southernyahoo Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 No I didn't , sure at some point a hominins ancestor was a hominid. Check this out from your link. Laetoli is a site in Tanzania, dated to the Plio-Pleistocene and famous for its hominin footprints, Then clicked on hominin and got. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominin Hominini is the tribe of Homininae that comprises Homo, and other members of the human clade after the split from the tribe Panini (chimpanzees).[1][2] Members of the tribe are calledhominins (cf Hominidae, "hominids"). The subtribe Hominina is the "human" branch, including genus Homo. So the Laetoli tracks are still Human or pre-human. The term Hominid refers to the family Hominidae which includes all great apes, though their tracks are markedly different from homo and it's more direct ancestors. This is why the tracks from Australia are human tracks and not potentially some other hominid. So if I follow science, I see human in bigfoot tracks. Thats logical right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) Then you throw in people who are hunting a bipedal Hominid into the mix, and you've really got a recipe for disaster. It certainly should give any hunter who loads up on camo or uses a ghillie suit pause to reflect on their mortality. I hunt, probably will as long as I'm physically able, however, I certainly do my best to find places as far from where others will be as I can. I focus on deep, brushy canyons nobody in their right mind (which disqualifies me, right? ) would go. Tradeoffs. I think I'm still safer in the woods than on the highway getting there. MIB Roger that MIB. But after the 3rd time I had bullets fying through the branches a couple of feet over my head from some lazy Clown sitting in a tree staind drinking brown liquor and then once having to return fire in the Clowns direction to get his attention that he was firing in my direction, I decided to stick to fishing. Then you throw in "amateur researchers" wanting to collect a bi-pedal Hominid specimen......no thanks. Norseman, your chances are zero. That's because they know your intentions before you even leave the house. Forget about your chances once you're in their space. Edited June 5, 2013 by LarryP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 ^^^^ the point you missed was pertaining to the second half of your post. If your adament against shooting one? why wouldnt you distance yourself from me? This is the point iam trying to make, the discovery will overshadow all else. Back to austropethicenes........ bipedalism came first before brain increase and their brain was about 400 cc which is chimp sized. I have read about them being called a "upright walking ape". In my opinion tool manufacture, fire and other inventions and brain use is what makes us human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 ^^^^ the point you missed was pertaining to the second half of your post. If your adament against shooting one? why wouldnt you distance yourself from me? This is the point iam trying to make, the discovery will overshadow all else. Back to austropethicenes........ bipedalism came first before brain increase and their brain was about 400 cc which is chimp sized. I have read about them being called a "upright walking ape". In my opinion tool manufacture, fire and other inventions and brain use is what makes us human. I have literally known Dolphins, Cats and Dogs, that were far more intelligent than 90% of the humans I have ever had the misfortune of having to interact with. Fire and inventions = WOW!.... I learned how to use a tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) Scenario: Collect two voucher specimens. Name one Voucher I Name the other one Voucher II Keep one and study it. Kill one and study it. Edited June 5, 2013 by Squatchy McSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 ^^^^ the point you missed was pertaining to the second half of your post. If your adament against shooting one? why wouldnt you distance yourself from me? This is the point iam trying to make, the discovery will overshadow all else. I didn't miss that either. I would want to see one to finally judge what it was. If I saw a human then I'd have to turn you in. If I didn't then I might say you shot a bipedal ape that could still ultimately be classified in the genus homo but not sapiens. You might get a pardon from me on that one, but only if it didn't have a modern human mitochondria. Ketchum owns that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 ^^^^ the point you missed was pertaining to the second half of your post. If your adament against shooting one? why wouldnt you distance yourself from me? This is the point iam trying to make, the discovery will overshadow all else. Back to austropethicenes........ bipedalism came first before brain increase and their brain was about 400 cc which is chimp sized. I have read about them being called a "upright walking ape". In my opinion tool manufacture, fire and other inventions and brain use is what makes us human. I have literally known Dolphins, Cats and Dogs, that were far more intelligent than 90% of the humans I have ever had the misfortune of having to interact with. Fire and inventions = WOW!.... I learned how to use a tool. And as a scientist you came to this hypothesis how? 90%........wow indeed! ^^^^ the point you missed was pertaining to the second half of your post. If your adament against shooting one? why wouldnt you distance yourself from me? This is the point iam trying to make, the discovery will overshadow all else. I didn't miss that either. I would want to see one to finally judge what it was. If I saw a human then I'd have to turn you in. If I didn't then I might say you shot a bipedal ape that could still ultimately be classified in the genus homo but not sapiens. You might get a pardon from me on that one, but only if it didn't have a modern human mitochondria. Ketchum owns that. Its not going to have modern human dna...... in the words of Todd Discotell, 15000 years ago? Us was us.......,., 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Doplhins, Cats and Dogs score higher on standardized testing than a human? Source please? Speculatation isn't research isn't proof isn't bigfoot. All you have to do is show a Bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Doplhins, Cats and Dogs score higher on standardized testing than a human? Source please? I have literally known Dolphins, Cats and Dogs, that were far more intelligent than 90% of the humans I have ever had the misfortune of having to interact with. Speculatation isn't research isn't proof isn't bigfoot. Personal experience is all the proof that is needed. There's no more speculation involved once that occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 And as a scientist you came to this hypothesis how? 90%........wow indeed! I"m not a scientist and it's not a hypothesis. It is purely an observation based on personal experience. Anyone who is out in the wilderness seeking to kill a BF in order to collect a specimen faces a host of logistical problems if they are successful. Do you need me to spell this out for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) And as a scientist you came to this hypothesis how? 90%........wow indeed!I"m not a scientist and it's not a hypothesis. It is purely an observation based on personal experience.Anyone who is out in the wilderness seeking to kill a BF in order to collect a specimen faces a host of logistical problems if they are successful. Do you need me to spell this out for you? I think so...... I dont really see a host of logisticsl problems. Edited June 5, 2013 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 And as a scientist you came to this hypothesis how? 90%........wow indeed! I"m not a scientist and it's not a hypothesis. It is purely an observation based on personal experience.Anyone who is out in the wilderness seeking to kill a BF in order to collect a specimen faces a host of logistical problems if they are successful. Do you need me to spell this out for you? I think so...... I dont really see a host of logisticsl problems. If you're alone in a remote wilderness, what are you going to do to collect the body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 And as a scientist you came to this hypothesis how? 90%........wow indeed!I"m not a scientist and it's not a hypothesis. It is purely an observation based on personal experience.Anyone who is out in the wilderness seeking to kill a BF in order to collect a specimen faces a host of logistical problems if they are successful. Do you need me to spell this out for you? I think so...... I dont really see a host of logisticsl problems. If you're alone in a remote wilderness, what are you going to do to collect the body? a single finger is adequate in proving the existence of sasquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 If you're alone in a remote wilderness, what are you going to do to collect the body? You haven't seen the power of Norseman's mule team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 And as a scientist you came to this hypothesis how? 90%........wow indeed! I"m not a scientist and it's not a hypothesis. It is purely an observation based on personal experience.Anyone who is out in the wilderness seeking to kill a BF in order to collect a specimen faces a host of logistical problems if they are successful. Do you need me to spell this out for you? I think so...... I dont really see a host of logisticsl problems. If you're alone in a remote wilderness, what are you going to do to collect the body? a single finger is adequate in proving the existence of sasquatch A single finger is not a body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts