Jump to content

Human Cousins pre-Sasquatch


Recommended Posts

bipedalist
BFF Patron

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/02/world/ancient-humans-skull-evolution-fossils-scn-trnd/index.html

 

Interesting account of competition between Homo erectus, Australopithecus afarensis and Paranthropus and how it all plays out hypothetically re: morphology, brain development and migrational patterns

 

And this re: Homo naledi https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0230440

 

And loving the great taste preferences of Neandertals https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238767-neanderthals-feasted-on-seafood-and-nuts-according-to-fossil-remains/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1585245771

Edited by bipedalist
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier

This is good stuff, b :) The first article was a bit confusing in its writing but it was interesting the three Homo species were in the same general area around the same eon. This was obviously more about taphonomy, lineage and physiology and not so much about the genetics behind brain size. There was certainly a brief mention of the split with Chimpanzees which is a critical "moment in our own evolutionary dynamic. It was good to learn bit more about Homo naledi, too. Thank you for posting this.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron
Posted (edited)

Yah, the location of the visual cortex in the various species from front to back is enlightening to those that have neuroscience backgrounds, who would have thunk visual cortex was frontal in apes (and I am not saying Great Apes), all I know is geolocation of chimpanzee is amazing with visual memory and cortex and there are several studies on youtube showing that amazing skill.

Edited by bipedalist
Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier

Yes, for something that has a brain a third the size of ours, what they can do is pretty remarkable. But it's still considered a primitive brain by Human standards of cognition. Nonetheless, I can see that type of brain fused into a Sasquatch-type body. And I do think that's what the Bigfoot is all about. It's make up. It isn't technically an ape. But it's brain says it isn't technically Homo either. It is bipedal (sometimes quadrupedal), its thumb is a little closer to opposable than an apes, but not as opposable as Humans, it apparently builds nests (very apelike), etc.. Quite a bit further along in the primate evolutionary sense, but didn't make it to Sapiens.

 

You know my theory by now, as most here do. It is that Homo and the Bigfoot shared a Last Common Ancestor AFTER the Chimpanzees split off. My hypothesis is that that LCA then split into the Bigfoot (and there may have been several different species), and into Homo (of which there WERE different species. My hypothesis goes further to say that both had advanced evolutionary bipedal bodies, and then similarities, beyond the physical, became altered. Homo's gradually increasing brain size over millennia kept widening the gap between the two branches. Today, Humans are on the field, the Bigfoots are in the bleachers, and the Great Apes are nowhere in the ballpark.

 

The Bigfoots are capable of throwing the first pitch, but incapable of creating or understanding the technology of the game.   

Edited by hiflier
Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron
Posted (edited)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-61839-w

 

Earliest known cordage documentation\ Neanderthal  41-52 ka

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/09/world/oldest-yarn-neanderthals-scn/index.html

Edited by bipedalist
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...