MIB Posted May 24, 2020 Moderator Posted May 24, 2020 On 5/22/2020 at 11:45 AM, BlackRockBigfoot said: I know that is completely improbable, but it would be something if there were not one but a couple of relic hominid population scattered across the land that explained the differing descriptions... Read any Robert Alley or Ivan Sanderson? That's essentially exactly what they suggest ... roughly 5 different patterns of hairy hominids still existing worldwide. I dunno. But supposing there were 2 or more kinds "here" (North America) and we were trying to force the various attributes onto a single assumed species, it certainly would create contradictory descriptions. If there really are more than one, some of the apparent contradictions may not contradict after all. Dunno, not claiming anything, just ... considering angles. MIB
NCBFr Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 People are over thinking this. If you have seen one, or even the good videos or pics, or read the 1K+ reports of sightings, they are basically large hairy humans with a relatively few (but very important) genetic differences. Take a look at a chimp or rhesus monkey, "our closest living relative", and compare it to Patty and tell me which one is closest to us. And if you think Patty is a suite, you are disqualified from this conversation because your answer has to be be E, none of the above, this is all BS. And yes, worst grammar ever.
Huntster Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 2 hours ago, hiflier said: ........my hypothesis is that there was one more Last Common Ancestor (hominin), after the Chimpanzee line split off, which was the LCA to Sasquatches and Humans. I further propose that the subsequent split between Sasquatches and Humans was when our Human ancestors began to benefit from the mutational copying of the NOTCH2NL gene. The potential of an unknown line of sub-Saharan Africans migrating into Asia over 100,000 years ago, as suggested by Sykes after his DNA work on Zana's progeny, is particularly interesting. Her physical description matches Patty from the PG film quite well. 1
hiflier Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 Agreed, Hunster, and thought so since back when I first read about her. Almasty? Dunno, but I can easily picture Sasquatch-types being responsible for much of the "lore" throughout central and eastern Asia. I can also easily picture at least one species crossing the Bering land bridge. One dynamic I've turned over is that after "Humans" got smarter, the Sasquatches began to experience a predator who was more organized and smarter that they were. As a result my speculation is that Sasquatches have been running and hiding from Humans ever since. This is all guesswork, of course, but it's based on everything I've read and learned from studying reports, primate evolution, and genetics. To me it's all a pretty good fit. I also am convinced that genetics is the way forward to finding them because millenniums of being prey their archetypal elusive natures, coupled with their intelligence and body shape, has been their best defense against capture. Proving them genetically with e-DNA could be the best way to find them while leaving them completely unmolested.
NatFoot Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 (edited) @hiflier I have a word I use for my wife in my house when she exhibits the same behavior you have been exhibiting...it's called "nagger"! Edited May 24, 2020 by NatFoot
hiflier Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 Noted and accepted. Yep, I'm a nagger but it's hard for me to consider the incredible possibility of having such a creature in North America and not push as hard as I do for it's discovery. The PGF STILL blows me away and it is my absolute go-to whenever I get discouraged. When I email lately I don't even mention BF. All I email about is to try an get an answer to two questions: Can one hypothetically use existing e-DNA protocols to determine the presence of a lost Gorilla in North America if physical searching hasn't succeeded? And, if so, can one target the proteins or base pairs of the Gorilla NOTCH2NL gene variations to do it. My answer to both questions, of course, are "Yes", but I would like to hear it from a scientist. This goes to credibility which in this case is extremely important on several levels. There are scientists who HAVE those answers, especially one who is a genetic primatologist. Know of any?
ShadowBorn Posted May 24, 2020 Moderator Posted May 24, 2020 56 minutes ago, hiflier said: There are scientists who HAVE those answers, especially one who is a genetic primatologist. Know of any? ^^ But that answer is going to be negative Hiflier ^^ Since if it was true it would be the biggest find the world has ever known. What primatologist would love to have the biggest discovery of an unknown ape/gorilla roaming in North America.
Huntster Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 1 hour ago, hiflier said: ........ it's hard for me to consider the incredible possibility of having such a creature in North America and not push as hard as I do for it's discovery........ Please think hard about this question before answering. Take your time: What do you think "discovery" will achieve for both sasquatches and humanity, and will any good outweigh any bad? 1
hiflier Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 I understand you're answer ShadowBorn. But I need to hear a scientist tell me the method I prose won't work. It has nothing to do with Sasquatch as far as a scientist is concerned. It's only about the methodology itself.
NatFoot Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 13 minutes ago, Huntster said: Please think hard about this question before answering. Take your time: What do you think "discovery" will achieve for both sasquatches and humanity, and will any good outweigh any bad? I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Even 6 months ago I was in the, we need to prove it camp. Now...I don't know what that does for anyone...the elusive Sasquatch or Humanity. I just want to be a knower because I saw one and it was clear enough for me not to second guess myself....obviously from a safe position. Once/if that ever happens...doubt you guys will see much more of me around here. 1
hiflier Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 3 minutes ago, Huntster said: Please think hard about this question before answering. Take your time: Two great questions, Huntster. and I've had had PLENTY of time to consider both. Everyone has, because the subject regarding the ramifications of discovery has come up numerous times on the Forum. There have been whole threads devoted to it. So, I'll take each question separately: 15 minutes ago, Huntster said: What do you think "discovery" will achieve for both sasquatches and humanity.... The future conservation of large tracts of wild habitat simply by force of discovery. Places that will never be developed or cut into along with creating programs sensitive to the environment where the creatures are know to live and roam. Those regions could be preserved for our own future generations for as long as the creatures are alive. And hopefully discovery will assure that they WILL be alive. They are already IN wild habitat but knowledge of their existence will secure the areas where they exist. We worked around the Spotted Owl by changing timber harvesting practices. We are fully capable of doing that with the Bigfoot as well. At first, there will be an economic impact but it will smooth out over time as we learn more about them. Who knows, we may learn more about ourselves in the process 27 minutes ago, Huntster said: ......and will any good outweigh any bad? See above. Personally I think the marvel and beauty of their existence will far outweigh what most think would be bad. Bad Stuff? Things like religious upheavals, panic in society, etc.. I don't think ANY of that would happen. There could be a lot of "I TOLD you they were real!" going around though
Huntster Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 26 minutes ago, hiflier said: Two great questions, Huntster. and I've had had PLENTY of time to consider both. Everyone has, because the subject regarding the ramifications of discovery has come up numerous times on the Forum. There have been whole threads devoted to it........ Actually, before I asked I ran a search of the forum using the word "discovery" within thread titles only. There weren't many appropriate threads, and only a couple of short ones even addressed my questions. I don't want to derail this thread with further advances into this subject, but my mind is turning towards either resurrecting one of those earlier threads or starting a new one. Your answers deserve wide, regular, and recurring thought and discussion. However, in short, the preservation of large parcels of public lands for a non-political hominin by a government made up of homo sapiens in the current political environment brings up so many potential political problems that the understanding of why government wants these creatures to remain undiscovered becomes more than obvious. 1 1
hiflier Posted May 24, 2020 Posted May 24, 2020 I'll dig up a good one that I remember. In that one I'll also post a link to a second one which is also fairly decent. BTW your post is a good one and touches on an important point regarding government not wanting public disclosure Okay, I'll get to work and then this thread can be left to its topic.
SWWASAS Posted May 25, 2020 BFF Patron Posted May 25, 2020 On 5/24/2020 at 10:22 AM, NatFoot said: I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Even 6 months ago I was in the, we need to prove it camp. Now...I don't know what that does for anyone...the elusive Sasquatch or Humanity. I just want to be a knower because I saw one and it was clear enough for me not to second guess myself....obviously from a safe position. Once/if that ever happens...doubt you guys will see much more of me around here. I hope that is not the case. I think that should existence ever be acknowledged, science will come around hat in hand and want to know what we know. They have a lot of catching up to do if they want to have a chance to learn something about BF daily life. It will be a hard study because of the elusive nature of the creature. Hopefully some of the younger folks on the forum will still be interested and became involved with scientific efforts to learn about the species. While we may not have a lot of answers, just knowing what areas of the country are active would be of tremendous benefit to main stream researchers with funding. I can see some of the monetary interests like States and timber companies funding research if they see the benefit of knowing what is BF habitat if it protects them from completely being shut out of the forests. While BF may be around, it is unlikely they live everywhere in the forests. If logging opens up the forest for deer and elk, then it may be of some benefit to BF if certain non habitat areas are logged. That sure would be my sell if I was trying to get funding for research.
hiflier Posted May 25, 2020 Posted May 25, 2020 26 minutes ago, SWWASAS said: I can see some of the monetary interests like States and timber companies funding research if they see the benefit of knowing what is BF habitat if it protects them from completely being shut out of the forests.....If logging opens up the forest for deer and elk, then it may be of some benefit to BF if certain non habitat areas are logged. That sure would be my sell if I was trying to get funding for research Absolutely a great perspective on a dynamic that never crossed my mind. Thank you!
Recommended Posts