Jump to content
hiflier

The Genetic Markers Of A Sasquatch

Recommended Posts

norseman
BFF Donor
On 10/2/2019 at 8:17 AM, hiflier said:

Thanks, MIB, What you say make good sense. On the subject of the bear DNA and all of the bear scat found around the nests in the Olympic Project's nesting sight what does anyone think of this?:

 

 

I posted pics. Its a possibility 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
BFF Donor
On 10/2/2019 at 10:17 AM, bipedalist said:

Hard to think refined blueberry twig snaps could occur with the bruins nest building but they are certainly dexterous and can tear up some trees for sure. 

 

I got to look at some of the material from one of the nests.    Pretty darn sure not bear.    When green / live wood breaks, the shape of the break will tell you much about how the wood was broken.   Look at the vid, look how the branches are broken / somewhat torn lengthwise.   This is because they weren't constrained / held / pinned during the break.   I've seen / handled some of the "nests" material.   It is sharply broken.   That means the force was applied to only a short, very focused area.    That requires hands or tools, not just something throwing its weight on the tree / bush as that bear did.

 

Play with this a little some time when you're out in the woods or in the back yard.    Find a couple green branches a half inch in diameter and a couple feet long.     Take one stick, hold the ends, and bend 'til it breaks.    Take another stick, hold your hands close together, and pinch/snap it off.   Compare the ends.   I think you'll see what I mean.

 

This video, combined with seeing the nest materials' characteristics, pretty well rules out bear for the nests.

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

That would be consistent with the twig snap added to a tree branch layout documented by me in my Sasquatch investigations between evening and morning in one instance during a long investigation of many years.  Movements of other layouts partially created by them and then  arranged by me were very curious and interactive at one point for several weeks too.  Although I had probable bear tooth marks and cable locks moved  around on a reconyx during this investigation I am sure the branch markers were not created, added to or moved, re-hung by bears. 

Edited by bipedalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor

It has been all over the news in the past 24 hours. I picked it up on a local Los Angeles news channel. It's like one of those little bald headed media CEOs sent the memo to let it out. Essentially, it's the mystery "human" (not homo sapien) that Sykes identified in Zana's granddaughter.

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/12/805237120/ghost-dna-in-west-africans-complicates-story-of-human-origins

 

Google up "ghost population dna". It'll run you over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

Fascinating stuff, H. Yeah, a ghost DNA showed up in the Denisovans, too, and scientists called it a mystery human. Back when I was speculating, I was speaking of successive Last Common Ancestors (LCA's). I took it from the LCA of Chimps/Gorillas Humans to the LCA of Chimps/Humans after Gorillas left the line. My speculation though includes Sasquatch. So it might have been the LCA of Chimps/Humans/Sasquatches. Then Chimps left the line and, still speculating, I mentioned a LCA for Humans/Sasquatches. My thinking was Sasquatches then left the line and only Homo continued spitting out various branches/species up to the present. My thinking was that Homo became Homo because of the genetic repair of original ape-brain gene.

 

All along the way the evolving primate body became more and more dexterous to include opposable thumbs, less overheating, and a number of other factors. Other than that, everything that branched off before Homo got left behind with their smaller ape brains and more primitive bodies. But I'm speculating that since  Sasquatch was the last of the line to leave before Homo it assumed the advantages of the more refined primate body but kept the hair and the brain of all the rest of the primates that had split off.

 

It's only guesswork folks. But since Sasquatch physically is more like us that any of the other Great Apes then the LCA held on long enough to physically evolve before Homo got the brain gene repair and split from Sasquatches, or at least creatures we could call Sasquatches: Bipedal Apes that looked and moved like Homo but without the increasing Homo brain size with its new capabilities. IOW Sasquatch doesn't have the repaired brain gene. It COULD have easily been another Homo branch, except for that one deficiency. We still have Gorillas, Chimpanzees, Sasquatches, and Humans. But Human cognitive abilities are far superior to every other primate that is alive today. Every one of them. Sasquatch....near Homo body....definite ape brain.

 

Does that make it an ape? I mean physically it COULD be called a people, but physically is only as far as it goes.......My opinion.

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor
10 hours ago, hiflier said:

.......But since Sasquatch physically is more like us that any of the other Great Apes then the LCA held on long enough to physically evolve before Homo got the brain gene repair and split from Sasquatches, or at least creatures we could call Sasquatches: Bipedal Apes that looked and moved like Homo but without the increasing Homo brain size with its new capabilities. IOW Sasquatch doesn't have the repaired brain gene. It COULD have easily been another Homo branch, except for that one deficiency. We still have Gorillas, Chimpanzees, Sasquatches, and Humans. But Human cognitive abilities are far superior to every other primate that is alive today. Every one of them. Sasquatch....near Homo body....definite ape brain.

 

Does that make it an ape? I mean physically it COULD be called a people, but physically is only as far as it goes.......My opinion.

 

It appears to me that these creatures regularly make monkeys out of us in many ways. Hey, the sapiens who think of themselves as the smartest of sapiens sit behind ivy covered walls and openly disbelieve the mere existence of these creatures while opining that they exist. 

 

Perhaps developing an eco car to satisfy an ideological movement isn't nearly as smart as not needing a car whatsoever?

 

These creatures are smart enough to live like sapiens should have been living all along.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

We’re thriving, they are not........

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

^^^ QFT. I mean it's not like there's 7+billion of THEM out there clear cutting, drilling for oil, mining raw minerals and metals and putting up solar panels. Nope, they're breaking off twigs for nests, poking sticks into stumps and clacking rocks together. Ape behavior at its best, with the advantage of an advanced, bipedal,  primate body. Someone will say my lineage hypothesis is a stupid hypothesis. That's fine, but I think the concept is a helluva lot better than G. blacki/Bigfoot which I see more as an ancient species of Gorilla that went East to live with the even more ancient Orangutans.

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
16 minutes ago, hiflier said:

^^^ QFT. I mean it's not like there's 7+billion of THEM out there clear cutting, drilling for oil, mining raw minerals and metals and putting up solar panels. Nope, they're breaking off twigs for nests, poking sticks into stumps and clacking rocks together. Ape behavior at its best, with the advantage of an advanced, bipedal,  primate body. Someone will say my lineage hypothesis is a stupid hypothesis. That's fine, but I think the concept is a helluva lot better than G. blacki/Bigfoot which I see more as an ancient species of Gorilla that went East to live with the even more ancient Orangutans.

While your LCA theory might be correct,  it could be that sasquatch is not the last but fits in the sequence someplace else.     Perhaps since Neanderthal was more robust than modern man, sasquatch is LCA with Neanderthol or a completely unknown ancestor of Neanderthol.     Much of our knowledge about human development is hinged solely on Africa and is too influenced by that.      Africa is a very stable continent, and while tectonic forces munch and crunch at its perifera,   the heart of the continent is the most geologically stable of all the continents.      That has created an environment where fossils can be formed and are not destroyed.    So human development theories have been too influenced by African fossil finds just because they are there to find.    But there have been many pushes out of Africa and some of in our ancestral lineage may yet to be found, because their species  did not last long or was in geologically unstable terrain or terrain that cannot form fossils.   Sequencing BF DNA will tell us a lot about all of this and the good thing is that every year we get better at understanding what we see in DNA about species evolution.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, Twist said:

We’re thriving, they are not........

 

Are we?

 

Are they not?

 

You base that on dense population, but frankly, I consider that a detriment. Sorta' like being a drone in an ant colony or bee hive. 

 

I'm at my finest and happiest when I'm in the same woods as them, and alone. You can have this thriving mass of sapien bliss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Your displeasures with society does not change the fact that we as a whole are most definitely thriving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor
53 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

While your LCA theory might be correct,  it could be that sasquatch is not the last but fits in the sequence someplace else.     Perhaps since Neanderthal was more robust than modern man, sasquatch is LCA with Neanderthol or a completely unknown ancestor of Neanderthol.

 

Hmm, I gave this some thought. First thing that cropped up is that Neanderthal is Homo. Older than Homo Sapiens for sure. But when Homo began, back before all of the different branching that we are discovering there was an LCA. This is where I'm hypothesizing that a Sasquatch-like species split off. From there the Homo line that got the good brain genes went on to branch out into Erectus, Australopithecine, Heidelbergensis, and all the rest up to Neanderthal, Denisovan, Red Deer Cave people, others, and Homo Sapiens. It would place Sasquatch very early, at a time when Homo branched off but well after the LCA where chimps branched off.

 

I'm hypothesizing that Homo didn't appear once the Chimp line split off. Instead, Chimps simply split from another primate that was the LCA of Humans and Sasquatch. THEN Homo split off because of the repaired NOTCH2NL gene with its  additional A,B,C variations, leaving Sasquatch behind with its advanced hairy body and ape brain. So Sasquatch essentially is a very highly evolved  Great Ape but only as far as it's physical make up is concerned. Under this hypothesis, Sasquatch WOULD be the missing link everyone has been searching for between us and all other knuckle-walking great primates. So its DNA would be danged close to ours by far over Chimpanzee DNA

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

Are we?

 

Are they not?

 

You base that on dense population, but frankly, I consider that a detriment. Sorta' like being a drone in an ant colony or bee hive. 

 

I'm at my finest and happiest when I'm in the same woods as them, and alone. You can have this thriving mass of sapien bliss.


I agree with your wilderness sentiments 2000 percent. But that’s a philosophical answer not a biological one.

 

Bees and ants are also successful. More successful than humans in biological terms too.

 

 Is Bigfoot successful? That’s a question only modern science can answer. But my wager is that it’s not as successful as it once was. Native salmon runs are extinct by 90 percent. The life blood of the interior gone. Blocked by giant dams. Logging, mining, all have an impact. Plus urban sprawl. Look at the I 5 corridor? Did it pave under food resources used by them? It must have.

 

I do not think their numbers are good for the reproduction of a species. But only a army of biologists could confirm that. I would guess their species distribution map would look similar to that of a Grizzly Bear. 1900/1950/2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor
6 minutes ago, norseman said:

I agree with your wilderness sentiments 2000 percent. But that’s a philosophical answer not a biological one........

 

Agreed, but as much behavioral, cultural,  and spiritual as philosophical. It's similar to the successfulness of the Sentinelese tribe. They are 100% homo sapien, so are our biological equals in every taxonomic way, but are almost saquatch-like compared to a western American citizen. Are the Sentinelese unsuccessful? Only if more modern sapiens go to the island and wipe them out.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor
20 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

Agreed, but as much behavioral, cultural,  and spiritual as philosophical. It's similar to the successfulness of the Sentinelese tribe. They are 100% homo sapien, so are our biological equals in every taxonomic way, but are almost saquatch-like compared to a western American citizen. Are the Sentinelese unsuccessful? Only if more modern sapiens go to the island and wipe them out.......


Mother Nature is a continuous arms race. As the gazelle runs faster? The cheetah must keep up or die.

 

Sentinelese? Or the coronavirus finds the island Or a tidal wave. Or whatever calamity that could affect a small population that a large one could absorb.

 

From a biological standpoint the Sentinelese are a dead end. Their genes will die out. Are they happy? Who knows.... We are romantic about primitive lifestyles. They may secretly dream about something akin to Disneyland while gorging themselves on slushes and cotton candy. There is a ship run aground on the island. I bet they know more about us than we think they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...