Guest toejam Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) Being fortunate enough to have had a close vocal experience starting off my research with a bang, I'd say it's something in between. It pronounced the whoops with such clarity it sounded human, but all animal. The craziest thing I've ever experienced (which is why I'm still in this almost 4 years later). I'd lean a little more towards animal. Edited April 9, 2012 by toejam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 What? Apeman isn't a choice? "I think I'm sophisticated 'cos I'm living my life like a good homo sapiens." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I think Bigfoot is the North American version of a Shoalin Monk. The start of the old 1970's TV show had the narative: "Listen for, he cannot be heard, look for, he cannot be seen, sought after, he cannot be found". Today it can be: "Take a picture, he cannot be filmed, listen for, he cannot be recorded, hunted for, he cannot be found....." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) Maybe they represent their own family.. not that of US ..not that of the great apes that we know now. I think they r different. I still think its a man with animal characteristics.. speed torque agility size .. It appears the distribution is more like us than any other spp but black bear may be a correlating indicator spp of presence so.. numbers may exceed which that of common sense suggests. Since we dont know if they are governed 100 percent by biological law as we know it.. who is to say at this time ? My best guess is different family but possibly the same, differnt Genus and certainly different spp if it turns out they are in the Homo genus.. (which I really would find amazing). Subspecies of man currently referred to as race.. so the closest to us would be another spp. I really think different genus minumum. But then I labor at chess so.. Q When you read the blood.. what determines whether its closer to us ? .. what does it have to be to be closer to us.. ? Need an update lol. Edited April 11, 2012 by treeknocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kronprinz Adam Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 (edited) The idea that early hominoids only split into two branches has been overtaken by events. It depends what you mean by early, but there are actually dozens of branches. No creature develops one facility only. There is a downside to every development, and so all evolution is a balancing act (for instance, our big brains require an awful lot of energy input to maintain). It is therefore hyper-simplistic and misleading to say that we developed intelligence and the other lot developed strength. Mike Hi Mike!!! This was the opinion of some researcher who wrote it down in a magazine (back in the 70s or 80s)...there was not the amount of information we have today...the idea looks simplistic today, given the fact that due to recent discoveries, our family tree has many more branches (we have denisovans, homo floresiesis, red deer cave people [China], ardipithecus, and I hope Orang Pendek will join soon the list of discoveries) but anyway, there are still many questions left... I liked the idea back in the 80 because I was a kid and I enjoyed that particular magazine..now I realize that it is not clear exactly how our species developed and how the other apemen became extinct, so what happened to all other branches? Are they hidden? Which branch produced Bigfoot-creatures? Greetings. K. Adam. Edited April 11, 2012 by Kronprinz Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 We're looking at something that diverged from us(or probably the other way around) from Ardi or early austrolopithecines but definitely not from the Homo genus. Our ancestors were not still swinging in the trees a million years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest minnie-ear Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Men are apes so the question is flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Being fortunate enough to have had a close vocal experience starting off my research with a bang, I'd say it's something in between. It pronounced the whoops with such clarity it sounded human, but all animal. The craziest thing I've ever experienced (which is why I'm still in this almost 4 years later). I'd lean a little more towards animal. That same thing is what got me early on in my field inquiry,....... the sounds that had a human quality but obviously wild in nature. Thats why I lean toward closer to man, because it takes a "genus homo" vocal apparatus to sound like that. It's easy to see how people get divided on this isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts