A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Bodhi]

why wouldn't 15K years be enough?

I'll find Disotell's interview and post it here, I don't want to misquote him.

[southernyahoo]

Well, here's one point. She stated that the divergence which has led to her purported hybrid occurred 15,000 years ago which is simply not enough time. Hence, skewed.

I thought that the "unknown primate" thing was incorrect, I've heard Dr. Disotell explain that what would be reported is an animal similar to "x" it wouldn't be reported as "unknown primate". I always chuckle when I see/hear people passing on that story of 'unknown primate".

But two things.

Q: Is there any example in nature of a species which went through a sudden non-evolutionary change - as a group so they could all interbreed?

Q: Are you positing that a breeding population of humans went feral? It couldn't be just one random guy or gal obviously, and in light of purported sightings it would have had to have occurred all over the continent.

 

It's on other continents too, but one theory would be that it's an off shoot of cro-magnon and Neanderthal hybridizations which retained the human mtDNA and lost the Neanderthal maternal lineage.  Subesequent  cross breeding would then simply update the mtDNA. I think Ketchum's dates were to imply a no earlier than date because there was no record of the haplogroups existing prior to then. I would think bigfoot had to have existed all along but could have changed as it crossed with us.

[Guest]

Dr Ketchum sounded legitimate on 2 coast interviews. A little flakey about her interactions with them, but she portrayed herself well, with lots of info on the DNA studies. She is not a lightweight in the field.

 

Probably on youtube if you care to listen.

[salubrious]

 If they were an advanced species then why would they have no need for fire?

 

Technology is also important for survival. Disease has wiped out populations of animals, just like it wiped out populations of humans. Many species eventually can't keep up and die out, but technology has allowed us to maintain ourselves and also many species of animals through disease control.

 

They don't need fire because they have hair, which would also make it dangerous to work with fire.

 

I like technology too FWIW; I hold a couple of patents, but I'm not sure I would call the whole thing 'smart'. Technology is something that we made- it comes with us. I'm not sure that makes it 'smart'; its simply part of who we are.

 

 

The model for Planet Earth is a pretty good model to base things on.  On Planet Earth higher intelligence results in technology.  Bigfoot reportage has shown itself to be a more of a brute than a thinker.  

 

I'm not sure of that. My own personal experience suggests that there is much more to BF than a simple brute!

 

My understanding is that the tribes people living near the gorilla range did hunt them, so how do you figure that gorillas weren't trying to avoid humans? Is this just your sense of the matter or do you have some source which you are quoting for this claim?

 

I'll put it this way: we can associate with gorillas. But BF- if there is an encounter a very common aspect is the BF leaving, ducking out of sight, etc. Gorillas are very secretive too, much more so than humans, but they will allow us near them given enough time. That does not seem to be the case with BF.

 

My theory is that we demonstrated to them long ago that we are pretty dangerous, meaning only the reclusive ones survived. Just a theory mind you and I'm not going to defend it on that account, but it does explain a lot.

 

Why is fire a presumption for "advancement?"

 

The Bronze Age. 

 

As far as destroying our own nest: I've restored/rebuilt endangered wetlands. Planted thousands of trees. I built a snake pit in 2003 on a challenge from a project supervisor to handle wildlife overflow of a subdivision.

 

Please tell me again why Bigfoot hates me?

 

I've watched this thread unfold for 24 pages and the divide is clear. 

 

Good day gentlemen.

 

Squatchy, just for the record people like you that do work to reinvigorate the environment are rare and you are to be commended. I'm sure how BF feels about you is nothing personal and I explained it (in theory only) above. Not that it makes any difference- none of it will unless we achieve contact, which I do not expect in my lifetime.  

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Survival of species (or any other  plant or animal) depends on genetics and adaptability. We are alive in 2015 because our ancestors had the genetic quirks that helped them survive the Plague, measles, mumps, German measles, diphtheria, smallpox, polio, chickenpox, the 1918 Spanish Flu and a host of other microorganisms. Technology such as vaccines, improved sanitation, antibiotics/antimicrobials are relatively new kids on the block and their long-term effect (read: effect on the Homo sapien sapien species) has yet to be determined.

 

Also what is "technology"? Is technology the ability to make things that contribute to survival? If so then nest-building birds have techology, so do coral and spiders. Is technology the ability to make and use tools? If so chimps have technology.

[Bodhi]

I think we associate fire with more than technological advancement. Cooking denatures the proteins in the meat allowing for easier digestion/absorption of the nutrients within the meat and that allows for a smaller gut. So using fire is kind of a critical step regardless of the body covering, IMO.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Well, here's one point. She stated that the divergence which has led to her purported hybrid occurred 15,000 years ago which is simply not enough time. Hence, skewed.

I thought that the "unknown primate" thing was incorrect, I've heard Dr. Disotell explain that what would be reported is an animal similar to "x" it wouldn't be reported as "unknown primate". I always chuckle when I see/hear people passing on that story of 'unknown primate".

