Collection Of Voucher Specimens

[BobbyO]

Crow changes her mind as often as I change my socks.

I actually laughed a little earlier today when looking at a bumped thread and came across this on the latest page.

[Guest DWA]

DWA has asked me to type this for him.  Going back over Crowlogic's posts of recent past, he suffered severe whiplash and is now recuperating in hospital.  He does wish that Crowlogic would make up Crowlogic's mind.  He is concerned that the public appraisal of the logical capabilities of Corvus brachyrhynchos might take a severe beating if this does not stop.  OW!  He told me to type that too.  Whiplash hurts, DWA says.

Edited April 2, 2015 by DWA

[norseman]

I didn't know Crow was a girl...... But yanno what the say about a woman's prerogative

[Guest]

I do not believe they are doing fine and are all over the place. My personal observations are similar to yours.

 

I believe my father and I saw tracks in the late 70's, I have since been packing horses and mules through out the Pacific NW since that time...............zip, zero, nada.

 

I've rode over more mountains, and thru more deep, dark canyons than I can remember, most of it while in the pursuit of elk. I've had one visual (in SE Oklahoma) and one roar/scream that I cannot logically explain. I hear of folks having multiple, if not dozens of encounters, and I'm jealous, considering all the vast wilderness I've rode/hiked thru. I admit, I was not looking for Sasquatch footprints, but I was certainly looking for elk sign, so I should have come across some tracks.

[Guest Divergent1]

You don't need that much. If anyone is ever going to study and understand them, you have to be able to find them and their lair. Wherever they sleep and or give birth there would be plenty of genetic material. "THIS" is how we treat apes today.

 

If they are members of homo, all that might be out of the question , and their genetic profiles might not be allowed to publish in data banks, which would limit it to private study. If a cure for some human disease was discovered, it might be proprietary.

This is a little off topic but it was brought up in another thread. There is a you tube video based on a book called" Genes, Giants, Monsters, and Men" . In that video towards the end they mention somatids, precursors to DNA in theory. A drug was developed called 714-X which has a good record for treating MS, CA, and AIDS. Do you think the U.S. is even trying to study that? And you can find these somatids in dirt. I doubt that any genetic material found in a bigfoot nest without the bigfoot in it is going to rock the world. 

Edited April 3, 2015 by Divergent1

[southernyahoo]

You can be wrong, and probably are wrong. Replace your Sasquatch in the survival story of ice age and extinction of the mega fauna and European colonization with:

 

A) Grizzly Bear

B )Lynx

C) Wolverine

D) Woodland Caribou

E) Wolf

F) Native Salmon stocks

G) Bison

 

All currently fighting for survival in the lower 48 states. They made it through everything you mentioned and right now, today they need our help.

 

I'm not going to even discuss the vast amount of species that have already gone extinct within the last thousand years, because of humans.

 

You don't want to shoot one, I can totally understand that. But you can still be a pro kill proponent...........it's the logical choice.

 

US law and a multitude of agencies are working very hard to ensure the species I've listed above do not go extinct...........absolutely nothing is left to chance. Your emotional knee jerk reaction to collecting a type specimen is illogical and unwarranted.

 

Sorry bud.

 

You could say I'm pro choice. If one is destroying your camp then yeah, defend yourself. If your encounter is benign and it is walking away from you and it looks too human then don't. Purposely hunting them will be met with the same challenges anyone else has in locating them and getting a good look. Sightings are like getting struck by lightning, So I'm not really concerned about sasquatch getting killed, it's probably happened before. I'm more concerned about the whole thing of bringing it in and getting the result you would want. I don't believe in dumb luck in that we don't already have a body. So I suspect something repeatedly goes wrong at some point in that process.

 

Then there is the sightings which occur all over the country, and from the evidence that I've heard, seen etc. I'd say they aren't really in danger of extinction, they are just better than any other ape at hiding or staying out of sight 99% of the time. I also think they are careful about leaving clear obvious tracks for us to find, (the younger ones probably making more mistakes) I've been in some places where my team has had some very compelling results, but you wouldn't have a clue just hiking around during the day. The clues can be subtle and can seem coincidental initially.

