Gigantopithecus

[Guest]

How many of you guys believe that Sasquatch could be a relict Gigantopithecus?

Also - this picture is from the BRFO. It's accepted (I believe) that any cold-weather primate would have a nose like a human's to allow for inhaling cold air to create a temperature regulation chamber between the outside air and the lungs, and I believe that Gigantopithecus had no such appendage. This picture gives no Latin names for the creatures but the "temperate" one does sport a human-like nose. Is that a species of Gigantopithecus, or what the BFRO believes they would look like if they had evolved to a colder climate?

http://www.bfro.net/images/lineupWeb_v4_1231.jpg

[Guest]

Me.

[Guest MoMoMafia]

I dunno, a lot of the descriptions I've read about gigantophitecus, had me thinking of an animal much more related to a gorilla than any animal that spent most of its time on two legs. That jump is too big for me to buy in to.

[Guest]

How many of you guys believe that Sasquatch could be a relict Gigantopithecus?

Also - this picture is from the BRFO. It's accepted (I believe) that any cold-weather primate would have a nose like a human's to allow for inhaling cold air to create a temperature regulation chamber between the outside air and the lungs, and I believe that Gigantopithecus had no such appendage. This picture gives no Latin names for the creatures but the "temperate" one does sport a human-like nose. Is that a species of Gigantopithecus, or what the BFRO believes they would look like if they had evolved to a colder climate?

http://www.bfro.net/...Web_v4_1231.jpg

It's the BFRO's idea of what gigantopithecus looked like. The only fossils we have for gigantopithecus are teeth and jawbones - we have no idea what they looked like, other than their teeth. Not only that, but the prevailing view is that gigantopithecus wasn't bipedal; it would have been too big and heavy to be able to support itself on two legs, unless it just had a big mouth.

Edited March 6, 2013 by leisureclass

[Guest]

According to the BFRO article on Gigantopithecus, early humans may have hunted and eaten them... which could explain why Bigfoot is so skittish around people.

[Guest Kronprinz Adam]

I dunno, a lot of the descriptions I've read about gigantophitecus, had me thinking of an animal much more related to a gorilla than any animal that spent most of its time on two legs. That jump is too big for me to buy in to.

I basically agree with MoMomafia and LeisureClass,. I think the only way to know what Giganthopitecus was, is to find more bones and a skull, if possible. Then we can investigate if Giganto was a giant gorilla or orangutan, and analyze if its appearance matches any modern Bigfoot sighting,.

Best regards,

K. Adam.

[BobZenor]

That is the BFRO idea of what a bigfoot is in the picture. They are just imagining what a gigantopithecus might look like. It looks most like a hominid so that is most likely what it is in my opinion. The argument against hominids is based on the idea that hominids weren't apes. That isn't biologically true so the argument for giganto fails on that simple argument.

Gigantopithecus are actually thought to be much more distantly related than gorillas which are more distant than chimps. For some reason that completely escapes me many think it is more likely that something convergently evolved from a distant relative rather than one of our closer relatives simply got larger. That logic presupposes many things like how apelike sasquatch is and that our ancestors weren't apelike in any way. To carry that logic further it is like hominids just popped into existence and weren't actually apes.

Edited March 7, 2013 by BobZenor

[Guest]

someone shared this link in another thread.

after reading it I am not convinced that BF could be gigantopithecus.

http://retrieverman.net/2012/01/18/why-bigfoot-cannot-be-gigantopithecus/

[Guest DWA]

My personal opinion is that whatever sasquatch lineage is, we don't have fossils for it yet, at least not for the key stretch (how they got here).

Beringia being mainly at the bottom of the Bering Sea now no doubt has a bit to do with that.

Not saying Giganto might not one day be seen as an ancestor. I just think it's a tad more complicated than "Giganto walked over the land bridge."

[Guest]

yea, I think that we have huge gaps in our knowledge of the Homo' lineage. fossils are relatively rare in the grand scale of things, especially in jungle and forest areas ... stuff dies and gets recycled into the environment unless under extremely rare circumstances.

so It makes sense to me that there could be whole lineages missing from homo's that lived only in jungle areas.

[Guest]

I don't think they're gigantopithecus but some descendent of the australopithecus lineage. Genus Homo falls into this lineage but I suspect bigfoot are more likely an offshoot from the australopithecines before Homo branched off. They would look like giant versions of an australopithecus species and would have plenty of time to grow large while migrating out of Africa and through Asia and over the Bering landbridge into North America.

[Guest]

If BF is not a Gigantopithecus then it doesn't exist at all, in my expert opinion.

ETA: or, it's something entirely different, or it still doesn't exist at all. Again, in my expert opinion.

Edited March 9, 2013 by Ace!

[Guest]

someone shared this link in another thread.

after reading it I am not convinced that BF could be gigantopithecus.

http://retrieverman.net/2012/01/18/why-bigfoot-cannot-be-gigantopithecus/

This document is well written, straight-forward, and pretty standard for scientific types. Unfortunately, it stands safely in the shade of what we know and accept. The scientific theory it mentions of using the smallest amount of assumptions is also standard practice in war planning.

However, what I've seen standing by the fence of my property did not fit neatly into what we know and accept. It was 6.5-7' tall and had reddish brown hair very similar to an orangutan. It was standing straight up like a human. I wonder if this was for my benefit. It's face was noticeably lighter in color, and it was this lighter color that caught my eye. It was perfectly still while it watched me walk the dog out of the corner of its eye. As soon as I looked away to deal with my dog (oblivious to what I was seeing) it moved farther down the fence and crouched down still looking in the same direction. I could not see the details of the nose or mouth (too dark), but I could clearly see its head was longer, wider and flatter than a human. The cheekbones extended well outside of the eye sockets. The closest illustration I have seen was a recreation of a gigantopithicus. I will try to add this illustration later.

In short, yes, I believe there could be a connection between BF (FL) and gigantopithicus.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Florida reader

[Guest]

Prior to coming into this forum, I was sure it must be gigantopithecus, or some descendant. After listening to people say repeatedly that it was way closer to man, I was sure it could not be. I know we only have teeth and maybe a partial jawbone. My question remains, how can we speculate so much about a creature we have so little evidence for? I get that they can determine diet by wear on the teeth, but how can we be so sure that this large a primate could not support the mass on two feet, or move swiftly. I know that leading up to the release of the “paper†everyone was trending away from this theory, but since we are back to square one, I would like to hear from some of the experts. The descriptions from witnesses look more like recreations of giganto than anything else, and would get us back to the mid-tarsal break issue. We know this species co-existed with early man and probably modern man. What does that say? I know that this is a bad example, but we used to all accept that dinosaurs were lumbering creatures and now we strongly think other wise. If we had no perspective on elephants from seeing them move would our thinking about their locomotion be different if all we had were bones and had never seen one. One would think if bigfoot was a close relative they would make tools and have fire. Again, throw out all the hope and faith many put into the failed DNA study and let’s look at it again.

[Guest]

I have attached two pics. One is the illustration of a giganto that I mentioned earlier. The other is a photo of a BF taken in FL. I have included it, because it is very similar to what I saw. I can only describe what I have seen.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Florida reader