But two things.

Q: Is there any example in nature of a species which went through a sudden non-evolutionary change - as a group so they could all interbreed?

Q: Are you positing that a breeding population of humans went feral? It couldn't be just one random guy or gal obviously, and in light of purported sightings it would have had to have occurred all over the continent.

 

We see that type of sudden change when hybridization occurs between two different species. Other than that, the only other thing that can cause such a change is genetic engineering. 

[Guest Crowlogic]

Survival of species (or any other  plant or animal) depends on genetics and adaptability. We are alive in 2015 because our ancestors had the genetic quirks that helped them survive the Plague, measles, mumps, German measles, diphtheria, smallpox, polio, chickenpox, the 1918 Spanish Flu and a host of other microorganisms. Technology such as vaccines, improved sanitation, antibiotics/antimicrobials are relatively new kids on the block and their long-term effect (read: effect on the Homo sapien sapien species) has yet to be determined.

 

Also what is "technology"? Is technology the ability to make things that contribute to survival? If so then nest-building birds have techology, so do coral and spiders. Is technology the ability to make and use tools? If so chimps have technology.

The link that completes the picture is abstract thinking.  Humans are the only known abstract thinkers and hence our ability to move beyond genetically programmed tool use as in birds.  Spiders are not exactly using technology they are following a genetic instruction similar to the way viruses operate.

[WSA]

^^Once again demonstrating failure to keep up with developments. Would you consider it "abstract thought" to fabricate a lie to gain a predicted advantage? That has been documented in non-humans.  

[Guest Stan Norton]

Not quite sure that 'genetically programmed' has any basis in reality. There is very little that is ordinary about bird tool use, especially amongst corvids. If you believe that Japanese crows are genetically programmed to drop nuts on pedestrian crossings (only when traffic has stopped mind) so that cars can crack them, then ok.

[ShadowBorn]

Not quite sure that 'genetically programmed' has any basis in reality. There is very little that is ordinary about bird tool use, especially amongst corvids. If you believe that Japanese crows are genetically programmed to drop nuts on pedestrian crossings (only when traffic has stopped mind) so that cars can crack them, then ok.

I am not sure that it is genetically programmed within the bird. But I would say that it was a learned behavior just like man learned to eat clams one day. It is not like one day man said that "today I will eat or try a clam" , Man must have saw it been eaten and said I will try it. Just like a bird must have seen a nut fall and hit the ground and seen that it cracked opened. That is when the idea of dropping the nut came in so to speak. Same goes with bears that have learned to look for clams when the tied has gone down. They have learned to look for bubbles and some how figured out that that is where the clams are at. Now this has been past down through generations. Nature is very brutal yet very intelligent in it's own way and has no need for technology. If our creator had his way we have no need for technology since all things would be of the earth. 

[Guest]

Birds are highly intelligent and have been dropping hard shelled food for probably millions of years. Any thing that flew and ate hard shelled food probably dropped it from height to crack it open, even dino's. Animals are not stupid as we tend to think.

Edited July 3, 2015 by Wag

[Guest]

Dolphins learned to carry sponges in their beaks to scatter sand on the Ocean floor, Chimps learned to use tools to hunt for food and sticks to forage for ants. Beyond what birds learned to accomplish in breaking open walnuts the Crows learned to drop stones in containers of water to raise the level in order to consume water. Elephants know how to drop objects on electric fences to disarm them and learned to fashion fans to swat flies! Gorillas have learned to use walking sticks to test the water depth before crossing.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Not quite sure that 'genetically programmed' has any basis in reality. There is very little that is ordinary about bird tool use, especially amongst corvids. If you believe that Japanese crows are genetically programmed to drop nuts on pedestrian crossings (only when traffic has stopped mind) so that cars can crack them, then ok.

I didn't say animals can't learn or have learned behavior.  A parrot can be taught to speak but does it know what it is saying?  Spiders spin webs by genetic programming.  Take the most advanced form of animal technology and intelligence and it is still many layers below even early humans.  

Birds are highly intelligent and have been dropping hard shelled food for probably millions of years. Any thing that flew and ate hard shelled food probably dropped it from height to crack it open, even dino's. Animals are not stupid as we tend to think.

Sea Gulls do it all the time to break shellfish.  However if given a golf ball they'll fly it up and drop if 40 times not understanding that i is not a food stuff.    Also many animals have picked up  things from humans.  Learned behavior is not a sure sign of intelligence.  Many animals are clever but clever is not intelligence per se

^^Once again demonstrating failure to keep up with developments. Would you consider it "abstract thought" to fabricate a lie to gain a predicted advantage? That has been documented in non-humans.  

What animal and what lie did it fabricate, when and where, source?

Edited July 3, 2015 by Crowlogic

[Guest]

Chimps can deceive for strategic purposes. Just read where dogs can  ''lie'' about feeling guilty, not sure what that was about. Im sure you can go to youtube and see all sorts of animals using deception. Some birds probably do it also.