Would the scientific discovery of Sasquatch revolutionize Paleo Anthropology

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

type it again and again

kill kill kill.

As far as subhuman it depends on if the definition is Species or Genus or both...

Neither might be interesting as well.

 

I wonder if not killing is biblical as opposed to scientific paradigm?

Edited October 30, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[TritonTr196]

On 10/28/2016 at 11:29 AM, hiflier said:

Hi TritonTr1956, Lafollette in Campbell County. Specifically newspapers covering November 11-14, 2003.

 

I can't really find anything substantial. I'm aware of the story at this time and place, but I can't find anything from any real newspapers. All I can find it comments talking about a reporter from a local paper. And I can't find any info on that certain newspaper...

[hiflier]

Thanks T. I'll do a little digging and see if I can't narrow things down a bit more. I really appreciate the follow up  

 

 

Edited November 2, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Just thought I would post a pic I'm working on.

Take the skull of Homo Erectus and stretch a face shot of a gorilla so the eyes line up with the skull sockets. tip of head, tip of jaw, and cheekbones.

I need to flesh it out, put in hair, skin color. and a bit more muscle, nail the hairline and brow ridge, but just so you get an idea.

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[FarArcher]

Not a critic, and certainly can't do what you can there.

 

The actual eyes are really big on these things.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

1 hour ago, FarArcher said:

Not a critic, and certainly can't do what you can there.

 

The actual eyes are really big on these things.

Thanks for the feedback.

I was working with one VR anthro skull that had huge eye sockets and seemed the best candidate.

Can't find the model now but think it was a Habilis.

[Guest Dkeeng]

It would be the biggest discovery in science since... I don't even know what qualifies as bigger than a living hominid...  The idea that the scientific community is covering up or doesn't want it to be real is absolutely absurd.

[FarArcher]

On 10/27/2016 at 9:57 AM, Incorrigible1 said:

Hmm, guy shoots a sasquatch, examines body, but wasn't ripped asunder by the angry clan members?

 

Do your close, personal experiences indicate that to be the rule, or exception to the rule?

[hiflier]

If I may comment? That hunter must have been extremely relieved when upon examining the body that it wasn't a man in a suit. Makes me wonder how he made that determination. There must have been some obvious indicator that something was different? Even if he was aiming at what he thought was a bear- but wasn't- tells me he simply didn't know, or only thought he knew, what he was shooting at. Funny how something like that could potentially have an extremely tragic backfire. It's why anyone going after there things needs to be 110% sure that what they are looking at says absolutely Sasquatch before they pull the trigger. Perhaps with only a second or two available to make that determination it may be best to hold one's fire? The risks are simply too, too great for one to be wrong.

 

The courts probably won't let anyone off on the "I didn't know" defense since the courts more that likely don't think the creature exists. So it should have been obvious to the hunter that it was a guy in a suit just on that basis. Because if Sasquatch doesn't exist then OF COURSE it was a guy in a suit. Yes, science would prefer one on a slab for study but getting one on that slab is an extremely complex undertaking. A lot can go wrong between seeing one and taking it down. The stakes are high and the risks even higher. There is no room for error and only one chance to get it right.

Edited November 25, 2016 by hiflier

[dlaw]

Hiflier & Titon, I live in middle Tenn. about 45 mi SE of Nashville.  Some activity around here.  Have found some activity in SE Tenn.

[hiflier]

Are you able to be a bit more descriptive regarding what type of activity?

[TritonTr196]

Hey dlaw, I live in Chattanooga.

[Incorrigible1]

On 11/24/2016 at 9:36 PM, FarArcher said:

 

Do your close, personal experiences indicate that to be the rule, or exception to the rule?

 

Perhaps your assurance the unfortunate shooter would be torn limb from limb could be in error?

[FarArcher]

4 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

 

Perhaps your assurance the unfortunate shooter would be torn limb from limb could be in error?

 

Why don't you answer the question?

 

I don't give assurances where there are variables - ever.  Your dishonest attempt to attribute an "assurance coming" from me is characteristic of your replies - willfully inaccurate - so at least you're consistent.

 

I was told that our time fuse burned at 130 seconds per meter, but I never "assured" my assistants that they could be "assured" of that burn rate when we were cutting things close to give us just enough time to clear an area.  Oddly, due to storage time, storage conditions, exposure to atmospheric moisture, temperature variations, etc., sure enough - there were on occasion variations that almost got us killed, meaning we could never be "assured" of an accurate burn rate, and had to factor in a plus or minus 10%.

 

I was also told that the .556 had an effective killing range of 600 meters.  But my personal experience demonstrated that after 200 meters, the killing effectiveness of the round gets really mixed results, and certainly nothing "assuring."  Way too much post-action clean up work.

 

I carried a number of different firearms in sequence, but when an enemy soldier fell on top of me because someone was sleeping instead of being awake on guard, we locked up, and I was the only one that had a knife.  I learned that relying on your firearm/automatic weapon  could not always be "assured."

 

Any man who shoots one of these things while alone is not considering the variables.

 

David Brown and Mertley Johnson entered the forest with sidearms, and within moments rapid fire was heard - and they weren't found until the following Spring - and they weren't killed by a bear, mountain lion, or wolves.

 

Carl Herrick was hunting, and ran into something yet unexplained.  He apparently got off one shot, and died by being powerfully cuffed up against his head and then squeezed to death per the coroner - and bears were in deep hibernation at that time.

 

Corey Fay was hunting, didn't meet back up with the group, and only some of his gear and some small bones were found ten months later - he'd been undressed and eaten by something.

 

Sam Adams was hunting with buddies, had a rifle and pistol, got separated, and disappeared.  Eight months later, they found his wallet, clothes, boots (with shoelaces removed), remnants of hair, and his rifle busted into three parts.  The area of his "battle" was found in a fifty foot circle, and he'd expended his ammunition.  He was consumed on the spot.

 

Bart Schleyer was bow hunting, and didn't meet the seaplane.  Bart was a bear and wildlife expert with extensive field credentials.  Investigators found that Bart had been sitting on his gearbag, calling Moose, and was taken by surprise his second day on site.  He too, was undressed and eaten.  And not by a bear.  All that was found was a skull and a few teeth.

 

 

So, Incorrigible - by all means - you go out alone, and shoot one.  I strongly encourage it.

 

I don't recommend it - but that's a long way from any "assurance" of mine.

 

 

 

 

 

[Incorrigible1]

::looks down, doesn't feel need to prove size::