On the Plausibility of Another Bipedal Primate Species Existing in North America

[Incorrigible1]

By Jeff Meldrum

 

https://beta.capeia.com/zoology/2017/10/20/on-the-plausibility-of-another-bipedal-primate-species-existing-in-north-america

 

As I knelt beside the 38 cm footprint, one of several dozen distinctly impressed in the muddy side road in the foothills of the Blue Mountains of southeastern Washington, the hair literally stood up on my neck with the incredulous sensation that a sasquatch may indeed have passed by here just hours earlier. The clarity of detail and dynamic signatures left no ambiguity, no room for misidentification. These footprints were either a very clever hoax or the track of an unknown living creature. The spontaneity, variation and animation of the footprints tipped the scales decidedly in favor of the latter option. But what were the implications of that conclusion? As a budding physical anthropologist, I had essentially shelved my youthful curiosity about Bigfoot and assumed that the passage of decades without any physical evidence justified a skeptical indictment of the subject as nothing more than folklore and legend. Here, on an overcast afternoon in February 1996, was stark evidence to the contrary. Of course it was not definitive, as in the form of a specimen, a type to establish conclusively the existence of a novel hominoid species. And short of that, I was to learn, there was no accommodating by the anthropological discipline of even the proposition of such a species, regardless of the accumulating affirmative evidence.

 

It is one matter to address the theoretical possibility of a relict species of hominoid in North America, and the obligate shift in paradigm to accommodate it, but there must also be something substantial to place within that revised framework. There must be essential evidence to lend weight to the hypotheses, and counter the critics’ various aspersions. I was once confronted by a colleague, who declared, “After all, these are just stories.” My response: “Stories that apparently leave tracks, shed hair, void scat, vocalize, are observed and described by reliable experienced witnesses. Hardly just stories.” Others mock the notion as “pseudoscience,” but fail to explain their justification for that label, let alone provide a defensible rationale for their pat disqualification of the evidence at hand. Then there is the now popularized statement by ideological skeptic Michael Shermer, which eventually became the basis of a column in Scientific American, 2003 – “The science starts once you have a body.” On the contrary, most serious investigators would contend that the science starts once you have a question, followed by observation, and the accumulation of data. Each of these detractions begs the question of evidentiary substance that motivates investigation, and instead either off-handedly dismisses all evidence, or demands conclusive proof up front, a priori. That is hardly the method or process of explorative science.

 

Many remain skeptical of the premise simply due to what they assume to be an exceptionally low probability that such creatures could remain undetected and unacknowledged today by modern science, especially within the continental United States. It has been pointed out that there is no history of known hominoids　 in North America. Indeed the original primates to have ever inhabited North America were squirrel-sized to cat-sized Eocene prosimian primates, most closely related to modern lemurs and lorises, not apes or hominins　. South and Central America would subsequently be colonized by platyrrhine primates, a diverse radiation now represented by marmosets to spider monkeys.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further discussion in the article:

 

What would be the source of a giant relict hominoid in North America?

Why is there no fossil record of sasquatch in North America?

Where are any recent physical remains?

How would a relict hominoid make a living in a temperate forest habitat?

Footprint evidence

 

And more, in the article by Dr. Meldrum. Enjoy!

 

 

 

[hiflier]

Thank you, Incorrigible1. I noticed the thread title said "On the Plausibility of Another Bipedal Primate Species Existing in North America". and not "On the Impossibility of Another Bipedal Primate Species Existing in North America". But then coming from Dr. Meldrum the wording makes sense. Looks like interesting reading, thoughts, and viewpoints.

[Incorrigible1]

Thank you. Thread title is same as Dr. Meldrum's article title, so credit goes to the author. It is a marvelously entertaining article. (With nary a mention of anyone named Melba.)

[hiflier]

59 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said:

(With nary a mention of anyone named Melba.)

 

LOL. And you won't get any from me either, my friend. Besides, at this point I'd be up for just about anything marvelously entertaining. I've started in on this and will be sure to let you know how it went. First impressions and all. 

[BC witness]

Excellent article. Thanks for the link. I like the fact that he published this on the 50th anniversary of the PGF

[Cotter]

Pretty interesting takeaway that there were 3 casts, taken decades and thousands of miles apart exhibited similar traits....

[hiflier]

Agreed. Read the article, most of what I think I basically knew. It was the first time I had seen more than one or two of the casts from Bluff Creek though. I have to hand it to Dr. Meldrum, he has stuck with this for years. I always like when I get to see something new.

[norseman]

Cool.

[bipedalist]

I think it was Dr. Meldrum's observations and sudden awareness of the dynamics of the Freeman finds that led Thom Powell to a re-examination of some of Freeman's finds.

 

It appears the re-examination led him (and now others) to believe Freeman did not hoax those that Meldrum saw, and Powell uploaded some Freeman footage to youtube as I remember

to review this.  You can probably find link to those on his blog at http://www.thomsquatch.com/  or just search youtube for Freeman BF videos. 

[gigantor]

Great article. Didn't know he was able to identify prints from the same individual at different locations/times, it gives a high degree of confidence in the find.

 

I'm also struck by his expert analysis that BF is a bipedal hominid, but not on the level of primitive humans with a culture,etc as many claim. Essentially, a "big monkey" in layman's terms.

 

[wiiawiwb]

Excellent read.

 

I noted the assessment of sasquatch as a big monkey as well Gigantor.  Far be it from me to dispute his assertion except to say that I have always believed (and still do) it to be close to human. What the heck do I know?

[Brian]

I'm  not sure what to think about Meldrum but he is an expert.   I sent a picture to him and he tore it apart !   I will put it on here when I get a premium account.  I will see what you think he did not get info about picture !   

[Twist]

Could you define “tore it apart”?  What was his response?

[Brian]

On 10/28/2017 at 8:52 PM, Twist said:

Could you define “tore it apart”?  What was his response?

Sorry should have said dismissed. I will explain fully when I post pic. I just think he gets so many things to look at that he doesn't really take time to look at it ! And what we have in Florida Isn't necessarily what is in PNW

[Cotter]

^Cool!  Looking forward to seeing the pic.  Be warned, you will open a can of worms! :-)