Collection Of Voucher Specimens

[Guest gershake]

With people saying things like "they are a lot closer to apes than us" and "I believe they are part human, part ape", I feel like it is time to link to my thread on taxonomics.

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/50615-for-reference-taxonomic-ranks-apes-hominids-etc/

 

Spoiler alert: Humans ARE apes. As are gibbons, orang-utans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and, IMO with 100 % likelihood (in case they exist in the first place), bigfoot. (Bigfoot NOT being apes would mean they are more distantly related to us than even gibbons are.)

[Guest]

You know what i mean...

[Guest gershake]

Not really. What do you mean by "part ape, part human"? That they are more closely related to us than chimpanzees are?

[Guest]

Yes

[norseman]

No, I don't think I can. That was perfect.

Karnak called he wants his talking Sparrow back!

[Guest]

Not even close

Every year here in Canada, Alaska and Siberia we have hunters killing grizzlies and polar bears, some using nothing but bows or black powder rifles

If a sasquatch exits, it will be no larger, stronger or harder to kill than any of the great bears.

I would be totally confident in using either my 338 winmag or 450 marlin on the type of creature you described

On this site there is a lot of stories about what is known and what is not known about sasquatch, yet at the same time there is no proof.

I will continue packing my rifle, but if someone in a museum somewhere digs up some misidentified bones sitting in a box, great.

 

What's not even close??

 

I'm very familiar with using a bow on large animals, such as a bear. Fred Bear took a Polar Bear with a bow. After multiple attempts failed, and the guide had to kill the bear with a gun. I think you missed the point. Killing one would be much easier than removing the body....

[norseman]

With people saying things like "they are a lot closer to apes than us" and "I believe they are part human, part ape", I feel like it is time to link to my thread on taxonomics.

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/50615-for-reference-taxonomic-ranks-apes-hominids-etc/

Spoiler alert: Humans ARE apes. As are gibbons, orang-utans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and, IMO with 100 % likelihood (in case they exist in the first place), bigfoot. (Bigfoot NOT being apes would mean they are more distantly related to us than even gibbons are.)

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You are correct of course so let me sharpen my pencil.

Chimps and Humans shared a common ancestor roughly six million years ago. Many early hominids were present in Africa not long after the split such as A. bosei. and A. Afarensis such as Lucy. If Sasquatch was descended from one of these early hominids, they would not be of the genus Homo but would be more closely related to us than Chimps. Because while the early Hominids were bushy it is known one branch lead to the rise of Homo and the hypothesis is that it was Lucy's group that is our direct ancestor.

Now remember that Lucy was very small (roughly 80-100 lbs) and had roughly the same size brain case as a Chimp. We also have zero fossil evidence that her kind ever left Africa. The first known African Migration of a bipedal ape was Homo Erectus much much later. Homo Erectus had roughly twice the size brain case and possessed the ability to manufacture stone tools and use fire. And is considered the first truly human species.

So the dilemma for me is that the Afarensis does not fit the model of a North American Sasquatch because they were never present in Asia, nor where the other early Hominids. They never left Africa. Size is a issue as well. But supposed traits of Sasquatch fits these early Hominids to a T.

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;

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lufengpithecus

That also seems to have some adaptations to bipedalism.

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 that doesn't seem to have any Homo traits of fire making and tool manufacture that were taken out of Africa from day one. So why would a Homo species lose these traits?

Another thing I like about a Ponganie family hypothesis is that Sasquatch could have been here much longer than humans. Instead of competing with them on the trip across the land bridge at the same time, they could have been here hundreds of thousands of years before us.

Edited March 28, 2015 by norseman

[Yuchi1]

https://www.barrett.net/firearms/model82a1

 

This is the model mentioned along with a electronic sighting system available (similar in function to the weapons zeroing system on my son's Abroms tank) would have been the basic platform. The 200X spotting scope I had previously purchased made scanning and target ID feasible for the location we'd selected. The cartridge(s) available in this weapon system have more than enough lethality to securely take out a large mammalian entity at those range(s).

 

As I would have been shooting from one mountainside across to the other, a extraction team was planned for the base of the target mountain. We had anticipated multiple kills would be necessary to facilitate the extraction as well as ensure the team could get to the target area quickly and establish a secure perimeter while the targets were retrieved.

