Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[norseman]

Just a FYI in my statement.

they = aliens

[georgerm]

cryptic m: I would agree that the difference and us is that they did not go down the technological rabbit hole.
They don't have a great need for human style speech as they are not socially complex or have technology, which would be the difference between them and us.
I don't subscribe to a "dumb" animals theory for any species. 
They all communicate regarding what they find important to signal in regards to their environment.
The real key is self awareness, such as the mirror test, where you know that the reflections is you.
That is a fairly high degree and no doubt a Bigfoot can pass this, (if they exist), as I think any hominoid would.
Course you would still need to verify from a science perspective if you ever get one into a testing setting.
 
 
Bigfoot didn't fall down the technological rabbit hole as you stated and the question is why? They have fingers to make things like we do. They need ways to get food and will invent better ways when game is tough to find. Instead of inventing technology, they invented better ways to hunt in groups by using stratagies  and communications with language and animal calls. It's been reported they have a jibberish sounding language that may be well developed. Does this make an intelligent animal? Can they out play us in 'forest chess' where they out wit us every step of the way? We try to spy on them and they beat us in the spy game by 10 to 1. Now with night vision gear, the spy game is improving for humans, but we will never match night mobility on the ground but may come close. How? You can answer that one.
 
They developed great night vision  to hunt better and to avoid humans. Bigfoot avoids humans by staying in the high elevations where only smaller groups could be supported and humans perished. They were reported to come to the low lands at night to steal salmon from pacific coast Native Americans. They avoided massive war like human populations by going in the opposite directions and living in small groups in the mountains. Humans developed in the low lands, farmed, grew in numbers, and invented war. Totally opposite ways to survive. What species is smarter or better?

 

Where does bigfoot fit in the evolutionary tree? Did they branch off the human evolutionary tree not so long ago when Neanderthals did? We haven't been lucky to find with bigfoot fossils as we did with the Neanderthal finds.

 

 
 
So here we are living side by side with bigfoot and, we really don't know what they are in terf intelligence and DNA.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

cryptic m: I would agree that the difference and us is that they did not go down the technological rabbit hole.

They don't have a great need for human style speech as they are not socially complex or have technology, which would be the difference between them and us.

I don't subscribe to a "dumb" animals theory for any species. 

They all communicate regarding what they find important to signal in regards to their environment.

The real key is self awareness, such as the mirror test, where you know that the reflections is you.

That is a fairly high degree and no doubt a Bigfoot can pass this, (if they exist), as I think any hominoid would.

Course you would still need to verify from a science perspective if you ever get one into a testing setting.

 

 

Bigfoot didn't fall down the technological rabbit hole as you stated and the question is why? They have fingers to make things like we do. They need ways to get food and will invent better ways when game is tough to find. Instead of inventing technology, they invented better ways to hunt in groups by using stratagies  and communications with language and animal calls. It's been reported they have a jibberish sounding language that may be well developed. Does this make an intelligent animal? Can they out play us in 'forest chess' where they out wit us every step of the way? We try to spy on them and they beat us in the spy game by 10 to 1. Now with night vision gear, the spy game is improving for humans, but we will never match night mobility on the ground but may come close. How? You can answer that one.

 

They developed great night vision  to hunt better and to avoid humans. Bigfoot avoids humans by staying in the high elevations where only smaller groups could be supported and humans perished. They were reported to come to the low lands at night to steal salmon from pacific coast Native Americans. They avoided massive war like human populations by going in the opposite directions and living in small groups in the mountains. Humans developed in the low lands, farmed, grew in numbers, and invented war. Totally opposite ways to survive. What species is smarter or better?

 

Where does bigfoot fit in the evolutionary tree? Did they branch off the human evolutionary tree not so long ago when Neanderthals did? We haven't been lucky to find with bigfoot fossils as we did with the Neanderthal finds.

 

 

 

So here we are living side by side with bigfoot and, we really don't know what they are in terf intelligence and DNA.

I was likely agreeing with you that they are smart, even in a human like way. 

 

No evidence they can coordinate in large groups (in my opinion).

 

I think they have a large visual spatial cortex that may allow then to process lots of visual information and "awareness" type of information much like a graphics card helps a CPU with computation. They play chess faster and better on the fly, as a result. Perhaps out anticipating human reactions, lead of focus, perception, mesmerism.

 

I think on the African plains we and a cousin species, Australopithecus, who did not use tools and was being out competed in the same niche by Homo as it acquired tools and larger brains led to a heretofore unknown branch of Australopithecus of the P. Boisei variant there or about (so far undiscovered) moved into the mountains that were forming during the same period as the plains that theoretically led to our evolution.

 

They were already upright walkers and as they became adapted to the forested uplands they developed the metatarsal break and the form of locomotion you see today in the P-G film. At some point during one of the inter glacial periods and after they had moved into Eurasia some crossed over the land bridge to North America.

 

This may have occured 2 million years ago or more recently at 200,000 to 12,000 years ago.

Forested upland in Africa probably have the same problems of fossil preservation in forested uplands anywhere. To wet and acid for fossils and to many rodents gnawing bones.

 

Probably a cave somewhere is where you might find the remains, likely the rich fossil beds not so much. Perhaps a volcanic ash-fall but then the rarity is still working against you.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[ShadowBorn]

Lets go back some ten million years, and lets say that man is just starting. Back then there were other creatures bigger and more hungry then us, so this placed that friend or foe or maybe flee moment in us and them. Now this is all theory on my part. But we took a different path , you know that apple one that we cannot talk about. They went the primitive way where there needs was just to live that day. In a way this is how we lived as well back then , until we were given an advantage and how that advantage came along is a question. 

 

As far as science should go, it should start with a base line. Discount what is natural until it comes down to the un natural. Then see if the un natural can be recreated so that it cannot be a hoax, trickery or any un natural occurrence. But the base line is the key to any encounter or actively searching for an encounter. These animals (not talking about Bigfoot) all communicate with in the forest system with each other. Learning this was a big discovery for me while I sat in my stand in the silence. I am sure that there are others who know this and that I am not the only one.

 

All it would take is one scientist with a high enough reputation willing to risk it all. This scientist would (like others have mention) make the greatest discovery that one single person has ever made in world history. But some how in a strange way this discovery would go un notice, like this was meant to be. I wonder if there are scientist out there who are willing to come out with the truth? There are limitations on those nondisclosure, if we are stalled it could be for the truth.

 

PS: So far no Men In Black at my door yet, it is usually me dressed in my black suit with my Black tie, oh yea love those black Oakley glasses.   

Edited February 18, 2016 by ShadowBorn

[SWWASAS]

ShadowBorn:   The only way I see this happening if you can talk some scientist into sitting in your tree stand and the BF are willing to keep coming back.   One time would convince that scientist.      Maybe he could talk another scientist into the same experience?    Somehow it is going to take more that one scientist to have the experience and it is repeatable.    The Gorillas in the Mist or the Jane Goodall thing happened because what was going on was ongoing, repeating and verifiable.  Pictures and videos of that happening were taken so there was little doubt what was going on.      Sadly one of the biggest anthropological finds in this continent is going to take that and more unless a body is obtained.    The only other thing that might grab attention is a dozen PHD's on bus for a field trip having a BF walk across the road in front of them, then stand and watch the bus go by so they all get a good close look.      Even then, half would probably assume it was a hoaxer in a costume.  Scientific dogma about that sort of thing in North America is that strong.   

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Let's throw a time line into the mix.

My apologies to http://higheredbcs.wiley.com/legacy/college/levin/0471697435/chap_tut/chaps/chapter17-03.html

Edited February 18, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[SWWASAS]

I wonder how many lines are missing from that chart because the fossil has not been found yet? 

Edited February 18, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[ShadowBorn]

ShadowBorn:   The only way I see this happening if you can talk some scientist into sitting in your tree stand and the BF are willing to keep coming back.   One time would convince that scientist.      Maybe he could talk another scientist into the same experience?    Somehow it is going to take more that one scientist to have the experience and it is repeatable.    The Gorillas in the Mist or the Jane Goodall thing happened because what was going on was ongoing, repeating and verifiable.  Pictures and videos of that happening were taken so there was little doubt what was going on.      Sadly one of the biggest anthropological finds in this continent is going to take that and more unless a body is obtained.    The only other thing that might grab attention is a dozen PHD's on bus for a field trip having a BF walk across the road in front of them, then stand and watch the bus go by so they all get a good close look.      Even then, half would probably assume it was a hoaxer in a costume.  Scientific dogma about that sort of thing in North America is that strong.   

How I see it for a PHD with a high level of reputation to have an encounter, it would have to be a personal encounter. By personal I mean a one on one very personal encounter that cannot be denied. I mean every one who has encountered these creatures have had a personal touch by them in some way. Some might not admit to it but their encounter has touched them on a personal level that can not be explained. How can science explain this grasp of knowledge that some how touches the human emotions. Science needs to experience this them selves and in order to do so must follow protocol.

 

Yes, I said protocol since there is non set and one does need to be set. So that one can have a personal encounter with a creature that science some how has refused to venture or even to fund. All we are doing now is just waiting for an actual body to hit the slab, but science just needs to place boots in places where these creatures have been seen the most and follow protocol. Just doing this will help with an encounter, But some how I feel like they already know, and that there is no need for them to pursue this avenue. 

[Incorrigible1]

Maybe one could track bigfoot by the glitter trail they leave behind?

[SWWASAS]

Maybe one could track bigfoot by the glitter trail they leave behind?

Actually I like your idea.      Finding Bigfoot tried that with one of their shows.      They dusted an area with a powder that fluoresces under UV light.       But no BF came around to leave a "glitter" trail.    Those in an area with ongoing activity could give that method a try.    But I think those powders are pretty expensive.     Pick an area with limited ingress and exit avenues and dust the area in concentric rings.      Maybe you could follow the trail for some distance.  

Edited February 18, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

I wonder how many lines are missing from that chart because the fossil has not been found yet? 

I'd say it's pretty incomplete as new as discoveries from the rest of the world show.

It's a framework for future work and gives a baseline to evaluate new finds against.

The most important idea is that hominids developed in Africa.

And the steps man took to get larger brains, language, and tool use.

The side branch that is interesting is Australopithecus and the idea they went extinct and that all the relic Genus Homo did as well.

To some extent the latter point is currently is what is being disproved to some extent. 

The missing line is the one with the unique foot and in line walking.

So if bipedal locomotion was present as early as the chart suggests

the departure leading to a second Genus developing may have happened 1 to 7 million years ago.

I wonder how many ankle and foot bones have been identified for Australopithecus at the 1 million or so mark.

[Guest freelygiven]

I won't use the quote function to save space, really, I guess, so I hope I respond to the many aspects of this thread that resonated with me.

 

It's discouraging to think science is stalling just as I'm getting into this. I'm brand new to this business, so I'm virtually clueless, but I know a little science so I'll throw out some thoughts anyway. The first thing is that I don't see a lot of science. How do you do bf science anyway? Is it research that's stalling? How would you research bf if you don't have one?

 

In any event, the grunt work of science can be done by non-scientists. I don't think you need a card-carrying scientist to actually see bf. They need only to design a study and write it up. In fact, nobody's reputation should be besmirched in that way. (That sounds terrible, doesn't it?)

 

There are many people out in the field trying to get "evidence" that, to paraphrase some of the language in here, I think, won't hold the hard science water. Even the DNA is human, so, absent a previously classified hominid, hard science has no alternative but to declare it a contaminant, right? They may not be laughing when they say they need a body. There's just no other way to classify a cryptid.

 

So what more is needed? What needs studying? If you've got the scientist to design a study, I'll crunch the numbers or do whatever I can to help the cause. Is there a database of the DNA evidence that's been advanced as being from a bf? There should be one somewhere to allow a comparision and find commonalities among them. That's an interesting article right there.

 

You can always do a qualitative study. I have no idea how many of them are out there, but it doesn't hurt to have one more. Set some qualifications for witnesses, decide the most relevant information you'd need from them and develop questions to ask in interviews with them. It can only help until that irrefutable proof turns up.

 

Just don't stop woring on this. Not in order to get him protected. We'll understand ourselves better.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

It not only stalled in went into a tailspin 

[ShadowBorn]

Freelygiven

 

Thanks for posting and I know that you are new but are knowledgeable and may offer advice on how to help. The evidence that has been collected by most researchers feel that their evidence is sufficient for the creatures existence. But as we are learning that this evidence is not enough to prove this creatures existence at all by science standards. Yet, there are hundreds upon hundreds of reported sightings of these creatures by witnesses with evidence that proves they seen some thing out of the norm. But this does not prove this creatures existence but should show interest to science that there is some type of animal that is roaming with in our wilderness.

 

Now these creatures have been around since the Native Americans have been around and these creatures might have been around before them. There have been stories of them being shot , but no mention of them being studied after being shot. I ( IMO ) find this strange that they would be shot in our past but no mention of the body or where the body layed.

 

So in my opinion if they were shot in our past they must have been studied by some one. These creatures are not normal creatures and for one to be killed and not be shouted out in town that they shot some thing strange is strange in it self. In my opinion some thing about these creatures scare the heck out of the shooters and those who get to close to them when they are shot.

 

If science already have the answers then it has no need to pursue these creatures any further. If all the evidence like DNA is being tossed out and said to be contaminated. Then science is stalling and refusing to except the answers that it is being given. If the DNA is being handled through the proper protocol of handling DNA , starting from the field to the lab. Should the DNA still turn up with Human as it has, since science has claimed that it is due to improper handling of the DNA.  Then it needs to accept it failure of recognizing a creature that has lived before the start or during the man or Humans were created. 

 

How do you do bf science anyway? Is it research that's stalling? How would you research bf if you don't have one?

 

The research has been on going and has not stopped. It is science that has stopped or refused to research into this by not funding the proper people with reputable PHD to do the research. But I believe that this has been done in the 70's by a chosen few who wrote up a detailed report on these creatures. But the problem is that it did not fit with what there concept of what animal behavior is suppose to fit. So the funding stopped due to what was reported.

 

The best way to research these creatures is in the field and in a known area of fresh encounters that can be controlled and must be kept under wraps.

 

  

in any event, the grunt work of science can be done by non-scientists. I don't think you need a card-carrying scientist to actually see bf. They need only to design a study and write it upI. In fact, nobody's reputation should be besmirched in that way. (That sounds terrible, doesn't it?)

 

It is already being done by amateurs who have no idea about animal behavior but are learning as they go. College or going back to school helps with writing up a study. But it will take a PHD for this write up to be accepted among their peers. But with out a body the evidence for the write up is weak and will be turned down, unless a well respected PHD can have a personal encounter to get a study started. 

 

There are many people out in the field trying to get "evidence" that, to paraphrase some of the language in here, I think, won't hold the hard science water. Even the DNA is human, so, absent a previously classified hominid, hard science has no alternative but to declare it a contaminant, right? They may not be laughing when they say they need a body. There's just no other way to classify a cryptid.

That's just it, there is no protocol of the proper handling  of the DNA, so they cannot narrow it down. Is the DNA contaminated by the handlers? or is this Human DNA found with in of the creature it self?. No channels exist of proper testing to see if the Human DNA belongs to the handlers or the creature it self. In other words they have not isolated the human strand of the so call contaminated DNA, nor have they gone onto details of the unknown strands of the DNA they have collected. It almost seems like they are refusing to research this creatures existence further and in my opinion I believe that they are scared. They are scared of that unknown strand that has mixed with Humans that does not match with nothing on earth. I am not saying that they are aliens , I am saying that they are refusing to add this unknown to the gen bank when ever they discover a new species. You can look this up your self if you do not believe me. They add new species to the gen bank every other month or even week with new species being discovered.

 

Is there a database of the DNA evidence that's been advanced as being from a bf?

No, and nor will there ever be DNA ever entered into the Gen bank from this creature. Like I said they are scared of the truth and where it may lead them too. An open mind will lead to discovery , but a closed mind will only lead you to a locked door with out a key.

 

I hope this helped

 

 

 

     

[georgerm]

Shadowborn: What did you notice about bigfoot while in your tree stand?

 

ShadowBorn:   The only way I see this happening if you can talk some scientist into sitting in your tree stand and the BF are willing to keep coming back.   One time would convince that scientist.      Maybe he could talk another scientist into the same experience?    Somehow it is going to take more that one scientist to have the experience and it is repeatable.    The Gorillas in the Mist or the Jane Goodall thing happened because what was going on was ongoing, repeating and verifiable.  Pictures and videos of that happening were taken so there was little doubt what was going on.      Sadly one of the biggest anthropological finds in this continent is going to take that and more unless a body is obtained.    The only other thing that might grab attention is a dozen PHD's on bus for a field trip having a BF walk across the road in front of them, then stand and watch the bus go by so they all get a good close look.      Even then, half would probably assume it was a hoaxer in a costume.  Scientific dogma about that sort of thing in North America is that strong.   

 

 

You have a good point. Maybe small groups of PHDs in zoology could be taken out to research sites or habituation properties to see the evidence first hand. They would be selected, groomed, and invited to participate with the help from present day researchers and educators. This effort will help get bigfoot science unstalled.

 

 

 

I wonder how many lines are missing from that chart because the fossil has not been found yet? 

I'd say it's pretty incomplete as new as discoveries from the rest of the world show.

It's a framework for future work and gives a baseline to evaluate new finds against.

The most important idea is that hominids developed in Africa.

And the steps man took to get larger brains, language, and tool use.

The side branch that is interesting is Australopithecus and the idea they went extinct and that all the relic Genus Homo did as well.

To some extent the latter point is currently is what is being disproved to some extent. 

The missing line is the one with the unique foot and in line walking.

So if bipedal locomotion was present as early as the chart suggests

the departure leading to a second Genus developing may have happened 1 to 7 million years ago.

I wonder how many ankle and foot bones have been identified for Australopithecus at the 1 million or so mark.

 

 

 

When we speak of a departure where one species becomes two species that evolve more and more differently as time goes on. So how does this happen? Does a primitive homo species group move off the low land tribal lands due to squabbles? They create a new tribe in the mountains since this land is not claimed? As millions of years goes by this mountain group begins to physically change as mutations occur that gives individuals a better chance to survive.  

 

Then fast forward a few million years and this mountain tribe has become a new species that is physically different from the smaller low land tribes. The group in the mountains live in smaller tribes due to confined conditions and small dwellings such as caves. They evolved in the opposite direction of the low landers due to environmental conditions.The larger ones can fend off bears, and the ones with thick fur can survive the cold. They have the speed and power to catch game and to defend themselves with out tools. Technology is not depended upon for hunting or shelter creation. The mid tarsal break in the foot provides walking and running advantages. Now we have large fur covered homo species that avoid the smaller war like low landers with weapons.

 

The low landers brain develops so the creature can create technology used for hunting and war. They evolve to live in large groups that are controlled by political manipulation. The mountain homo species develops intelligence to avoid low landers, and to hunt in small coordinated groups that utilize language. Over time they become nocturnal and stealthy by utilizing intelligence and knowledge of flora and fauna.