 

You're always trying to confirm their presence right here , right now, then switching to new tactics to get a visual.. Getting inside their bubble without them knowing is tougher than you might think. IMO

[norseman]

If it looks like Patty? I'm shooting........

 

And you bring up a good point, and this is why I started Project Grendel. Coming into visual contact with one is absolutely like being struck by lightning. So if you have enough right minded people packing rifles to do the job, someone at some point is going to get lucky. As opposed to having a single well equipped and maintained team.

 

I've already seen this with Cougar hunting, hound hunting which was the pinnacle of consistently harvesting Cougars was outlawed. Cougar hunting for boot hunters was allowed, but no body ever bought a tag because of the low percentage of probability. So the state invented a big game package that included Deer, Elk, Bear and Cougar. By selling thousands of big game packages the state was able to maintain a harvest quota. It took thousands more boot hunters than houndsman to do this, but it worked. They replaced quality with quantity.

 

Dunno about the conspiracy, but I would certainly take precautions with my type specimen against it. It's a discovery of the century, I would not be overly trusting with that discovery. 

[southernyahoo]

If any of them have the physical anatomy and sentience for complex speech, I won't be shooting it unless threatened, because if it speaks, it's human and no study will change that.

 

I really doubt you would be able to stay with the specimen throughout it's study, and I'd imagine a great deal of pressure on anyone in charge of it. That's probably a big obstacle by itself, but if the study would result in a proclamation that there are giant lawless wildmen roaming our forests, well I can see where it goes wrong. Those in charge of it's release might decide it's better for us and them to keep the status quo.

 

They normally don't mess with us much, but we would want to mess with them more than we do now.

 

You should understand that I play devils advocate sometimes and it is to try and mirror the public's eye looking at this potential discovery for the first time as a reality.

[norseman]

They would need a hyoid bone. And the only way we can verify that is with a specimen.

Knowledge is power and the more people who know? The harder it is to contain.

[southernyahoo]

All apes have a hyoid bone, but the apes that speak and followed that path of evolution lack the bulla and the laryngeal air sacs. 

 

Humans still have some remnant pathology of these air sacs but aren't really useful anymore. Squatch might still have a use for them though. Some recordings hint at their presence in the sierra sounds as well as the speech.

 

So Sasquatch could be in transition to humanity or with some preserved genetics we don't have. That might make sense given the selective pressures they would live under.

 

 

 https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/lucy/recreating-ancient-voices/

 

 

Plastic models of primate air sacs obscure the clarity of bellowing sounds to human observers. Therefore, de Boer concludes that the changing lifestyle of the bipedal ancestors of humans made the ability to articulate an increasingly important survival skill. However, nothing about A. afarensis anatomy suggests it sounded like anything but an ordinary ape. De Boer supports his contention by the claim that humans retain useless vestigial remnants of primate air sacs in the form of laryngeal saccules and occasionally as pathoglogical laryngocoeles. He further notes that some fossils of Neanderthals and H. heidelbergensis have been found with hyoid bones lacking bulla. Therefore, he believes speech evolved between the “Lucys†and the Neanderthals. De Boer writes, “This indicates that air sacs disappeared somewhere between 3.3 million years ago and 500 000 years ago in human evolution.â€5

 

 

 

DNA can tell us something also,.....

 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v418/n6900/full/nature01025.html

 

 

Language is a uniquely human trait likely to have been a prerequisite for the development of human culture. The ability to develop articulate speech relies on capabilities, such as fine control of the larynx and mouth¹, that are absent in chimpanzees and other great apes. FOXP2 is the first gene relevant to the human ability to develop language². A point mutation in FOXP2 co-segregates with a disorder in a family in which half of the members have severe articulation difficulties accompanied by linguistic and grammatical impairment³. This gene is disrupted by translocation in an unrelated individual who has a similar disorder. Thus, two functional copies of FOXP2 seem to be required for acquisition of normal spoken language. We sequenced the complementary DNAs that encode the FOXP2 protein in the chimpanzee, gorilla, orang-utan, rhesus macaque and mouse, and compared them with the human cDNA. We also investigated intraspecific variation of the human FOXP2 gene. Here we show that human FOXP2 contains changes in amino-acid coding and a pattern of nucleotide polymorphism, which strongly suggest that this gene has been the target of selection during recent human evolution.

