Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) I think Meldrum made the best guess he could, and has some pretty good data points to base his model on. I note that the model of the Gigantopithecus has not had a problem getting scientific support - and all they have on those is partial jaws and teeth. Or how Neanderthal looks with skin and hair on. I do note that most supposed ancestors are usually portrayed to display more human characteristics - and I wonder why that is? Will be interesting when one is taken, to find out how close he came. Dr. Meldrum's comparison A Neanderthal that interbred with Sapiens but did not merge with the gene pool (absorbed) would have taken away some Sapien characteristics from the encounter such as lack of a hairy coat, etc. This isn't relevant in the Patty example but that there are Homo relatives that may look somewhat more like us than the fossil record and may still be around and even more capable of interbreeding or merging with a modern Sapiens population. Gigantopithicus looks to be too primitive if you look at the massive narrow V shape, I think it would have given Patty a much sharper narrower chin. Your statement would only apply to Sapien females to take away anything from an encounter with Neanderthal. That would do nothing for the Neanderthal line. Somehow I don't think the more robust Neanderthal female would allow conquest by a scrawny Homo Sapien male. She would probably kill him if he tried. Perhaps that factor alone is why the Neanderthal line died out. They lost their genetic diversity at a time when Sapiens were gaining genetic diversity. Who knows without a time machine. I know, but I'm not telling. Edited February 12, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) Kind of like this person. Some things just have to be experienced, or not, like Sasquatch. Edited February 12, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
Twist Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) I think Meldrum made the best guess he could, and has some pretty good data points to base his model on. I note that the model of the Gigantopithecus has not had a problem getting scientific support - and all they have on those is partial jaws and teeth. Or how Neanderthal looks with skin and hair on. I do note that most supposed ancestors are usually portrayed to display more human characteristics - and I wonder why that is? Will be interesting when one is taken, to find out how close he came. Dr. Meldrum's comparison A Neanderthal that interbred with Sapiens but did not merge with the gene pool (absorbed) would have taken away some Sapien characteristics from the encounter such as lack of a hairy coat, etc. This isn't relevant in the Patty example but that there are Homo relatives that may look somewhat more like us than the fossil record and may still be around and even more capable of interbreeding or merging with a modern Sapiens population. Gigantopithicus looks to be too primitive if you look at the massive narrow V shape, I think it would have given Patty a much sharper narrower chin. Your statement would only apply to Sapien females to take away anything from an encounter with Neanderthal. That would do nothing for the Neanderthal line. Somehow I don't think the more robust Neanderthal female would allow conquest by a scrawny Homo Sapien male. She would probably kill him if he tried. Perhaps that factor alone is why the Neanderthal line died out. They lost their genetic diversity at a time when Sapiens were gaining genetic diversity. Who knows without a time machine. I know, but I'm not telling. No offense CM, I have respected some of what you have said, but, that comment screams, " I have no way to backup what I have stated" What good is it to make a statement, or take a stance on here, only to claim you have the information to back it up but refuse to provide it. Edited February 12, 2016 by TWlST
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 PS: I reserve rights to artwork, just my blurb.
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 PS: I reserve rights to artwork, just my blurb. I think Meldrum made the best guess he could, and has some pretty good data points to base his model on. I note that the model of the Gigantopithecus has not had a problem getting scientific support - and all they have on those is partial jaws and teeth. Or how Neanderthal looks with skin and hair on. I do note that most supposed ancestors are usually portrayed to display more human characteristics - and I wonder why that is? Will be interesting when one is taken, to find out how close he came. Dr. Meldrum's comparison A Neanderthal that interbred with Sapiens but did not merge with the gene pool (absorbed) would have taken away some Sapien characteristics from the encounter such as lack of a hairy coat, etc. This isn't relevant in the Patty example but that there are Homo relatives that may look somewhat more like us than the fossil record and may still be around and even more capable of interbreeding or merging with a modern Sapiens population. Gigantopithicus looks to be too primitive if you look at the massive narrow V shape, I think it would have given Patty a much sharper narrower chin. Your statement would only apply to Sapien females to take away anything from an encounter with Neanderthal. That would do nothing for the Neanderthal line. Somehow I don't think the more robust Neanderthal female would allow conquest by a scrawny Homo Sapien male. She would probably kill him if he tried. Perhaps that factor alone is why the Neanderthal line died out. They lost their genetic diversity at a time when Sapiens were gaining genetic diversity. Who knows without a time machine. I know, but I'm not telling. No offense CM, I have respected some of what you have said, but, that comment screams, " I have no way to backup what I have stated" What good is it to make a statement, or take a stance on here, only to claim you have the information to back it up but refuse to provide it. Should have not risen to the occasion. I retract all assertions. Consider if for purely entertainment purposes. You can PM me criticisms or comments as I will lay low at this point. *ducks*
BigTreeWalker Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 Sorry Cryptic but I did see what you wrote up there originally before the edit: "Cause I met one."
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) Sorry Cryptic but I did see what you wrote up there originally before the edit: "Cause I met one." It's good I took it out, then anyhow I posted elsewhere on the subject. Edited February 12, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
FarArcher Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 I see the skull is a bit too big for the body. Way too big. 1
xspider1 Posted February 13, 2016 Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) ^ yep! I knew something looked off with that skeleton and couldn't put my finger on it. The skull seems very disproportionate. We need ver. 1.1 Edited February 13, 2016 by xspider1
Lake County Bigfooot Posted February 13, 2016 Author Posted February 13, 2016 I do think there are several variety of sasquatch, the head size is describes as either very large for the body, or has been described as very small for the body, both have been witnessed. Also you have a variety of hair descriptions ranging from long and shaggy to short and groomed looking, to almost no hair, and hair colors ranging from Jet Black to Albino White. It certainly is to small of a box to fit all sasquatch into Meldrum's model. I think what he is after is the classic PG type NWP type. Some refer to as a type 1 sasquatch. In contrast the Skunk Ape, smaller and skinnier, and the booger of the south, well they are mostly what some call a type 2, which generally slighter in build, more Neanderthal like in appearance. Though then you get into face types and it can range to near human to completely ape to everything in between, so I think the book is going to remain open for a long time as to what is out there.
Guest DWA Posted February 13, 2016 Posted February 13, 2016 There really is less than zero reason not to suspect two, or more, species of North American primate. Think gibbon species. Think chimp/bonobo/Bili ape. Think gorilla species. Think all the varieties of fossil hominid. There's more than one, probably at least three or four.
Oonjerah Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 Does Bigfoot live in the mountains surrounding Pocatello? http://www.idahostatejournal.com/does-bigfoot-live-in-the-mountains-surrounding-pocatello/article_6eed7946-1890-5a39-bc5f-2ab65d36a8d0.html Yes ... most of us know what Dr. Meldrum says about Bigfoot. But some of the readers' comments below the article, the first one especially, I found real interesting.
Recommended Posts