If Bigfoot Were Real.

[ShadowBorn]

Quote

, he chases us with sticks and rocks

What makes you think that he chases you with sticks and rocks . Have you ever thought that maybe the sticks and rocks might be a form of testing you. I have thought of my times and thought that I should have stayed . The sticks and stones are sure attention grabbers though but I think their strange. Have never encountered aggressive  throwing though I would like to understand.

 

So I am waiting for that type of encounter Cryptic Megafauna

[salubrious]

39 minutes ago, Cryptic Megafauna said:

Perhaps you have an intelligent counter argument?

I've posted photos of hominid skulls or you can look them up, you have the P-G film.

Measure the proportions, that would be the scientific approach.

Perhaps Dr. Meldrum can help you with your quest for knowledge.

Nothing I've said that he would have any problem with.

But then you will probably just wind up dissing him as well.

 

Or am I mistaken in thinking you don't care for intelligent discussion but more in ad hominem attacks?

Or is it just me or the anonymous nature of message boards?

 

I feed the trolls but then I spank them with rocks.

Me and my buddy bigfoot are good like that.

There's been no attack on my part. I'm going with the comment in bold. Methinks thou protests too loudly.

 

My comment was was intended to be humorous (thus the smiley face thingy), although I did want to know where you got the brain size thing from. 'The PGF' would have been and is a sufficient answer. As to Meldrum, I have no opinion and no reason to mount an attack. 

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

3 hours ago, salubrious said:

There's been no attack on my part. I'm going with the comment in bold. Methinks thou protests too loudly.

 

My comment was was intended to be humorous (thus the smiley face thingy), although I did want to know where you got the brain size thing from. 'The PGF' would have been and is a sufficient answer. As to Meldrum, I have no opinion and no reason to mount an attack. 

In that case please accept my humble apologies.

Perhaps my skin is too thin.

Edited July 28, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

5 hours ago, MIB said:

 

Perhaps you have the intelligence to understand a counter-argument?   (Perhaps not.)

 

I've already given you examples ... look at frames 362 and 364.   Show me the sloping forehead.   That's all it takes.   If you can't, your whole schtick about Australopithecine hominids is irrelevant to a discussion of bigfoot.    I see nothing similar to the pictures of the skulls you've offered in the PGF.  

 

MIB

Here is a homo habilis skull, comparison overlay on a sketch below.

I made the sketch before I obtained a 3d model or a homo habilis skull and would similar to an Australopithecine and rotated it to the sketch so I was not working from the skull but from Patty. The skull came later, the point being I was not trying to create a match with a skull so the similarity is either there or not.

It is what it is.

To me it's pretty obvious as it would be to Greene, Meldrum, Bindernagel, etc. The comparisons have been done by many others and the conclusions drawn. Anyone who bothers to read a good book on the evolution of man and understand it would have a hard time not seeing the logic, except the woo woo crowd I reckon.

[MIB]

Oh, is that supposed to be Patty?    Thanks for letting me know.   Um, that's .. nice.    I'm sure you're proud of it.  

 

MIB

[BigTreeWalker]

 

3 hours ago, Cryptic Megafauna said:

Here is a homo habilis skull, comparison overlay on a sketch below.

I made the sketch before I obtained a 3d model or a homo habilis skull and would similar to an Australopithecine and rotated it to the sketch so I was not working from the skull but from Patty. The skull came later, the point being I was not trying to create a match with a skull so the similarity is either there or not.

It is what it is.

To me it's pretty obvious as it would be to Greene, Meldrum, Bindernagel, etc. The comparisons have been done by many others and the conclusions drawn. Anyone who bothers to read a good book on the evolution of man and understand it would have a hard time not seeing the logic, except the woo woo crowd I reckon.

 

Cryptic, you want everyone to approach the skull type and size scientifically. Yet you yourself do not do so. If you're going to compare the early hominids, take your pick which one, they were small compared to us. Regardless what shape you think Patty's skull is considering her stature and body build, her head is probably bigger than ours. You want to make those comparisons, then scale them to the correct size. The problem is, it would still only be a rough estimate at best. As others above have commented, unless you have an actual sasquatch skull to work with, you are just guessing. 

[guyzonthropus]

Besides that, in the accounts I've read there seems to be considerable variation in reported head size and shape, with some stating what they saw had a small round head, others claim a small yet conical head form, while others still say what they saw had an enormous round head, then there are those seeing creatures with large conical or crested head shape.

Sure, to some degree it's a matter of individual interpretation on the part of the witnesses, but there does appear to be a diversity of head form found in these creatures.

Whether or not this denotes multiple species in question, is perhaps a question for a different thread, but with such a wide span of reported cranial configurations, it seems a bit premature to ascribe presumed levels of cognition based on a single format of unknown size, volume, or content.

One must bear in mind that in light of our species' inability to effectively communicate with most every other species, we have no means by which to assess the capacity for abstraction in the other creatures of our world, nor the paths used to attain or implement it.

 

[Lake County Bigfooot]

"Humans are not always the only species to bury their dead. Chimpanzees and elephants are known to throw leaves and branches over fallen members of their family groups. In a particularly odd case, an elephant which trampled a human mother and child buried its victims under a pile of leaves before disappearing into the bushes.^[20] In 2013, a viral video caught a dog burying a dead puppy by pushing sand with its own nose.^[21] It is presumed, however, that since dogs retain the instinct to bury food, this is what is being depicted in the video."  Wiki

So if more intelligent species have been known to have some sort of burial ritual or behavior, I find it barely any leap to credit Sasquatch with the same. That could be part of the problem, locating these burial sites. If it is simply a very primitive grave with tree branches or literally dug in the ground, or maybe a cave or other cavity might serve the purpose.

You cannot limit your thinking in terms of traditional burial. The point is that they might  hide the body, just as the elephant attempted to above, it seemed aware of the issue of someone finding those bodies, so how is it any stretch for a creature that is instinctually avoidant, and probably more intelligent than any other mammal maybe excepting homo sapiens, how is it any reach for them to have a burial ritual of some sort, and perhaps even more elaborate than just sticks or branches. Whether or not you accept the existence of such a creature, you have to consider what it would entail for such a creature to exist, even if you think it does not. You would have to credit it with superior abilities to adapt and survive, and I believe that is the case here, and part of that case is to not leave your dead. Or for that matter to find them if they are missing, and recover them. It is really very little stretch to credit a creature of this intelligence, if it indeed does exist, with such behavior. The two would go hand in hand in my opinion.

IF IT EXISTS=MUST BE HIGHLY INTELLIGENT=KNOWS THE IMPORTANCE OF REMAINING UNDETECTED

 

 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Lake County Bigfooot

[SWWASAS]

Perhaps the question of whether BF cares for it's dead is best answered by looking at other primates.    Chimpanzees carry around dead infants sometimes for weeks, often to the point where the remains are mummified.     A dying adult will be stroked and groomed until the point of death and then left alone other than some attempts to wake them up.   Upon death the tribe physically moves away from the immediate presence of the dead member.    The whole process is calm and without commotion unless the death was violent, because the victim fell or was killed,    then the tribe is agitated for quite a period of time.    Gorillas also will carry a dead infant around for a period of time.      I suspect the difference between BF and  most other animals is that they have arms and hands,   like the other primates, and do stuff that is abnormal for other animals without arms and hands.     Elephants have been mentioned and they can use their truck as if they are hands and care for and tend and move the bones of their dead.       Logic would suggest that intelligent animals with the means to move their dead do so in some manner, each in their own way.    Why would we assume that BF is any different?     We just do not know what they do.    

[hiflier]

10 hours ago, guyzonthropus said:

Besides that, in the accounts I've read there seems to be considerable variation in reported head size and shape, with some stating what they saw had a small round head, others claim a small yet conical head form, while others still say what they saw had an enormous round head, then there are those seeing creatures with large conical or crested head shape.

Sure, to some degree it's a matter of individual interpretation on the part of the witnesses, but there does appear to be a diversity of head form found in these creatures.

Whether or not this denotes multiple species in question, is perhaps a question for a different thread, but with such a wide span of reported cranial configurations, it seems a bit premature to ascribe presumed levels of cognition based on a single format of unknown size, volume, or content.

One must bear in mind that in light of our species' inability to effectively communicate with most every other species, we have no means by which to assess the capacity for abstraction in the other creatures of our world, nor the paths used to attain or implement it.

 

 

I've considered many things about our Hairy Friend over the past few years as have a lot of us. The overall shape is fairly consistent. It's the differences within the shape that sometimes draws our attention in the effort to understand what those differences might suggest- even to the point of differing species. The shape of the head is no exception to this. Some say a conical head is a boney prominence and other say it's just how the hair is configured at the top of the skull.

 

Going on the basis of there being a boney crest then the reasons could be entirely a result of dietary habits where over years a mature animal has developed the need for larger muscles for chewing fibrous materials. Other animals in a different locale/terrain may have food sources that are not so arduous to consume and so do not form a boney sagittal crest as larger muscle anchorage isn't required. It could be evolutionary but it would seem usage would be the chief dictator regarding physical differences in head shape. Specifically what areas would be best suited for developing a boney crest could be an interesting avenue for discussion.

 

Whenever ideas like this occur the most likely research would span across databases to see if any of this bears anything close to being reasonable. Just lobbing my two rocks into the camp.

[Guest DWA]

4 hours ago, Lake County Bigfooot said:

"Humans are not always the only species to bury their dead. Chimpanzees and elephants are known to throw leaves and branches over fallen members of their family groups. In a particularly odd case, an elephant which trampled a human mother and child buried its victims under a pile of leaves before disappearing into the bushes.^[20] In 2013, a viral video caught a dog burying a dead puppy by pushing sand with its own nose.^[21] It is presumed, however, that since dogs retain the instinct to bury food, this is what is being depicted in the video."  Wiki

So if more intelligent species have been known to have some sort of burial ritual or behavior, I find it barely any leap to credit Sasquatch with the same.  ...

IF IT EXISTS=MUST BE HIGHLY INTELLIGENT=KNOWS THE IMPORTANCE OF REMAINING UNDETECTED

I think there are *lots* of animals that know the importance of remaining undetected, just as there are a number that appear to have possible rituals related to the death of another.  I just don't go looking for bigfoot burials, anymore than we've done that to locate any other animal we've confirmed.  I especially don't do this when there isn't solid evidence pointing to the possibility, which I'd have to be pointed to because I'd say there is none.

Edited July 29, 2016 by DWA

[guyzonthropus]

The crested head may also be a result of that was the only form in that region that survived a bottleneck just by chance, with its head shape having no bearing on that survival at all, but when it was reproductive season, he was the only one to show up at the dance.....

Then over time, individuals from other regions may have infiltrated back into that territory, and integrated themselves into the gene pool, producing populations of varied cranial configurations.  ("Oh, yeah...she has her mother's head...")

 

Another possibility is that head shape is in part due to female preferences in terms of choosing a mate, which could be an issue of social trends within their groups, tribes or clans..."looks like big round heads are the favourite this spring, too bad all you coneheads, better luck in the fall!"

[MikeZimmer]

7 minutes ago, guyzonthropus said:

The crested head may also be a result of that was the only form in that region that survived a bottleneck just by chance, with its head shape having no bearing on that survival at all, but when it was reproductive season, he was the only one to show up at the dance.....

Then over time, individuals from other regions may have infiltrated back into that territory, and integrated themselves into the gene pool, producing populations of varied cranial configurations.  ("Oh, yeah...she has her mother's head...")

 

Another possibility is that head shape is in part due to female preferences in terms of choosing a mate, which could be an issue of social trends within their groups, tribes or clans..."looks like big round heads are the favourite this spring, too bad all you coneheads, better luck in the fall!"

 

 

We have had a great deal of discussion in past years that the sagital crest, if that is what you are talking about, is a feature of size, and provides better attachment for the muscles for jaw movement. Large gorillas have large sagital crests, regardless of sex. I think that Bill Munns had another opinion, that the crest was hair, but don't quote me on that, as I may have mis-remebered.

[guyzonthropus]

I hear you, but in light of large individuals lacking this feature suggests there may well be other influencing factors aside from chewing fibrous plant matter or animal sinew.

Could be different lines developed to large size but due to ecological differences had no need for more rigorous attachment s while others did.

There could be any number of uses or reasons that configuration came to be, not to rule out the vegetarian component, by any means, but we humans discussing the aspect can come to no concrete conclusion until a number of various forms are actually studied in hand, or until the BF's finally show that they speak "as well as any dwarf, thank you very much!" And then clue us in about the head shapes...

"You guys thought WHAT?....seriously?....wow..."

[norseman]

I agree with Cryptic, her head is very sloped.

 

And while we can fight about head shape? Whats undeniable is Patty is naked with no stuff.

 

Homo Erectus packed a hand axe from Africa to Asia. And Neanderthals had spears and other tools and jewelry.

 

We see none of the Human trappings with Patty. She had nothing with her....not unlike a early hominid.