Collection Of Voucher Specimens

[Guest DWA]

That you need African big 5 class firearms to kill an 800lbs animal 

The great bears are a perfect analogy to the type of weapon needed to kill a sasquatch If they exist

 

And if I. Even remotely believed that groups of Sasquatch would come running out of the woods to attack me if I. Killed one, I would feel quite confident in the company of a few hunters that I know

 

I will say this:  the evidence doesn't back this scenario.

[norseman]

Have you ever even hunted dangerous game??

Do you consider Grizzlies dangerous?

[southernyahoo]

Homo Erectus was present in Asia but doesn't fit supposed traits of Sasquatch. While most examples of Erectus are not too far from scale of modern humans it would seem they spawned very large and very small subsequent species such as Hedelbergensis and the Hobbit. It would seem highly unlikely that this species would regress to match Sasquatch's lack of stone tools and fire.

So that leaves us with the question, were there any other lines of apes living in Asia that could better match the description of Sasquatch? I think there is. We all know Gigantopethicus was championed by Krantz, supposedly related to Orangs and according to Krantz was likely bipedal based on the wide set of the jaw. But there were others as well, such as Lufenfpethicus;

I think concerning Asian extinct Apes? We haven't even touched the surface and they are strategically located to spawn a North American bipedal ape.

I'll use the bolded part to argue with as well, the fossil record is never complete nor does it tell all.

 

I would go with an extant descendant of Heidelbergensis which simply evolved in a different direction but kept it's genetic compatability. Paralell convergent evolution with no genetic crossing going back to Lucy seems less likely.

 

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

 

Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans (H. s. sapiens) are all descended from H. heidelbergensis.

[BC witness]

Bowcat, both MagniAesir and I hunt in British Columbia, Canada, he for more than 30 years, and I for more than 50. Black bears and cougars are common throughout the province, and grizzlies in most of it, especially where we hunt moose and elk, and more recently, they've moved into our local deer hunting areas, within 50 miles of our homes. Though neither of us has trophy hunted the carnivores, I have meat hunted blacks, and had to take down a charging grizz on one occasion. I was using the ubiquitous 30-06 at the time, and though it took more than 1 shot, that bear is now a beautiful rug, and I'm still here to tell you about it. BTW, both of us have at least a decade of bow hunting experience, as well. Two close friends have also taken grizzly under similar circumstances over the years, and both were downed with one shot, using a .270, and a wildcat 7mm-308, so I think that MagniAesir's statement that  that magnums, or 'elephant guns" are not necessary to take the type specimen can stand, from my perspective of experience with large, dangerous game.

[Guest Stan Norton]

Firstly, who says the first specimen will be an eight foot beast? Could very easily be a juvenile. After all, sasquatches are presumably not born eight feet tall...

Secondly, the objections are based predominantlyly on an anthropomorphic, navel gazing value system: appears that the distaste is due primarily to the putative humanlike characteristics of sasquatch rather than an all encompassing ethical system. If I've got it wrong and it's the latter, I would ask why the killing of an ape is worse, or more morally reprehensible than the killing of a bird, pig, cow or invertebrate. If you are going to take a moral stance on killing, at least make it consistent.

[Guest DWA]

Given our treatment of our own kind since time immemorial, "we can't kill one 'coz they're human" elicits a chuckle from me, when it elicits anything.

 

I personally don't think we should kill any more of *anything* for most reasons, particularly "to show everyone they're real."

And as I have frequently said here:  it'll be a nasty guilty pleasure to have sasquatch confirmed for me that way.

[Guest Stan Norton]

Yep. I guess my beef is that if one is so offended by the notion of killing an organism, then please allow that to permeate your existence: be a true vegan. Don't drive, don't consume, live a simple life etc. Don't preach to others about the morality of killing if one doesn't ensure that one's own actions are beyond reproach. If killing is a moral issue it must, by definition, apply equally to all organisms. Or you accept that some are more equal than others and that is a slippery slope into realms we are not supposed to discuss here.

[Guest DWA]

OK now I have to recommend for you this great article by David Foster Wallace:  http://animalrightskorea.org/essays/david-foster-wallace-consider-the-lobster.html

 

Of the treatments I have seen of justification for killing, this is by far the best.

 

Those who Cringe In Fear (I know I know; I stalled somewhere in the middle of Infinite Jest too) will note the Standard Wallacian Footnote Extravaganza!  (very *very* restrained in this instance, for him).  But read it.  It is a *great* read.  By a guy who, if you had the patience to get to it, had much to say about ethics worth listening to.

And I love lobster, and you know what, meat too, all kinds, and life takes life to live.  But just to show people who can't be bothered that they're real...?   Why care about what they *think*?

[southernyahoo]

I'm a carnivorous omnivore  no doubt, but am in no way obligated to kill members of homo to prove it.   

 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=homicide&searchmode=none

 

 

homicide (n.) "the killing of another person," early 13c., from Old French homicide, from Latin homicidium "manslaughter," from homo "man"

 

I think people who want to beat people over the head about taking a voucher specimen should first demonstrate that they can atleast go find one and lay eyes on it with some resemblence of reliability first, or just resign to the fact that a dead one in the hands of science will be as likely as pure chance.  

[Guest DWA]

Well, most all of my concern over this isn't, I realize, practical concern.  We just discuss killing things way too casually.  As a species we do, I mean.  

 

I would like to point out apropos the article I linked:  steaming or boiling a lobster is nowhere near the most macabre method of reducing another animal to food that there is in nature.  To kid ourselves that We Are The Worst at this is just another anthropocentric conceit.

It could easily be argued that what AIDS Ebola and cancer do to us is far crueler.  And one need not stop there.

Edited March 30, 2015 by DWA

[Guest]

Bowcat, both MagniAesir and I hunt in British Columbia, Canada, he for more than 30 years, and I for more than 50. Black bears and cougars are common throughout the province, and grizzlies in most of it, especially where we hunt moose and elk, and more recently, they've moved into our local deer hunting areas, within 50 miles of our homes. Though neither of us has trophy hunted the carnivores, I have meat hunted blacks, and had to take down a charging grizz on one occasion. I was using the ubiquitous 30-06 at the time, and though it took more than 1 shot, that bear is now a beautiful rug, and I'm still here to tell you about it. BTW, both of us have at least a decade of bow hunting experience, as well. Two close friends have also taken grizzly under similar circumstances over the years, and both were downed with one shot, using a .270, and a wildcat 7mm-308, so I think that MagniAesir's statement that  that magnums, or 'elephant guns" are not necessary to take the type specimen can stand, from my perspective of experience with large, dangerous game.

 

I appreciate your comment amigo, and was not trying to be condescending in any way, nor did I ever use the term "elephant gun." My thought process was immediate knock down and dispatch. I've followed a few blood trails into a thicket carrying nothing more than my bow, and what I was trailing was more than capable of sinking teeth or tusks into me. I've competed on the State level, and the National level with my bow, but have no interest in sticking an arrow into an 8' tall ape like critter, because my knowledge of him is nil.

 

If you guys come across one, and you're carrying your .270 and you decide you want to shoot him, have at it. Come here and post the results, cause I would be interested.

[BC witness]

No, you didn't say elephant gun, it was MagniAesir that mentioned "African big 5", which I took to mean that. No condescension percieved, just wanted to fill in a little background of where his comments, and mine, as his occasional sidekick, are coming from. He and I both now carry somewhat more powerful arms than the .270, in part due to the presence of grizzly in almost all areas in which we now hunt/hike/Sasquatch research. My own intense few moments with my "rug" convinced me to upgrade to 300 WinMag from the 30-06.

[norseman]

I'll use the bolded part to argue with as well, the fossil record is never complete nor does it tell all.

 

I would go with an extant descendant of Heidelbergensis which simply evolved in a different direction but kept it's genetic compatability. Paralell convergent evolution with no genetic crossing going back to Lucy seems less likely.

 

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

 

Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans (H. s. sapiens) are all descended from H. heidelbergensis.

It's possible but here are the issues I have with that hypothesis.

Stone tool manufacture and fire use, we see no evidence of Sasquatch possessing those technologies. You would have to explain how those technologies were lost.

Also I have read that Neanderthal-Human hybridization was at its outer limits. If the two species had been separated from each other much longer, viable offspring would not have been an option. If true that would make a Hedelbergensis-Human hybridization out of the question. As the two species were separated by time even longer.

The upside to your hypothesis is that they were the largest Homo species ever.

[MagniAesir]

Have you ever even hunted dangerous game??

I have hunted black bear on a number of occasions although I don't really consider them dangerous game

I have also been backup on a few of grizzly hunts in Northern British Columbia

I know first hand what a 375 H&H will do to a grizzly as well as a 30/06 and 338 winmag

I also know the pucker factor of looking for a possibility wounded grizzly

I wouldn't hesitate to have any of the guys that I have hunted grizzlies with watch my back or BCWitness for that matter

where I hunt in Northern BC is prime grizzly country and over the years we've had bluff charges, camps entered and many peaceful sightings

[norseman]

Your mindset appears that of a young man however, if it's not the case perhaps you're of the type that keeps repeating the same grade, over and over?

 

You are a virgin, when it comes to all things of a personal experience in this endeavour and that's no personal attack rather, your own words.

 

The Beowulf mythology brings no shame unto itself, it is your perversion of it that's shameful.

 

I truly do not care what you are doing however, other pilgrims should take note of the folly of your position.

It's YOU that are doomed to repeat the same grade over and over again. Because you offer NOTHING towards the end goal of species recognition. You just squeak weakly from the sidelines about how unjust or unfair it all is........ And if someone calls you out on your lack of evidence or your sanctimonious rhetoric? You attack their character........

Your pathetic.