 

This was based upon experience that indicated a close approach under appropriate conditions was not likely, so extreme range sniping was determined to be the most pragmatic option.

 

However, before this plan could be implemented, I was able to attain enough intelligence from multiple people that had the opportunity to "take the shot" at ranges of 15-150 yards to decide this path was the wrong one. In each instance, these observers had the same explanation for not pulling the trigger.

 

The face "looked too human".

 

The men conveying this information were of the highest credibility and integrity (IMO) and with introspective thought, providing the basis for my decision.

 

For someone, never having a close encounter, to embark upon such a venture, speaks of (IMO) gross ignorance and/or hubris.

Edited March 28, 2015 by Yuchi1

[norseman]

[Yuchi1]

^^^ pics of some of the women you've woken up with after a wild night?

[Guest gershake]

With people saying things like "they are a lot closer to apes than us" and "I believe they are part human, part ape", I feel like it is time to link to my thread on taxonomics.

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/50615-for-reference-taxonomic-ranks-apes-hominids-etc/

Spoiler alert: Humans ARE apes. As are gibbons, orang-utans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and, IMO with 100 % likelihood (in case they exist in the first place), bigfoot. (Bigfoot NOT being apes would mean they are more distantly related to us than even gibbons are.)

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You are correct of course so let me sharpen my pencil.

Chimps and Humans shared a common ancestor roughly six million years ago. Many early hominids were present in Africa not long after the split such as A. bosei. and A. Afarensis such as Lucy. If Sasquatch was descended from one of these early hominids, they would not be of the genus Homo but would be more closely related to us than Chimps. Because while the early Hominids were bushy it is known one branch lead to the rise of Homo and the hypothesis is that it was Lucy's group that is our direct ancestor.

Now remember that Lucy was very small (roughly 80-100 lbs) and had roughly the same size brain case as a Chimp. We also have zero fossil evidence that her kind ever left Africa. The first known African Migration of a bipedal ape was Homo Erectus much much later. Homo Erectus had roughly twice the size brain case and possessed the ability to manufacture stone tools and use fire. And is considered the first truly human species.

So the dilemma for me is that the Afarensis does not fit the model of a North American Sasquatch because they were never present in Asia, nor where the other early Hominids. They never left Africa. Size is a issue as well. But supposed traits of Sasquatch fits these early Hominids to a T.

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;

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lufengpithecus

That also seems to have some adaptations to bipedalism.

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 that doesn't seem to have any Homo traits of fire making and tool manufacture that were taken out of Africa from day one. So why would a Homo species lose these traits?

Another thing I like about a Ponganie family hypothesis is that Sasquatch could have been here much longer than humans. Instead of competing with them on the trip across the land bridge at the same time, they could have been here hundreds of thousands of years before us.

 

Good post. I used to think that if sasquatch exist, they had to be our closest living relatives, but I've since given thought to some stuff that you mentioned as well. I don't think the pongine hypothesis is all that far-fetched.

[norseman]

^^^ pics of some of the women you've woken up with after a wild night?

Actually I'm celebrating my 25th wedding anniversary this year. But the point I'm making is that all three species above look very human, and all have been dissected by science.

Also their know existence to science has allowed conservation groups to try and save their habitat from human development.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Well there's only one thing to do now. Attention all you habituaters and knowerw who are in good with the forest people that you share a knowing relationship with.  Step up to the plate and deliver the goods that they are the humans that you say they are.  Do it it'll save the lives of your forest human friends.  That is of course if anyone actually making such off the wall claims are not just spinning yarns.  The entire thing is well past the stage where shooters should be expected to acquiesces to the pleas of a certain contingent that won't deliver proof of what they claim.  Lock and load ladies and gentlemen shoot well and let the blood be on the "knowers" hands that could have put the whole thing to rest ages ago.

Edited March 28, 2015 by Crowlogic

[norseman]

Exactly, they can be shot now with impunity. If they cared a hoot they would prove the species real so we could get real laws passed for their protection!

Instead of a lot of hot air.

[Yuchi1]

Actually I'm celebrating my 25th wedding anniversary this year. But the point I'm making is that all three species above look very human, and all have been dissected by science.

Also their know existence to science has allowed conservation groups to try and save their habitat from human development.

Problem is that you have never (by your own admission) had a FTF encounter and as such, you are totally ignorant of what "they" look like and so to speculate they look like a great ape is preposterous and disingenious.