Bigfoot Research--Still No Evidence (Continued)

[norseman]

 

Yes I addressed that in post #692.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that people are kinda locked in that there was only one land bridge across the Bering strait, and it was a very cold place, roughly 15000 years ago.

Thanks, I had missed that.

 

 

In the Bakken oil field, they have a cypress stump on display that was excavated in N. Dakota

 

http://econdev.mckenziecounty.net/Projects/Long_X_Visitor_Center_-_Museum

[Guest]

^Sure, and Alaska was subtropical in the Cretaceous.  You need the right animal at the right time, though.  Personally, I find our hypothetical bigfoot way too human to have come over in a Miocene dispersal from some kind of gorilla ancestor.  It's humanness today would then be a product of convergent evolution, rather than common ancestry, adding another significant hurdle of parsimony to overcome - especially for the large and growing contingent of bigfooters who are convinced that bigfoots are a form of human.  Also, a Miocene dispersal greatly lengthens the gap in the fossil record without any sign of a bigfoot-like thing in North America.  For a Pleistocene dispersal, that gap is ballpark 10,000 years; for a Miocene dispersal, it's more like 10 million.

[norseman]

^Sure, and Alaska was subtropical in the Cretaceous.  You need the right animal at the right time, though.  Personally, I find our hypothetical bigfoot way too human to have come over in a Miocene dispersal from some kind of gorilla ancestor.  It's humanness today would then be a product of convergent evolution, rather than common ancestry, adding another significant hurdle of parsimony to overcome - especially for the large and growing contingent of bigfooters who are convinced that bigfoots are a form of human.  Also, a Miocene dispersal greatly lengthens the gap in the fossil record without any sign of a bigfoot-like thing in North America.  For a Pleistocene dispersal, that gap is ballpark 10,000 years; for a Miocene dispersal, it's more like 10 million.

 

 

I personally do not think it exhibits any human traits other than bipedalism. But touche on the larger strike zone for a fossil discovery.........your right. A Miocene hypothesis should be easily proven in the fossil record.

[Guest]

I personally do not think it exhibits any human traits other than bipedalism.

Well evolutionarily, bipedalism would be the big one.  Our own brand of locomotion hasn't evolved separately, as far as we know.

 

What other "human traits" do you dismiss?  High intelligence?  Rudimentary language?

[Guest]

There is a curious new trend developing in the world of Bigfoot. More and more Bigfoot believers are taking to the field and are actually seeing the beast that is the object of their quest. Unlike the last several decades when Bigfooters would come up empty in the field, where they were chasing sighting reports and told where to find previously discovered tracks, today’s field researchers are, well, Finding Bigfoot.

These feats are primarily and strangely grouped in Texas and Oklahoma, areas not known to be home to indigenous unclassified giant apes or giant aborigines.

Let’s look at the North American Wood Ape Conservancy (NAWAC). Alton Higgins is a member of the board of directors of NAWAC, a biology professor, and a wildlife biologist. While investigating a sighting in a sparsely wooded area of Oklahoma, he had his own sighting. His Bigfoot was black and as massive as an angus bull. It moved quickly, oddly in a bent over posture.

http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/2270

This account was written up by fellow conservancy member Daryl Coyler, who later had a sighting in south eastern Oklahoma in NAWAC’s “Area X.â€

http://woodape.org/index.php/news/news/204-the-echo-incident

A year later Coyler had another sighting at “Area X.†His sighting can be found around the 43:40 mark.

Other members have sighted various Bigfoot at the location as well. Continue with the video to hear these sightings, and hear from a member that was actually touched by a wood ape (while he was sleeping).

It is interesting that before his Oklahoma sightings, Coyler saw a wood ape in Texas too. He and his wife were taking a short walk near the Trinity River when he saw it.

http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/271

The Mid-America Bigfoot Research Center (MABRC) also has had success in locating Bigfoot. Here, researcher Randy Harrington recounts his brush with Bigfoot near Honobia, Oklahoma (not far from Area X, btw.) He has video of the Bigfoot: The Honobia Ridge Walker.

The next video also by MABRC shows an investigation by the Green County Bigfoot Research Center where their computer camera is picked up and moved around by something. The most interesting part is their claim they also had sightings of Bigfoot moving on all fours. The MABRC, btw, says it has a photo of a young Bigfoot walking in such a manner, but I’ve been unable to find it posted for non-members.

Now we move to the Searching For Bigfoot group as they explore a swampy end of a lake near Paris, Texas. Tom Biscardi and company find what they are looking for.

http://searchingforbigfoot.com/Paris_Texas_July_2006

Troy Hudson is a former member of BFRO. He has come to understand Bigfoot as Okla Chito, the Big People. He has even spoken to them.

http://www.bigfootbuzz.net/we-only-know-so-little-by-troy-hudson/

These reports are just a sampling of the Bigfoot Researcher Phenomena of Finding Bigfoot.