 

 

This is why when I hear the articulated speech in multiple researchers recordings, I have a predictive hypothesis about where they will fall on the tree of life and what genus they are from and based on the REAL science that backs my position on taking voucher specimens.

 

 

 

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

 

So Sasquatch could be in transition to humanity or with some preserved genetics we don't have. That might make sense given the selective pressures they would live under.

 

 

I suspect that as well. All of their characteristics seem to be something between man and ape. There are extinct species of bipedal hominids that fit the profile of Sasquatch and they are closer to humans genetically than any currently known species of non-human apes. The possibility that they can speak in sentences like us is there. There are anecdotes from credible people which suggests that it may be the case.

 

With that being said though, we still need a body.

Edited April 3, 2015 by OntarioSquatch

[norseman]

Your right other Apes have a hyoid bone, it's just not like modern humans or Neanderthals. I have found this:

http://minnieapolis.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/14/1487095-the-hyoid-bone-and-the-capacity-for-speech-in-hominids-and-apes

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

This leads to more than speculation about the larger range of sounds possible once one is not limited to hoots and grunts. As Bolles says in his blog, Babel's Dawn:

"But what evidence is there that the loss of air sacs might be related to the rise of speech? De Boer has modeled the sounds that follow the addition of an air sac to the vocal system. Air sac result in lower frequency sounds and a smaller acoustic range than humans enjoy. Air sacs shorten the articulatory range and the mouth is less able to shape the sound that comes out from an air sac vocalization. De Boer hypothesized that when what you say becomes more important than how you sound, air sacs give way. So the disappearance of air sacs is likely a good bit of evidence that speech of some sort has appeared (Bolles E.B. 2008)."

So at this point it seems safe to conclude that the modern hyoid bone was key to expanding our vocal capabilities, aiding our progression from apes who communicated with hoots, grunts and gestures to the modern electronic sapiens who communicates with email and iPhones.

[Guest Divergent1]

I don't think the theory is that simple, you need to look at the more ancient languages of the world. Some languages didn't require the same level of  vocal range as you see in modern day languages. 

 

I brought this up before in a Neanderthal thread, but art, a jump in the evolution of tool making, and evidence of language as we know it didn't occur until 40,000 years ago based on the archaeological record. Artistic expression is an indication of symbolic thinking. None of us had it until some event 40,000 years ago changed us forever.

 

The only event that I can think of that would result in a sudden leap like that is hybrid vigor. I think the right combination of different hominids blending over time with Neanderthal hybridization being the last known hybridization event resulted in this ability. We might not have air sacks, but if we did, our language might sound more like singing.

 

I think it's the mental capacity that directs language ability, with that, the rest will follow. This theory allows for Bigfoot to possess speech even without a hyoid bone similar to ours. You simply might not recognize it as such when hearing the screeches, moans, or what other descriptive adjectives you might use to describe  the noise that some claim come from bigfoot. I've read the criticism for Scott Nelson's research, but I don't totally discount his conclusions about bigfoot speech. 

 

http://australianmuseum.net.au/how-do-we-know-if-they-could-speak

Edited April 4, 2015 by Divergent1

[Guest Stan Norton]

Or some other stochastic event such as climate change, population bottlenecks etc. Remember, our knowledge of the evolution of both human species and their technologies is patchy. Neanderthals had a very very sophisticated culture. I believe there is now unambiguous evidence that they created art. Or soon will be when the dig is written up.

[Guest DWA]

Really, I wouldn't be surprised if they *invented* art.  Evidence such as brain case size and diet point in that direction.

 

Bill Gates didn't come out of nowhere.  Hey, nice invention there!  [snag]