Meganthropus Tooth Found In Santa Cruz?

[Guest WesT]

Hi hiflier,

The only thing I had heard about the tooth was back in 2012-13? Not much, just a large human-like tooth was found in California.

What I do know for a fact is that when the Denisovan tooth was discovered it was almost overlooked by scientist as belonging to a cave bear. Cave bears were rather large in size... just sayin

[hiflier]

Hello All,

 

I have an update that is rather important. I spoke to Mike Rugg today and I can tell you he was simply great to talk to. Personable and very candid in relating some additional details regarding the fossil tooth. We talked about his experiences with both Dr. Ketchum and Dr. Sykes. It's quite a story in and of itself. I called him to inform him of my activities in contacting the Archeological Society as well as my contact with the Museum Curator along with my email to Todd Disotell.

 

But a lot of what we talked about was overshadowed when he informed that the remainder of the tooth that he held at the Bigfoot Discovery Museum went missing 10 days ago and is now thought to have been stolen from the Museum. I asked Mr. Ruggs if it would be OK with him if I posted the bad news on this Forum and he agreed that it would be a good thing to do for several reasons:

 

1) To get the word out for it's return no questions asked

2) To perhaps allow Dr. Brian Sykes to realize the importance of the piece that he currently has in his possession. Also I was told tht Dr. Jeffery Meldrum had requested from Dr. Sykes for it's return to Mr. Rugg . Dr. Sykes replied that he wanted to hear from Mike Rugg himself which he subsequently did and told Mike that he would return the partial sample to him. Mr. Rugg is still waiting for the return of the tooth section.

 

As you can see, without the remainder of the tooth which was stolen from the Museum there is nothing other than Dr. Sykes' sample left to examine. The return or location of this piece of fossilized tooth is very important. Just so whoever has it knows it. There is a chain of custody involved here so there is no way anyone can bring this artifact into the public eye without someone asking questions. The best course of action would be to return it or call Mike Ruggs at the Museum at 1-831-335-4478 to arrange for it's return- anonymously or otherwise. Please seriously consider this request.Thank you

[chelefoot]

I don't see Sykes returning that tooth portion without making definitely sure it's nothing unusual. Think how he would feel if he sent it back and it turned out to be something crazy.... missed opportunity (and would make him look bad).

[bipedalist]

If he (Sykes) doesn't immediately return it he sets a bad precedent started by Ketchum of malingering with other people's property.  IIRC Tom Burnette's alleged baby bigfoot skull which seemed to be a juvenile deer skull with saw marks after all was photographed and examined, was only returned by Ketchum after multiple requests and threats---at least by Burnette's personal testimony.  

 

Re: Meldrum, I seem to have noted that he has revoked certain membership qualities here such that friends that were established are now missing due to "deleted member"?

Edited August 14, 2015 by bipedalist

[norseman]

That sucks rotten eggs.

That tooth should have been under lock and key maybe?

[hiflier]

Hello Norseman,

 

Yes, perhaps it should've been. When I spoke to him he said that it wasn't but it was kept under the counter in a container toward the back of the shelf. Whoever absconded with had to know what is was and where it was kept? He didn't say if anything else was missing from there and I didn't think to ask. He was certainly candid enough to mention of other articles were found to be missing as well.

 

BTW anyone who wishes to call and talk to him I'm sure he would welcome the contact and would discuss the subject as long as he understood who you were and how you knew of the incident. He said he was a member here in times past but didn't remember his password info. Maybe he'll show up here if he does a password recovery effort. It of course requires an email address which I'm sure he has but which I had forgotten to ask him for.

 

I'm still waiting for email replies from the Capitola History Museum curator as well as Dr. Todd Disotell.

[bipedalist]

That sucks rotten eggs.

That tooth should have been under lock and key maybe?

 

 

Trust no one in this field, security and verification is everything.  

[hiflier]

Hello bipedalist,

Yes, and there has certainly bee a lot of locking the barn after the horses have left over the decades and yet people still trust others. I respect Mr. Rugg for his obvious trusting nature and he sets a good example however in retrospect he may be wishing he had done things differently; especially in the area of important physical evidence even if it was found to not be from a NA primate.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I do not think a camel tooth looks anything like the specimen in question. Well, at least a modern camel tooth doesn't, but I have no idea about the extinct species. But then again, who said it was from a camel? That was one comment from some unknown source, at least to my knowledge, so there is nothing definitive saying that the tooth most definitely came from a camel. Therefore there is not any need to even attempt to disprove the camel hypothesis at this point. At least not based on what I know, but perhaps someone knows more about the whole issue. Wasn't this the tooth that was uncovered in the mud by accident? I had always wondered whether the guy who found it, who to my knowledge was NOT a bigfoot researcher, actually took the time to scour and prod the muddy area for any other specimens. Personally I doubt that he did. Was anyone ever able to locate the spot where the tooth was found? If so, I would bet that the area has been searched.

 

If it was me, I would search not only the area where the tooth was found, but also the area that is in the opposite direction of where the flow of water and mud would have originated. My logic behind this is assuming that the tooth was attached to a skull at some point after the animal's death, and that the tooth became dislodged and therefore became separated from the skull itself. It is possible that the tooth was lost while the animal was still alive, meaning that no other bones are likely to be found in that location, unless by luck another specimen ended up there. If the tooth is from a bigfoot I would be willing to bet that it was not detached while the animal was still alive. Now I could be wrong, but I would not expect a healthy tooth to simply dislodge itself for no reason. I'm no dentist, but the tooth would have been loose, eventually falling out. But this would not happen unless there was some underlying dental issue. If the tooth appeared to have been decaying from a cavity or something like that, there would be a greater chance that it came out while the animal was still alive, but I don't think the tooth appeared to have anything wrong with it. If there was infection I am wondering if there would have been signs left on the tooth that could still be seen. I don't know if an infection could cause a tooth to fall out, but I would guess that if the structural integrity of the gums and the root became compromised due to the infection, a tooth would become loose and eventually come out.

 

On the other side of the question, do teeth tend to dislodge themselves easily when only a skull remains? If so, this increases the chances that the tooth in question dislodged from the skull of a dead animal, as opposed to falling out while the animal was still alive. Anyway, ever since I heard of this tooth I had wondered when testing was going to be performed. Someone mentioned that Sykes did not give the results or something like that...? That would upset me greatly, were I the one who had submitted the sample. Perhaps it was "contaminated" with human DNA, lol. That is funny because I believe that sasquatch DNA could very well have similar markings that could be confused with one another. I'm not saying that I believe that, rather I believe it is possible. Thus, throwing out any sample for this reason could mean that the definitive evidence was tossed aside. Again, I don't know what is going on, or what went on with all of that. I'm just giving my take based on what little I think I know.

[hiflier]

Hello JiggyPotamus,

Many of your points are well taken. I received a follow up email from the Curator of the Capitola History Museum yesterday which I answered in return. His email is as follows:

"Dear XXXXXX,

I don't see any information on where the tooth came from. Is it supposed to be local? The preservation looks like some of the fossil teeth from the Santa Margarita Formation in the Scotts Valley area, which is middle Miocene. The tooth is badly worn, and there is only half of it. I would need a better specimen to determine what kind of mammal it is from. Also, knowing where it is from would help limit the possibilities. There have been many thousands of mammal species through geologic history. The shape of a tooth also depends on the age of the animal, the amount of wear, and the location in the mouth.

Sincerely,

Frank Perry"

I responded with as much information that I had (which wasn't/isn't that much) along with the phone number of the Bigfoot Discovery Museum is case he wished to talk to Mike Rugg direct. I also informed him that the tooth remnant is now missing and believed stolen about two weeks ago. I don't think I can take this much further and am still waiting on a response from Dr. Disotell which, now that the remaining sample at the Museum is now gone seems rather moot. If I receive a positive reply from him though maybe he can end up with Dr. Brian Sykes' only remaing sample somehow in the near future?

Edited August 15, 2015 by hiflier

[norseman]

Crud, I guess this means the rifle goes back in the scabbard.

[hiflier]

Hello Norseman,

Yep, and with the safety on too it would appear. It always seems we get this close (holds index finger 1/64th of an inch from thumb)......and something happens. Maybe the tooth remnant will be returned or otherwise located at the Museum. It might be the best scenario to hope for at this point. DANG!

OR....the Curator at the Museum starts working with the Archeological Society and they get out there and do some digging in Shark's Tooth Hill Yep, that's me, Mr. Positive.

Edited August 15, 2015 by hiflier

[Rockape]

Great work hiflier. To show my appreciation I have plussed all your posts on this.

[hiflier]

Hello Rockape,

Aw shucks, 'twern't nuthin'. But I appreciate very much the support. This could've been a contender yes? At least it was an interesting lead. I also have a sense that it ain't over yet either.

Edited August 15, 2015 by hiflier

[Guest]

That is very strange it went missing just 10 days ago when all this interest started to generate. I also live in the Santa Cruz mountains, pretty remotely, and have been popping into the museum every now and then over past decade. The tooth always looked like a human molar to me but much larger. I have a picture of Mike holding it from last summer. Not sure how to embed photos while posting from iPhone. Here's to hoping it's found..