Release Of Forensic Dna Results For Sierra Kills Sample

[Guest]

"simple grasp of anthropology and evolution rules out any notion that there was some unknown hominid roaming around at that time"

Huh?

Somebody tell the two Phd Anthropologists I know who are convinced of the viability of Sasquatch's existence, about this - I'm sure it will be news to them

I for one, would like to know what evidence do we have of any hominid other than humans at that point in time.

Edited January 17, 2013 by ronn1

[Guest slimwitless]

I don't know where I stated that *bigfoot exists*..I admit at one time I was on the fence. No longer..I'm a firm skeptic.

Really? Last month you wrote:

Let me just say this folks..

I'm on your side as far as this creature living among us..

and

we all love the squatch...we all think he's walks as we speak...I do

You also ask for evidence of other hominids living with humans 15,000 years ago. Are you suggesting we know about all hominid species that ever lived?

[Guest Theagenes]

I for one, would like to know what evidence do we have of any hominid other than humans at that point in time.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Theagenes

[southernyahoo]

"simple grasp of anthropology and evolution rules out any notion that there was some unknown hominid roaming around at that time"

Sykes is keeping an open mind..Didn't you guys send a sample to him?..........but maybe he doesn't have the grasp on anthropology that you and your Phd's do. Also check that homo floresiensis and the deer cave people are from that era of 15,000 years ago whom had a real taste for venison and prominant brow ridges. No DNA from those yet for comparison.http://news.discovery.com/human/evolution/big-foot-genetic-testing-120522.htm

While Sykes doesn't expect to find solid evidence of a yeti or Bigfoot monster, he says he is keeping an open mind and hopes to identify perhaps 20 of the suspect samples. Along the way, he'd be happy if he found some unknown species. (Rumor or Reality: The Creatures of Cryptozoology)"It would be wonderful if one or more turned out to be species we don't know about, maybe primates, maybe even collateral hominids," Sykes told LiveScience. Such hominids would include Neanderthals or Denosivans, a mysterious hominin species that lived in Siberia 40,000 years ago."That would be the optimal outcome," Sykes said.

[Guest]

Really?

You also ask for evidence of other hominids living with humans 15,000 years ago. Are you suggesting we know about all hominid species that ever lived?

Yes..I was a believer..so *on the fence* was not a good description. I stand corrected. I'm no longer a believer..but I am *open* none the less. Science has not demonstrated that another hominid co-existed along side of man 15K years ago. I'M AWARE OF *FLORENSIS*.which has not been shown to have lived 15K years ago. Also ISOLATED and not living in the same region as humans.

[Guest Theagenes]

I'M AWARE OF *FLORENSIS*.which has not been shown to have lived 15K years ago. Also ISOLATED and not living in the same region as humans.

You are mistaken on both counts. H. floresiensis lasted until at 17kya and possibly as recent as 12kya. There were H. sapiens on surrounding isalnds and possibly on Flores itself. That is why the early opponents of Flores man as a separate species were arguing that the first finds were a deformed HSS. Also one of the theories of their extinction was that they were exterminated by HSS. For further reading:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v437/n7061/full/nature04022.html

[Guest Tyler H]

Sykes is keeping an open mind..Didn't you guys send a sample to him?..........but maybe he doesn't have the grasp on anthropology that you and your Phd's do. Also check that homo floresiensis and the deer cave people are from that era of 15,000 years ago whom had a real taste for venison and prominant brow ridges. No DNA from those yet for comparison.http://news.discovery.com/human/evolution/big-foot-genetic-testing-120522.htm

SY, you attribute a quote to me that was not made by me - it was made by ronn1

I was asserting the folks like Meldrum, Sykes, and another anthroplogist tht I know, do in fact keep an open mind, and feel there is compelling evidence in support of the existence of this non-human primate/hominid

[Guest]

You are mistaken on both counts. H. floresiensis lasted until at 17kya and possibly as recent as 12kya. There were H. sapiens on surrounding isalnds and possibly on Flores itself. That is why the early opponents of Flores man as a separate species were arguing that the first finds were a deformed HSS. Also one of the theories of their extinction was that they were exterminated by HSS. For further reading:

http://www.nature.co...ature04022.html

I think the *Floresiensis argument* is a no go as far as holding on to the notion that there was another hominid *available* to mate with humans in NA..giving rise to a BF (per Ketchum). Establishing an isolated hominid...essentially isolated and not PROVEN TO EXIST 15K years ago..especially in NA , is a very tenuous argument in my mind... grasping at straws to buttress Ketchums claim. As far as the RED DEER people..again...they seem to be isolated in China and certainly weren't in NA. There is also debate as to whether they are a separate hominid:

"The odd appearance of the Red Deer Cave people probably "just tells us that modern humans are a very diverse species," Max Planck's Gunz suggested.

"Modern humans are exceptionally variable, especially if you compare modern humans to our closest fossil relatives, the Neanderthals," who seem to have had a comparatively narrow range of appearances, he said.

While unusual, the skull features detailed in the new study "plot very close, or even within, the modern human range of variation," Gunz added.

"I would say it's not completely unexpected for a modern human at that age, so my gut feeling is that this is not a new species."

Gunz does, however, think the Chinese fossils might be evidence of multiple migration waves out of Africa that involved different populations of modern humans."

Edited January 17, 2013 by ronn1

[Guest]

I don't understand why people that don't believe that this is even possible, would spend so much time arguing about it. there is many things i don't believe in.

Maybe i'm crazy, but I never spent 1/100th of a second of my life trying argue with people that do, nevermind spending time reading and posting about it

Edited January 17, 2013 by zigoapex

[Guest Theagenes]

Who said anything about mating in NA?

You claimed there were no other hominins around 15kya and that's incorrect. You seem to be doubling down on your assertion that H. floresiensis hasn't been "PROVEN" to exist at that time. Please understand that while there are certain things about H. floresiensis that have been and continue to be debated, their recent dating is not one of them. So do you have any evidence that would contradict the current paleoanthropological consensus or are you just saying words?

[southernyahoo]

SY, you attribute a quote to me that was not made by me - it was made by ronn1

I was asserting the folks like Meldrum, Sykes, and another anthroplogist tht I know, do in fact keep an open mind, and feel there is compelling evidence in support of the existence of this non-human primate/hominid

My bad.

[Guest]

Who said anything about mating in NA?

You claimed there were no other hominins around 15kya and that's incorrect. You seem to be doubling down on your assertion that H. floresiensis hasn't been "PROVEN" to exist at that time. Please understand that while there are certain things about H. floresiensis that have been and continue to be debated, their recent dating is not one of them. So do you have any evidence that would contradict the current paleoanthropological consensus or are you just saying words?

For arguments sake...I'll accept floresiences did live 12K years ago in an ISOLATED part of Indonesia...JUST within the margins of the proposed *birth of BF*. Does this, in anyway support the theory of an Unknown Hominid mating with humans? Same with the Red Deer Cave people...although the fact that they are a separate hominid species is still debated. Yes..I say NA because proposing that this *highly unlikely * mating event took place eleswhere (asia) 15K years ago when BF seems to exist exclusively in NA. If it was in asia, then they would exist there at least in equal #s as NA. This is the case with humans...they migrated accross the frozen Berring Straight 20K plus years ago and populated NA...BUT still remained and populated asia.

[Guest]

What about Heidelbergensis? I thought he was around up until about 12K.

[Guest Theagenes]

For arguments sake...I'll accept floresiences did live 12K years ago in an ISOLATED part of Indonesia...JUST within the margins of the proposed *birth of BF*. Does this, in anyway support the theory of an Unknown Hominid mating with humans? Same with the Red Deer Cave people...although the fact that they are a separate hominid species is still debated. Yes..I say NA because proposing that this *highly unlikely * mating event took place eleswhere (asia) 15K years ago when BF seems to exist exclusively in NA. If it was in asia, then they would exist there at least in equal #s as NA. This is the case with humans...they migrated accross the frozen Berring Straight 20K plus years ago and populated NA...BUT still remained and populated asia.

The point is that what we've been learning in the last decade is the last 200,000 years or so of human evolution is far more complex than we thought. We're discovering new coeval species and sub-species nearly every couple of years and learning that interbreeding between them seems to be the rule not the exception. So making any kind of definitive statements like you're doing without any qualifiers is silly and no paleoanthropologist would do it. The picture is just too murky now. There are many things to criticize about MK's study, but the idea that humans interbred with another hominin around 15kya is actually one of the most believable aspects given what we've learned in the last few years. Also the 15kya date was an estimate; according to Stubstad the actual range including margin of error was 30-10kya.

On NA, I've posted several times in the Ketchum thread on why the proposed interbreeding almost certainly had to take place in the Old World for MK's scenario to work.

CTfoot, on H. heidelbergensis, the most recent dating is about 125kya. There is some evidence that isolated pockets of H. erectus survived until around 40kya though, so having isolated groups of older hominin forms is not at all impossible

[Guest]

Apparently, several people have been told by MK or her operatives that the mtDNA haplotypes were european, and "African American". So assuming she is telling the truth, and knows what she is doing, any hybrid scenario 15,000 years ago needs to be a mutliple event, and account for the 2 different haplotypes, while excluding asian and native American! So some of you need to teak your "explanations" to conform to that evidence!

SS