Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) You are coming back when this is out and 'splainin to me again? !! Thanks. Edited December 7, 2012 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) So, if we assume this story we hear is true- woman mated with some other type of human ancestor then what could that other thing have been? Not Denisovan or Neanderthal. Erectus? Paranthropus? Ergaster? What type of being crossed with human would make a 8ft tall 700 lb upright hairy thing with massive bulk? Excessive size is not unheard of in hybridization cases. See "ligers" and "tigons" for example. Assuming these reconstructions are anywhere near close, I could see Hominid X being close to a couple of them (based on appearance): Based on the climatological choices, Heidelbergensis would also be a possibility. Also bugging me- if a woman crosses with a different type of human making a new hybrid, wouldn't it have to happen twice and produce 2 offspring (or once and have twins?) Hybrid human would have to breed with hybrid human to make a new line. Otherwise if a one time hookup happened and the thing grew up and bred with a normal human, the line would only be 1/4 unknown hominid. See what I mean? Yes, this would have been a process taking several generations if not longer. Edited December 7, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 "We may not have the whole picture as to what bigfoot is, since we are still looking for the original maternal line." You mean paternal line. We have a maternal line (human) and a paternal line (unknown) evidencing a cross happened approx. 15 thousand years ago. Whatever it was that crossed with humans, had it's own maternal line at some point. If the crossing only occured between human females and unknown males then it is possible the unknown lost it's original maternal line due to selection. I would think though in order to have produced a new viable breeding population the crossing would have to be widespread to avoid inbreeding and the resulting homin was favored for survival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunflower Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 We may not have the whole picture as to what bigfoot is, since we are still looking for the original maternal line. If that went extinct then it would argue for the idea of very strong natural selection of the hybridized type. Bigfoot seems extremely well adapted with great intelligence. The smartest animal on the planet, or the wildest man you'll ever come across. That is about where I am in this but I'll be glad to hear the all scientists involved in the tests, give their opinions and results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) I have to do some research to make a better guess, but I suspect the 15,000 year date is based on a known haplogroup with one or maybe two previously unknown mutations. Sykes in his book concluded I believe that a mutation gets into our population through the mitochondria in about 10,000 years. If the sequences are identical to what is known, I can't figure out how they get to the 15,000 year date. However if their haplogroup is one click off from say H, while using the 1:10,000 rule you could come up with that time frame. I've reread Dr. Burtsev's press release and it gives a maximum ceiling for the hybridization event which leads me to conclude they must have a known haplogroup and not a new sub group. I think it is possible given the details in his release to narrow down which one they belong to. Edited December 7, 2012 by HODS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 What are the posibilities that the unkowm hominid donor survived in the old world and the hybrid population migrated to the new world. The yeti jumps out as the paternal donor, BF and Almas/Yerens two different hybrid populations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 ^^^^^^ I think it will take many more years of research to answer that question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Also bugging me- if a woman crosses with a different type of human making a new hybrid, wouldn't it have to happen twice and produce 2 offspring (or once and have twins?) Hybrid human would have to breed with hybrid human to make a new line. Otherwise if a one time hookup happened and the thing grew up and bred with a normal human, the line would only be 1/4 unknown hominid. See what I mean? Agreed. Seems to me the likely scenario would be a clan of one type constantly interbreeding with a clan of another type, not one single event. Perhaps these offspring were shunned by both groups (which still happens today) so were outcasts that formed their own group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Hello??? She said BF was *born* 15K years ago...wanna debate that? All aside..let's see where all this goes>>>NO WHERE!! No she said the non-human hominid/ human hybridization happened no earlier than 15,000 years before present. The "bigfoot" species as you say was already there. They hybridized with a human female at least once and that human female's mitochondrial DNA is still found within the species. Therefore they are a non-human hominin with human dna involved. That's the take I get when I read what she actually wrote. Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 ^^^^^ actually she said approximately 15,000 years ago, and Igor claims that date was a maximum time for the event, so it's not so clear unless you have another source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Thank you for the precision on the time frame. Is the rest of what I said accurate? Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scout1959 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Also bugging me- if a woman crosses with a different type of human making a new hybrid, wouldn't it have to happen twice and produce 2 offspring (or once and have twins?) Hybrid human would have to breed with hybrid human to make a new line. Otherwise if a one time hookup happened and the thing grew up and bred with a normal human, the line would only be 1/4 unknown hominid. See what I mean? It sounds to me that it's a hybrid only in that the mitochondrial DNA is human. The nuclear DNA sounds to be other than human. That means you could easily have had only one mating and for some reason all maternal lines run back to that one mating. Which of course resulted in a female being born. From there all BF trace their family trees back to that one BF female. Since then more and more 'human' nuclear DNA would have been breed out of the new species. (honestly calling it a new species after so much nuclear DNA has been bred out is likely misleading) However this would also mean less and less hybrid vigor so the theory that BF is big because of hybrid vigor is completely false. "IF" BF really is as big as some say that all comes from the nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA would have nothing to do with size. However the species could have evolved since that mating to prefer larger individuals for whatever reason. For an example my own mitochondrial DNA is NA. HOWEVER that single NA female entered the family tree in the late 1600's so today I bear no morphology what so ever that indicates I am part NA. However my mitochondrial DNA is 100% NA. I had a friend in High School who was 1/4 NA but his Y chromosome came from an English man and his mitochondrial DNA came from an German woman. You look at just those two and you'd identify him as European but he looked as NA as anyone I've ever known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) The liger grows much larger than its parents due to hybredization. I dont think its unreasonable to deduce that happened to the Sasquatch. Stealing women has been a popular past time through out the ages, both among animals and humans. I think Sasquatch's dad stole his HSS mom and after alittle romancing little sassy was born but as he grew up little sassy turned into Big Sas. The rest of the group would have noticed that HSS women make big strong sons and proceded to steal as much HSS women as they could (possibly causing the original rift between us and them) Eventually the bigger offspring would take over their family groups and the rest is history. Edited December 7, 2012 by Nakani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Agreed. Seems to me the likely scenario would be a clan of one type constantly interbreeding with a clan of another type, not one single event. Perhaps these offspring were shunned by both groups (which still happens today) so were outcasts that formed their own group. Good response... How about one clan making war on another for years, or a single one time event (war), eventually eliminating the men . That would/could be your single event with a stable breeding population with minimum inbreeding.. I'm just saying its another scenario type possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 How about one clan making war on another for years, or a single one time event (war), eventually eliminating the men . Or just taking the women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts