Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dopelyrics

Secrets of the largest ape that ever lived...

Recommended Posts

hiflier
BFF Donor

Science is making great strides in this field. So. What questions relative to our Hairy Friend should we be asking here? As in our modern day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
BFF Donor

A question I would ask would be how good / reliable is that sample?   In other words, yes, they got DNA, but is it degraded to the point it is not useful as a type sample, and ... how would they know for sure without another sample to compare to?     If you have two, and know it is the same species, from different locations, then you can check for consistency but with only one, it seems like you're taking a lot on faith.

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

My understanding of the article was that DNA wasn't part of the picture. It was about being able to track proteins. This is new to me and so I could be way off base with that but I don't think DNA was available in any form. I'll have to reread the article to be sure.

 

So one of the questions I have is whether or not the protein they were testing, or testing for would be unique to the species. Or at least unique enough to determine a genetic line. It would appear so which would open up a whole new type of science for anything in North America. My thinking is whether or not tracking ancient, or even modern, protein residues would ever become part of an environmental DNA regimen.

 

I also read today that all of Modern Man came from one woman in Botswana 200,000 years ago. O also read about a 3' tall biped creature (11.8 million years old!) found in Bavaria. Modern legs (bipedal) and hands for climbing. Reminded me of the find in the Star Cave of South Africa. The Bavaria skeleton is remarkable because it pushed back the known origins of bipedalism to millions of years before anyone had thought.

 

Science folks. Gotta stay with the science because these days its really growing fast regarding Human/primate origins. Makes me wonder if science hasn't been secretly on the trail of Sasquatch after all! ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
BFF Donor

Oh, ok, gotcha.    I believe you are right, I just mis-connected the dots.

 

I wonder how far back bipedalism goes.   Pushing farther and farther it seems.     I wonder if we will eventually find that bipedalism was the earlier adaptation and that pongid feet and tree dwelling is actually the off-shoot rather than the parent.   

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor
25 minutes ago, MIB said:

I wonder if we will eventually find that bipedalism was the earlier adaptation and that pongid feet and tree dwelling is actually the off-shoot rather than the parent

 

I think you hit the nail on the head. The thinking now seems to be that tree dwellers evolved bipedalism, strange as that may sound. I think there was mentioned the necessity of carrying tools of all things.  Lessee.....okay, here it is https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50305423 and I hope I'm not off topic by too far with this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arvedis

I found a link on that site that is more interesting: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44541847. A new species of gibbon has been identified in the same region as Giganto.  This is just an example of many new species of apes being found over the years but not BF. I see this as adding weight to the theory that BF may not be from the same branch of evolution as anywhere in the ape family. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...