What do we make of it?

[norseman]

 

I personally do not think it exhibits any human traits other than bipedalism.

Well evolutionarily, bipedalism would be the big one.  Our own brand of locomotion hasn't evolved separately, as far as we know.

 

 

 

 

I guess I should have used the term Homo in place of Human.

 

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-family-tree

 

I could accept that it could be in the Paranthropus group or other pre Homo group.

 

What other "human traits" do you dismiss?  High intelligence?  Rudimentary language?

 

Yes, as well as tool manufacture, fire usage, etc..... Homo Habilis manufactured and used stone tools 2.4 million years ago. It doesn't make since to me that if Squatch was apart of the Homo lineage that they would not be making or using some rudimentary stone tools. 

Edited June 16, 2013 by norseman

[MIB]

What do we make of it?

 

Nice background and examples, but it's not clear to me what you're asking. 

 

MIB

[Guest]

Yes, as well as tool manufacture, fire usage, etc..... Homo Habilis manufactured and used stone tools 2.4 million years ago. It doesn't make since to me that if Squatch was apart of the Homo lineage that they would not be making or using some rudimentary stone tools. 

Agreed, but that's a problem for the Miocene scenario - too early for Homo, right?

[norseman]

 

Yes, as well as tool manufacture, fire usage, etc..... Homo Habilis manufactured and used stone tools 2.4 million years ago. It doesn't make since to me that if Squatch was apart of the Homo lineage that they would not be making or using some rudimentary stone tools. 

Agreed, but that's a problem for the Miocene scenario - too early for Homo, right?

 

 

Correct, but early Homo ancestors were walking upright in Africa at the end of the Miocene epoch. But we have no fossil evidence of them being outside of Africa. I believe from the fossil record the fist bipedal species in Asia would have been Homo Erectus. Which would place bipedalism of the Homo lineage in Asia only during the Pleistocene. Which is obviously too late.

 

So in order for a Miocene scenario to work? Something like Sahelanthropus tchadensis would have had a couple of million years to get beating feet towards N. America.

 

OR, Sasquatch represents a completely different branch in the Ape bipedalism tree. Which as you have alluded too, has not been discovered in the fossil record.

[Drew]

Even if Chororapithecus was a gorilla living 10million years ago, it could have been a non factor in the human/ape split, or it could have been one of the common ancestors of the gorilla/human/chimp split.

 

My point is, that the Austrian fossils were in Austria before Chororapithecus was in Africa.

 

The question is, do any of the Extant African gorillas show any migration patterns into Asia or Europe?

 

No.  Because the bipeds were the ones doing the migrating.  They had a huge evolutionary advantage when it came to spreading their populations.

 

If human-like species were living coincidentally with Giganto, Giganto would have lost the battle.   Humans would have eaten it, or eaten it's food.  And it would have died.

[norseman]

Even if Chororapithecus was a gorilla living 10million years ago, it could have been a non factor in the human/ape split, or it could have been one of the common ancestors of the gorilla/human/chimp split.

 

My point is, that the Austrian fossils were in Austria before Chororapithecus was in Africa.

 

The question is, do any of the Extant African gorillas show any migration patterns into Asia or Europe?

 

No.  Because the bipeds were the ones doing the migrating.  They had a huge evolutionary advantage when it came to spreading their populations.

 

 

 

 

So you do not believe that all Apes originated out of Africa?

 

 

If human-like species were living coincidentally with Giganto, Giganto would have lost the battle.   Humans would have eaten it, or eaten it's food.  And it would have died.

 

 

Yes Humans could indeed fell a giant like that as they did with ground sloths, mastodons and many other mega fauna. But I believe Giganto ate Bamboo.........so therefore was not in direct conflict with Humans for food sources. Maybe it was the Panda that drove Giganto to extinction instead?

 

But ultimately Humans and Human ancestors have shared the same ecosystem with non Human apes, and one did not drive the other to extinction that I'm aware of. Not counting of course the Industrialized Revolution of very late, in which things look dire now. Although I definitely believe that competing Homo species drove each other to extinction absolutely.

[Guest]

What do we make of it?

 

Nice background and examples, but it's not clear to me what you're asking. 

 

MIB

This does appear to me to be an interesting development in Bigfoot phenomena. It is typical in that it holds paradoxical and inconsistent elements that betray a straightforward endorsement of Bigfoot as a real entity.

For instance, some of these reports are made by Bigfoot believers who simply go to some spot designated a Bigfoot-viewing area, set up camp, and see Bigfoot. If it really were that easy, we would not be debating any issue relating to the existence of Bigfoot here. Not only would Bigfoot have been found years ago, it would have been found countless times and would be as mundane as natural fauna as elk.

Also, you have the contradiction in reports of field researchers who are "finding" Bigfoot as to what they are actually finding. NAWAC is adamant about what they are seeing: the "wood ape" designation says it all. On the other hand, you have field researchers like Troy Hudson who are just as certain they are interacting with real human beings, not apes.

You also have the unlikely multiple sightings by individual researchers. One researcher does nothing more than take a short stroll beginning off a major highway and luckily or otherwise almost bumps into a Bigfoot. His companion does not see it. Later, in another state, he again sees a Bigfoot up ahead right off the trail, and again, his companion sees nothing (this time, because the companion is too far back, just around a bend.)

We can just accept all this if we want to be cheery supporters. However, if we want to look at the whole Bigfoot phenomena more critically, then looking where recent developments are happening might give us a clue and a new starting point.

[Cotter]

^Plussed Jerry.

Very interesting post.

[MIB]

Ah, ok.  Thanks for clarifying.

 

I guess you could call me a "true believer" or a knower since I am someone who has had an extended sighting and some interaction.   At the same time, I remain a skeptic of individual reports.   There are things reported  which I have not personally experienced which I (subtly, I hope, so as not to insult anyone) raise an eyebrow about.   The implications are profound: F&B vs paranormal.  Rather than relying on assumptions and pre-conceived ideas, "MIB HQ" encourages me to investigate in person, try to either substantiate the claims, report nothing happened, or find alternate explanations for the claims' components.  

 

I'm not laughing, I'm not sneering, but I'm not drinking any koolaid either.   'bout all I can say 'til it happens, right?  The next 6 months or so should be interesting.

 

MIB

[norseman]

 

 

What do we make of it?

 

Nice background and examples, but it's not clear to me what you're asking. 

 

MIB

 

This does appear to me to be an interesting development in Bigfoot phenomena. It is typical in that it holds paradoxical and inconsistent elements that betray a straightforward endorsement of Bigfoot as a real entity.

For instance, some of these reports are made by Bigfoot believers who simply go to some spot designated a Bigfoot-viewing area, set up camp, and see Bigfoot. If it really were that easy, we would not be debating any issue relating to the existence of Bigfoot here. Not only would Bigfoot have been found years ago, it would have been found countless times and would be as mundane as natural fauna as elk.

 

 

Or hear a coyote and think it's a Squatch, or take a picture and see a Squatch in the picture or find a forest divot and think they have found a trackway..........understood.

 

 

Also, you have the contradiction in reports of field researchers who are "finding" Bigfoot as to what they are actually finding. NAWAC is adamant about what they are seeing: the "wood ape" designation says it all. On the other hand, you have field researchers like Troy Hudson who are just as certain they are interacting with real human beings, not apes.

 

But this observation is not compelling at all, it's just Humans projecting......... Some people look at Koko the Gorilla and see an Ape, some people see her as Human. Some people would konk her over the head and make a rug out of her. While other's have taken the patience to teach her how to sign. And this extends beyond Apes to things like Whales and Dolphins. You can turn on "Whale wars" and see this very clash of mindsets played out. I would expect a bipedal ape like creature would provoke similar debate. And until we get our hands on one we will never know what exactly it is.

 

You also have the unlikely multiple sightings by individual researchers. One researcher does nothing more than take a short stroll beginning off a major highway and luckily or otherwise almost bumps into a Bigfoot. His companion does not see it. Later, in another state, he again sees a Bigfoot up ahead right off the trail, and again, his companion sees nothing (this time, because the companion is too far back, just around a bend.)

 

I absolutely positively feel that some researchers have lost all objectiveness while in the woods. I see it on TV shows and youtube all the time, I touched on this on my first paragraph of this post. They want to see one soooo bad, that their mind makes it happen for them. I'm not suggesting this is the case all of the time, with everyone. But put it this way, on the show "Finding Bigfoot" I'm going to lean on Ranae for objectivity, and maybe Cliff.......the other two have Squatch on the brain.

 

We can just accept all this if we want to be cheery supporters. However, if we want to look at the whole Bigfoot phenomena more critically, then looking where recent developments are happening might give us a clue and a new starting point.

 

Hypothetically speaking of course, is this all purely fable or is there somewhere a kernel of truth in the matter?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beast_of_Exmoor

 

Take the phenom above as an example.......we know big cats exist in the world (unlike Sasquatch), but the point being is that people in the UK claim to see a big cat, report death of livestock, etc........and the government even sent in the Royal Marines to kill it. Nada. So is there really a beast of Exmoor? Or is this again people's imaginations running amok? It's certainly plausible that somebody turned a big cat loose that was illegally held in the country. And the story holds parallels with the Bigfoot phemon. 

 

As everyone well knows I like track ways in deep snow, in remote areas, exhibiting characteristics that would be impossible for a man to hoax. And these cases do exist. What made them? But the bigger question is does these minuscule amount of cases, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Grandma Nellie is feeding Bigfoot carrot cake off of her back porch in New Jersey? Of course not. But by the same token it doesn't explain them away as overactive imagination either.