, an excited group of chimps can act an sounds like an excited group of hockey fans. We hoot an holler, an act pretty much the same when excited, an we can still yell an toss an break things, when we ain't happy campers. When it comes to wood knocks, I've also seen a program on gorillas(in the wild), who would clap their hands while bedded down in trees as a sign of their location for others. As for them bein' considered more intelligant simply because they have elluded us better than chimps an gorillas, lets not forget the billi ape. I believe it was first noticed by westerners near a hundred years ago, then nothin' till recently. Sasquatchs may not be classified or recognized by science, but people still report seein' them, they leave tracks like any other animal. Based on what I've read, I'd have to say some type of ape. Pat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 I don't think it's some spirtual desire to do without all the modern trappings of civilization, or some noble oneness with Earth, they flat out don't have the ability to do these things. It's easy to say they don't have the desire for warmth or shelter, but have you seen one in the middle of a blizzard with an emtpy stomach?? Tell me, how happy is he at that point? If a cooked steak and warm shelter was available, would he take it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts