Collection Of Voucher Specimens

[LeafTalker]

Yuchi1, thanks so much for being such a tireless advocate for our hairy cousins.

 

Your clarity on this issue is very comforting to me, and I would guess to many others, as well. 

[WSA]

Norse...that all mules are sterile is not 100% true. There are cases, but that is not the point I was trying to make either.  In recorded history we've never crossed hominid species...at least none that have been documented. Given that, I think it is rash to predict what the morphology would be, don't you? It may be something that looks like the mother, looks like the father, looks like both, or looks like neither.  The outcomes might not even be consistent. The offspring might be sterile, or it may not be, depending on how remote the genomes are, one from the other.

[Guest DWA]

I'm just not thinking we need to go into the hominid-plasticity thing here.  For my money, the allegedly-extinct robust australopithecines went a lot farther than fossils we have found indicate; for what it's worth, they're one of Meldrum's candidates too.

 

And showing how one's mind can change with more information supplemented by pondering:  I thought WHA!?!? when I first heard that idea.  But Gigantopithecus just seems less and less likely to me with each day that passes.

You mean no one would try to [kill one] for the advancement of science?

Well, that is how we've gotten practically everything else confirmed.  I might like to see us start to ease out of the kill to confirm habit; but as long as the rampant stupidity of the scoffers continues, there will be no headway in that direction.  It's really on them to get intelligent about this; the first corpse is on their hands otherwise.

[Guest Crowlogic]

OS,

 

Science is ambivalent to this subject ergo, the absence of any serious, professional investigation/study.

 

It is a fringe curiosity, avoided at all costs by those in the scientific community that (currently) value their halls of ivory reputation.

 

When NatGeo and/or the Smithsonian get geared up for this endeavour, things will have obviously changed within that community.

So why does the fringe community insist on creating the very circus that derails proper study?  Is it the subject itself or the people attracted to it?

[Guest DWA]

Any subject like this is gonna be like any vacuum; it gets filled with stuff.  That always includes bad stuff.  A lot of it.  People like calling attention to themselves; and in a field where the knowledge isn't well publicized, charlatans will abound.

 

That's why to me this is all on the mainstream.  It is their problem.  A few of their number have gone out on a limb and said:  here is what we think.  It is incumbent on any scientist pronouncing on this topic to have read, and criticized from a scientific standpoint, the proponents' case first.

[WSA]

Just the Rule of large numbers my friend, or as my Second Grade teacher was always telling us (O.K.....me), "It is always the actions of a few that ruin it for all the rest."

[Guest DWA]

And it's the actions of those few that get all the attention.  It's just that some of us know those folk when we encounter them.  They announce themselves to us.

The people in the know in this field have extremely well honed BS meters.

Edited April 14, 2015 by DWA

[southernyahoo]

^^^^^^^^^

No, I'm talking about Infertile hybrids, and I'm 100% correct. as there will never be a daughter or a son for that matter.

To make another generation of Mules? You need a Donkey and a Horse EACH time!

 

You are assuming infertility of the hybrid off spring, which we don't know. It's not a given.

[norseman]

In Mules and Ligers? It's a known.

And of course we do not know in the case of the Sasquatch, but given the morphology? It's more than likely a offspring would not even be produced.

Which has now led us full circle back to my original post.......the not knowing part until you collect a type specimen that is.

Edited April 15, 2015 by norseman

[MIB]

You are assuming infertility of the hybrid off spring, which we don't know. It's not a given.

 

Not merely not a given, but seemingly ridiculous.   To understand why, think about the biological necessities that introduces.   Examine Norseman's mule analogy.   If bigfoot = mule, a sterile hybrid, then not only is a person ( or horse ) required, but another parent (or donkey) is required, and in large enough numbers to both maintain their own population AND produce these hybrids in large enough numbers to account for the sheer number of reports.

 

If there is another parent species out there, they should be in much greater number than bigfoots, so the odds of finding them should be even higher, yet we haven't.   Frankly the only way that could happen is if they are so far beyond us we're as ants in an ant farm to them.

 

Norseman's idea here argues HIGHLY against them being mere apes and should lead him to abandon his pro-kill position if he actually believes it.   He's talked himself in a circle IMHO.

 

MIB

Edited April 15, 2015 by MIB

[norseman]

^^^^^^

Come again?

[norseman]

Norse...that all mules are sterile is not 100% true. There are cases, but that is not the point I was trying to make either. In recorded history we've never crossed hominid species...at least none that have been documented. Given that, I think it is rash to predict what the morphology would be, don't you? It may be something that looks like the mother, looks like the father, looks like both, or looks like neither. The outcomes might not even be consistent. The offspring might be sterile, or it may not be, depending on how remote the genomes are, one from the other.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_6464853/mule-foal-fools-genetics-impossible-birth

Its more rare than rare, but lets take a look at this for a minute. What are the chances of this happening in nature? And what are the chances that the foal of the Molly is going to change the DNA of an entire Horse Herd, or Donkey herd (depending on where it ends up). Because John mules are always sterile which means this miracle foal is going to assimulated back into one of the two donor species.

Mules will never become their own species, they are a creation of man.

concerning my prediction of morphology? your putting your cart in front of the horse. instead of asking what a hybrid could look like? first ask yourself do the two species look close enough in the first place. Neanderthals? Pretty close. Sasquatch? based on Krantz and Munns and Meldrums work? not so much. IMHO of course.....

if you had to chose which scientific reconstruction best fits Pattys side profile of her head? which species of Homonoid would you chose? and remember this a horse has small ears a donkey has gigantic ears and mules ears are in between. how primitive of a skull needed to mate with us to produce pattys head?

Edited April 15, 2015 by norseman

[southernyahoo]

Not merely not a given, but seemingly ridiculous.   To understand why, think about the biological necessities that introduces.   Examine Norseman's mule analogy.   If bigfoot = mule, a sterile hybrid, then not only is a person ( or horse ) required, but another parent (or donkey) is required, and in large enough numbers to both maintain their own population AND produce these hybrids in large enough numbers to account for the sheer number of reports.

 

If there is another parent species out there, they should be in much greater number than bigfoots, so the odds of finding them should be even higher, yet we haven't.   Frankly the only way that could happen is if they are so far beyond us we're as ants in an ant farm to them.

 

Norseman's idea here argues HIGHLY against them being mere apes and should lead him to abandon his pro-kill position if he actually believes it.   He's talked himself in a circle IMHO.

 

MIB

 

Norse proposes BF is a species of ape that is not a hybrid from human, but does think that if BF were a hybrid it would have to hybridize each generation to have human mtDNA. The hybridization events could have happened mostly a long time ago however, and the nuclear human contribution could be much diluted from what we would see in a first generation of such hybrids. I've mentioned a number of times that fertility would have to be there for them all to have human mtDNA and that they would have to have been preferred mates to have taken over the progenitor maternal lineage. This does happen among other primates as Disotell has mentioned studying for 20 years.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

It's worth mentioning that they are most likely not human. The only reason the idea of them being human is even worth considering, is the fact that purported Bigfoot samples continually show modern human mtDNA. The results could be the result of contamination, which happens a lot when someone handles a biological sample. Another issue is that the theory of them being hybrids or genetically modified human beings isn't very likely plausible. If it was a likely explanation, I think it'd be bad idea to shoot one, but right now it just isn't. If someone like Norseman wishes to prove they exist by obtaining a specimen, I think they should be able to do so, at least for now, without a whole bunch of people saying that they are human.

[norseman]

I think we are all frustrated, thats what I think........ SY believes what he believes because the creature has eluded us for so long and DNA samples come back as human. 2+2=4 in his perspective. I dont agree based on the evidence of what we have. But we wont know til we know.