Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[Incorrigible1]

 

 

When I look at the Pangea map that shows the earth 200,000 million years ago, then we look at the early human like people found in Africa during the same time, guess what comes to mind? Did these early people migrate across land from Africa to future North America to form Native Americans and bigfoot?

 

 

Your numbers are hopelessly confused. Pangea broke apart 200 million years ago, not 200,000 million.

 

The earliest Homo are thought to have evolved between 200,000 years and 100,000 years ago.

 

Homo was not extant while Pangea existed.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Incorrigible1

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

 

 

 

When I look at the Pangea map that shows the earth 200,000 million years ago, then we look at the early human like people found in Africa during the same time, guess what comes to mind? Did these early people migrate across land from Africa to future North America to form Native Americans and bigfoot?

 

 

Your numbers are hopelessly confused. Pangea broke apart 200 million years ago, not 200,000 million.

 

The earliest Homo are thought to have evolved between 200,000 years and 100,000 years ago.

 

Homo was not extant while Pangea existed.

 

200,000 for Homo Sapiens Sapiens...

[Incorrigible1]

Yes, thanks for the clarification. 

 

And no species of Homo during Pangea.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Incorrigible1

[georgerm]

Sorry for the confusion and it should have read 200 million and not 200,000 million. Was slightly tired when posting. Below is how the post should read. There were several species of homo during Pangea.  Look at the time line diagram.

 

 

When I look at the Pangea map that shows the earth 200 million years ago, then we look at the early human like people found in Africa during the same time, guess what comes to mind? Did these early people migrate across land from Africa to future North America to form Native Americans and bigfoot?

 

We have lots of layers of sedimentary rock showing in Oregon and maybe in the older rock some ancient bones will show a different story of early hominids. Maybe Homo habilis, shown below, will show up dating back 1.9 million years ago in Africa. More questions than answers.

 

Dr. Sykes thinks they may have migrated to Asia to form the Yerens including Zana. Study the diagrams and let your mind wander. Interesting connections are being made with evolving science.

 

[Incorrigible1]

Sorry for the confusion and it should have read 200 million and not 200,000 million. Was slightly tired when posting. Below is how the post should read. There were several species of homo during Pangea.  Look at the time line diagram.

 

 

The timelines provided (which I agree with) do not depict any homo existent during Pangea. Do you realize there were dinosaur species roaming Pangea, some 200 million years ago? Your posted timelines show homo (edit: ancestors of homo) at 7 million years ago.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Incorrigible1

[georgerm]

 

Please study the chart to the left and three homo species overlaps the 200 million mark. They are the Homo georgeicus, Homo habilis, and finally the Homo  ergaster. The see the reconstructed clay faces posted earlier.  

[Incorrigible1]

I don't know how more clearly I can state this: You are misinterpreting the charts you've posted. The timeline states "MYA." Millions of Years Ago.

[norseman]

The only mammals that existed 200 million years ago were small rodent like creatures.

It wasnt until the KT boundary event 65 million years ago when Dinosaurs went extinct that mammals began to flourish.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal

The first mammals (in Kemp's sense) appeared in the Late Triassic epoch (about 225 million years ago), 40 million years after the first therapsids. They expanded out of their nocturnal insectivore niche from the mid-Jurassic onwards;[30] The Jurassic Castorocauda, for example, had adaptations for swimming, digging and catching fish.[31] Most, if not all, are thought to have remained nocturnal (the Nocturnal bottleneck), accounting for much of the typical mammalian traits.[32] The majority of the mammal species that existed in the Mesozoic Era were multituberculates, eutriconodonts and spalacotheriids.[33] The earliest known metatherian is Sinodelphys, found in 125 million-year-old Early Cretaceous shale in China's northeastern Liaoning Province. The fossil is nearly complete and includes tufts of fur and imprints of soft tissues.[34]

The oldest known fossil among the Eutheria ("true beasts") is the small shrewlike Juramaia sinensis, or "Jurassic mother from China", dated to 160 million years ago in the Late Jurassic.[35] A later eutherian, Eomaia, dated to 125 million years ago in the Early Cretaceous, possessed some features in common with the marsupials but not with the placentals, evidence that these features were present in the last common ancestor of the two groups but were later lost in the placental lineage.[36] In particular, the epipubic bones extend forwards from the pelvis. These are not found in any modern placental, but they are found in marsupials, monotremes, nontherian mammals, and Ukhaatherium, an early Cretaceous animal in the eutherian order Asioryctitheria. This also applies to the multituberculates.[37] They are apparently an ancestral feature, which subsequently disappeared in the placental lineage. These epipubic bones seem to function by stiffening the muscles during locomotion, reducing the amount of space being presented, which placentals require to contain their fetus during gestation periods. A narrow pelvic outlet indicates that the young were very small at birth and therefore pregnancy was short, as in modern marsupials. This suggests that the placenta was a later development.

Edited May 29, 2016 by norseman

[georgerm]

I don't know how more clearly I can state this: You are misinterpreting the charts you've posted. The timeline states "MYA." Millions of Years Ago.

 

Stand totally corrected ............................... I got too excited about the topic and really jumped the track by mixing Pangea into the discussion..... me bad ..........

 

Let's eliminate the Pangea factor in the discussion and see if we can revive some interest. It's obvious early Homonids did not use the Pangea connections to get to North America. One plausible theory is some wandered to the east out of Africa during ancient migrations

 

The only mammals that existed 200 million years ago were small rodent like creatures.

It wasnt until the KT boundary event 65 million years ago when Dinosaurs went extinct that mammals began to flourish.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal

The first mammals (in Kemp's sense) appeared in the Late Triassic epoch (about 225 million years ago), 40 million years after the first therapsids. They expanded out of their nocturnal insectivore niche from the mid-Jurassic onwards;[30] The Jurassic Castorocauda, for example, had adaptations for swimming, digging and catching fish.[31] Most, if not all, are thought to have remained nocturnal (the Nocturnal bottleneck), accounting for much of the typical mammalian traits.[32] The majority of the mammal species that existed in the Mesozoic Era were multituberculates, eutriconodonts and spalacotheriids.[33] The earliest known metatherian is Sinodelphys, found in 125 million-year-old Early Cretaceous shale in China's northeastern Liaoning Province. The fossil is nearly complete and includes tufts of fur and imprints of soft tissues.[34]

The oldest known fossil among the Eutheria ("true beasts") is the small shrewlike Juramaia sinensis, or "Jurassic mother from China", dated to 160 million years ago in the Late Jurassic.[35] A later eutherian, Eomaia, dated to 125 million years ago in the Early Cretaceous, possessed some features in common with the marsupials but not with the placentals, evidence that these features were present in the last common ancestor of the two groups but were later lost in the placental lineage.[36] In particular, the epipubic bones extend forwards from the pelvis. These are not found in any modern placental, but they are found in marsupials, monotremes, nontherian mammals, and Ukhaatherium, an early Cretaceous animal in the eutherian order Asioryctitheria. This also applies to the multituberculates.[37] They are apparently an ancestral feature, which subsequently disappeared in the placental lineage. These epipubic bones seem to function by stiffening the muscles during locomotion, reducing the amount of space being presented, which placentals require to contain their fetus during gestation periods. A narrow pelvic outlet indicates that the young were very small at birth and therefore pregnancy was short, as in modern marsupials. This suggests that the placenta was a later development.

 

Thanks Norse for adding some clarification for the confusing mess caused by me.  As to animal life 200 million years ago ....................... no hominids. Seems like there were small, hairy schrew like animals as seen below................................... our predecessor.

 

I'm still amazed with the 3 homo species that were living 2 million years ago in Africa. What happened to them?

 

Did they evolve to higher homo species? Did they migrate to Asia? How are they related to Neanderthal?  What is Yeren, Almasty or Bigfoot? 

 

As time goes by, more gaps will be filled in to the puzzle.   peace be with us .................

[norseman]

No worries.

We have several species of both Homo and non Homo Apes that could fill the bill of a Sasquatch predecessor living in the far East.

As Ive said before the concept of Sasquatch really is not strange at all. The only two factors that puts Sasquatch out of whack with scientific knowledge is time and location. We have fossil beds full of bipedal ape men......even in far Asia.

[Incorrigible1]

Geogerm, it's all good. We are actually living in a rare moment in our Homo history, that we cannot confirm another similar, closely-related species living concurrently with us. Hopefully Norse can provide a type-specimen and correct that situation.

[MIB]

I'm still amazed with the 3 homo species that were living 2 million years ago in Africa. What happened to them?

 

Did they evolve to higher homo species? Did they migrate to Asia? How are they related to Neanderthal?  What is Yeren, Almasty or Bigfoot? 

 

As time goes by, more gaps will be filled in to the puzzle.   peace be with us .................

 

What happened to them?   Likely one outcompeted the other two and drove them to extinction while at the same time, isolated populations of its own kind were diverging to adapt to local conditions.   It has happened countless times in the past.  

 

Your second question .. rhetorical.  We don't know.  "It depends."   Likely 3 separate things though. 

 

You're right about more gaps being filled over time, however, there is another aspect.   If history can teach us anything, we will also find that some of the gaps we thought closed were mis-closed and the assumptions we've made about them were in error.   "Settled science" is a myth, it is only "settled" at a point in time but predictably newer, more precise understanding will replace it (and in turn, itself be replaced at some point in the future).

 

MIB

[hiflier]

Geogerm, it's all good. We are actually living in a rare moment in our Homo history, that we cannot confirm another similar, closely-related species living concurrently with us. Hopefully Norse can provide a type-specimen and correct that situation.

That was a very kind and generous thing to say there Incorrigible1. Proud of you for that. Plussed you for it too

[ShadowBorn]

Geogerm, it's all good. We are actually living in a rare moment in our Homo history, that we cannot confirm another similar, closely-related species living concurrently with us. Hopefully Norse can provide a type-specimen and correct that situation.

Me too Incorrigible, I hope that Norseman bags one too. It would be a great day for everyone, as long as it stays with one. I am sure it will since they are hard to track.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Yes, thanks for the clarification. 

 

And no species of Homo during Pangea.

I think it was just Sapiens, (200,000) not Sapiens Sapiens as they only are acknowledged in the 120,000 or later period.

I think you are restraining your irony wonderfully 

 

Here is a good video on why Bigfoot are smarter than us BTW. (at end of my rant, very good video, great reasoning, it's about the Freeman film but it is the commentary that is valuable)

You can throw Homo Erectus and Early Native genetic groups such Algonkian, associated early Tall thin Narrow head and high forehead types such as Tibetans, Anu, Kennewick Man groups as they had bigger brains.

 

They were less social and more schizo affective, hyper focused, hyper intelligent and shamanic.

 

And then came T.V. and McDonalds.

 

10 social idiots can outwit one lone genius by sheer weight of stupid.

 

Edited May 31, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna