Neanderthal locomotion

[MonkeMan]

15 hours ago, norseman said:

Morphologically speaking? Your beating up my theory that Neanderthals are too short to evolve into a Sasquatch. So you pick a species that is alittle over 4 feet tall and just over 100 lbs!🤣🤣🤣

 

Please, don't oversimplify it. If we are to suggest that Bigfoot evolved from a extinct hominid then we have to look at the evidence in a relative sense. Moreover, while both of our candidates lack the associated height that is usually reported in sightings my theory doesn't have the burden to explain why it has re-evolved certain basal characteristics like an extremely hairy body or a mid tarsal break and lower intelligence.

 

Furthermore I have suggested that that there is an actual selection history that can explain how an Australopithecus could evolve a larger body size, namely high predation rates. Which I'd imagine a 4ft, 100lb primate living in a sparsely wooded area would succumb to and it is a far more parsimonious explanation than bergman's principle or allen's rule ( which you used incorrectly by the way!).

[norseman]

18 minutes ago, MonkeMan said:

 

Please, don't oversimplify it. If we are to suggest that Bigfoot evolved from a extinct hominid then we have to look at the evidence in a relative sense. Moreover, while both of our candidates lack the associated height that is usually reported in sightings my theory doesn't have the burden to explain why it has re-evolved certain basal characteristics like an extremely hairy body or a mid tarsal break and lower intelligence.

 

Furthermore I have suggested that that there is an actual selection history that can explain how an Australopithecus could evolve a larger body size, namely high predation rates. Which I'd imagine a 4ft, 100lb primate living in a sparsely wooded area would succumb to and it is a far more parsimonious explanation than bergman's principle or allen's rule ( which you used incorrectly by the way!).

Im not stuck on body sizes. I just find it hypocritical that you are and yet ignore even a larger deficit with your own candidate.

 

Also your base beliefs are flawed. Who says Thals were not hairy or didn't have a mid tarsal break? A small percentage of the Sapien population HAS a mid tarsal break!

 

Just like there can be large variations on size in the Homo genus? There is also large variations of intelligence. Some of us are using computers and some of us are still in the stone age.

 

A offshoot of thals or Denisovans that crossed the land bridge and was cut off from others of their own species? Could certain devolve, lose technology, and slowly become sometimes else.

 

In my mind? Any candidate that never made it out of Africa? Isn't a serious candidate. The most primitive likely candidate would be Homo Erectus. They were in Asia too.

 

Either way this has nothing to do with the fact that Thals seem to exhibit many of the reported traits of Sasquatch locomotion. No matter if they are closely related or not.

 

 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, MonkeMan said:

 

Please, don't oversimplify it. If we are to suggest that Bigfoot evolved from a extinct hominid then we have to look at the evidence in a relative sense. Moreover, while both of our candidates lack the associated height that is usually reported in sightings my theory doesn't have the burden to explain why it has re-evolved certain basal characteristics like an extremely hairy body or a mid tarsal break and lower intelligence.

 

Furthermore I have suggested that that there is an actual selection history that can explain how an Australopithecus could evolve a larger body size, namely high predation rates. Which I'd imagine a 4ft, 100lb primate living in a sparsely wooded area would succumb to and it is a far more parsimonious explanation than bergman's principle or allen's rule ( which you used incorrectly by the way!).

I posted this when I found it last year. Meldrum supports your position on Paranthropus being the origin species. You may find his video helpful.

 

 

[MonkeMan]

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Im not stuck on body sizes. I just find it hypocritical that you are

 

I'm not, I'm not sure why you think I am.

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Who says Thals were not hairy or didn't have a mid tarsal break?

 

Well the fact that they had clothes and the existence of fossilized feet seem to heavily suggest both of those things.

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Could certain devolve, lose technology, and slowly become sometimes else.

 

They wouldn't lose technology or intelligence to this extent unless both of those traits became somehow less beneficial, which I don't see happening. It just seems like a huge leap in logic.

 

 

4 hours ago, norseman said:

The most primitive likely candidate would be Homo Erectus.

 

Possibly, but it sufferssimilar issues that Neanderthalis does as a possible candidate.

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Meldrum supports your position on Paranthropus being the origin species

 

Well yes, because we're both Anthropologists or at least well versed in the relevant literature. So we know that Paranthropus or Australopithicines are the most likely candidates based on anatomical evidence that does exist.

 

And I read through that mess of a thread, you are right, OOA is very much a settled issue in Anthropology and I'm not sure why they think a 12 million year old semi-bipedal Ape in germany disproves that.

 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, MonkeMan said:

 

I'm not, I'm not sure why you think I am.

 

 

Well the fact that they had clothes and the existence of fossilized feet seem to heavily suggest both of those things.

 

 

They wouldn't lose technology or intelligence to this extent unless both of those traits became somehow less beneficial, which I don't see happening. It just seems like a huge leap in logic.

 

 

 

Possibly, but it sufferssimilar issues that Neanderthalis does as a possible candidate.

 

 

Well yes, because we're both Anthropologists or at least well versed in the relevant literature. So we know that Paranthropus or Australopithicines are the most likely candidates based on anatomical evidence that does exist.

 

And I read through that mess of a thread, you are right, OOA is very much a settled issue in Anthropology and I'm not sure why they think a 12 million year old semi-bipedal Ape in germany disproves that.

 

Then we will shelve your assertion that Thals were too short to become Sasquatch.

 

What evidence do you have that they made clothes as we understand them? Most believe they only used simple hides as protection.

 

And as I have stated? The modern Homo Sapiens population has individuals who exhibit a mid tarsal break. Like a 1:10 ratio. Where is your evidence that Thals did no exhibit flat footedness in their population?

 

Or they could no longer find the right rocks to flake on the tundra. Or new viruses killed off adults who would have passed the knowledge along. Or a myriad of other reasons. Cultures have LOST technology many many times in history. Nothing crazy far fetched here.

 

So your a Anthropologist?

 

Did you watch Meldrum’s video?

[BlackRockBigfoot]

Has evidence been found that Neanderthal made needles and constructed clothing?  

[norseman]

1 hour ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Has evidence been found that Neanderthal made needles and constructed clothing?  

Not to my knowledge.

[MonkeMan]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

Then we will shelve your assertion that Thals were too short to become Sasquatch.

 

I never made that assertion.

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

Most believe they only used simple hides as protection.

 

Yeah, that's clothing. If they were extremely hairy as sasquatch is depicted as then they wouldn't really have a need for it.

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Like a 1:10 ratio

 

And? How do you know this was the case 300,000 years ago?

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Where is your evidence that Thals did no exhibit flat footedness in their population?

 

 

I'm not the one with the burden of proof. Where is your data that Neanderthals exbihtied extensive flat footedness in their populatons?

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Or new viruses killed off adults who would have passed the knowledge along.

 

Now that's an interesting theory, but I'm sure struggling Neandertals would have adopted contemporary Homo Sapien tool culture to persevere like they already did in Europe. And while it is very much true that cultures can lose technology they do not lose it anywhere near to the extent that you are suggesting.

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

So your a Anthropologist?

 

I'm not employed as one. There is simply no money in it, but at one point I almost became one and it's certainly a passion of mine

 

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Did you watch Meldrum’s video?

 

The first one in the thread right? Yes, what about it?

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Not to my knowledge.

 

Well there actually were some 50,000 year old needles found in denisova cave. Weren't made by Neandertals but if Denisovans had it then I suspect Neandertals did too.

[Incorrigible1]

If cattiness were a requisite for being an anthropologist, you'd have exceeded.

[norseman]

9 minutes ago, MonkeMan said:

 

I never made that assertion.

 

 

Yeah, that's clothing. If they were extremely hairy as sasquatch is depicted as then they wouldn't really have a need for it.

 

 

And? How do you know this was the case 300,000 years ago?

 

 

I'm not the one with the burden of proof. Where is your data that Neanderthals exbihtied extensive flat footedness in their populatons?

 

 

Now that's an interesting theory, but I'm sure struggling Neandertals would have adopted contemporary Homo Sapien tool culture to persevere like they already did in Europe. And while it is very much true that cultures can lose technology they do not lose it anywhere near to the extent that you are suggesting.

 

 

I'm not employed as one. There is simply no money in it, but at one point I almost became one and it's certainly a passion of mine

 

 

The first one in the thread right? Yes, what about it?

 

Well there actually were some 50,000 year old needles found in denisova cave. Weren't made by Neandertals but if Denisovans had it then I suspect Neandertals did too.

No its not clothing. Imagine wearing only a deer hide in ice age Europe during winter? I would imagine your sporting a decent rug of your own to keep from freezing to death.

 

Yes. Thals were flat footed… How does a “almost” anthropologist not know this!? You think Thals were less flat footed than humans? 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/archaeology/.premium.MAGAZINE-french-neanderthals-had-lots-of-kids-fossil-footprints-show-1.7817591

 

Unless there wasn't any Sapiens around to copy from? This migration could have happened long before Sapiens left Africa…

 

You suspect Thals had needles because a different species did? You rake me over the coals for peer reviewed articles? And you suspect? You are working off of a double standard here…. Not cool.

 

 

 

[MonkeMan]

11 hours ago, norseman said:

No its not clothing.

 

Why not?

 

11 hours ago, norseman said:

Thals were flat footed

 

Well first, that article is behind a paywall and also wants me to take off adblock, do you have anything else? And no, as far as I'm aware Neandertals were not flat footed. They have a longitudinal arch. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.499.2010&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

11 hours ago, norseman said:

This migration could have happened long before Sapiens left Africa…

 

Possibly, but there is no real evidence to suggest as much. In fact if we are to assume that it was a less archaic hominin that made it to america and become Sasquatch it was probably Homo erectus or Denisovans.

 

11 hours ago, norseman said:

You suspect Thals had needles because a different species did?

 

Again, an oversimplification of the point I'm trying to make. Neandertals and densiovans were closer for a longer period of time  than Tals were to Humans and just as Humans and Neandertals exchanged culture (an example being the Châtelperronian) despite only overlapping for 30,000 years we can expect that Denisovans and Neandertals did that same. I mean we already know they were interbreeding https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0455-x

 

12 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

If cattiness were a requisite for being an anthropologist, you'd have exceeded.

 

Sorry, I'm not trying to come across as an a$$hole (is cursing allowed here?) that's just how I talk.

[norseman]

18 minutes ago, MonkeMan said:

 

Why not?

 

 

Well first, that article is behind a paywall and also wants me to take off adblock, do you have anything else? And no, as far as I'm aware Neandertals were not flat footed. They have a longitudinal arch. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.499.2010&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

 

Possibly, but there is no real evidence to suggest as much. In fact if we are to assume that it was a less archaic hominin that made it to america and become Sasquatch it was probably Homo erectus or Denisovans.

 

 

Again, an oversimplification of the point I'm trying to make. Neandertals and densiovans were closer for a longer period of time  than Tals were to Humans and just as Humans and Neandertals exchanged culture (an example being the Châtelperronian) despite only overlapping for 30,000 years we can expect that Denisovans and Neandertals did that same. I mean we already know they were interbreeding https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0455-x

 

 

Sorry, I'm not trying to come across as an a$$hole (is cursing allowed here?) that's just how I talk.

Sasquatch has been reported with hides and even bark woven blankets…. I guess that means they wear clothes too.

 

Why not? Go naked into the north woods during winter naked with only a frozen deer hide and get back to me on that. 
 

The link works perfectly fine for me. Thals were flat footed. They were not long distance runners….

 

There is absolutely zero evidence Paranthropus left Africa either…. Thals were way closer and better adapted to a land bridge crossing than Paranthropus was.

 

Im just playing your game. Show me evidence or it didn't happen. Thals didn't make clothes. There is other evidence as well. Unlike Sapiens? Thals do not seem to have targeted fur bearing animals. No needles. No fur bearing bones around campsites. It was a deer hide thrown over the shoulders. Thats all.
 

Cursing is not allowed, no.

[MonkeMan]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Sasquatch has been reported with hides and even bark woven blankets…

 

How often is this reported? Are these reports reliable?

 

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Go naked into the north woods during winter naked with only a frozen deer hide and get back to me on that. 

 

Neandertals seemed to do it perfectly fine through multiple ice ages. Moreover, i don't have the morphology of a Nendertal. 

 

1 hour ago, norseman said:

The link works perfectly fine for me.

 

It's not that the link is broken, I'm just not going to give them my email address or pay for a subscription. Do you have a link to the actual study? Did you read my study?

 

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Show me evidence or it didn't happen.

 

You seem to be confused. I have shown evidence. Just because you want to ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Furthermore, I'm not simply disregarding your hypotheses because we lack evidence, as you should be aware all hypotheses on this subject in particular engage in some level of speculation. Again, I just believe that if we narrow it down, Sasquatch is probably a descendant from more archaic Hominids like Paranthropus or Australopithecus. It is entirely possible that the morphology we associate with Sasquatch evolved within the old world before it migrated to america, just as it's possible Neandertals  made it to america, lost all of it's technology and re-evolved many basal traits, but none of these claims have direct evidence. There is no need to be so combative.

 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, MonkeMan said:

 

How often is this reported? Are these reports reliable?

 

 

Neandertals seemed to do it perfectly fine through multiple ice ages. Moreover, i don't have the morphology of a Nendertal. 

 

 

It's not that the link is broken, I'm just not going to give them my email address or pay for a subscription. Do you have a link to the actual study? Did you read my study?

 

 

You seem to be confused. I have shown evidence. Just because you want to ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Furthermore, I'm not simply disregarding your hypotheses because we lack evidence, as you should be aware all hypotheses on this subject in particular engage in some level of speculation. Again, I just believe that if we narrow it down, Sasquatch is probably a descendant from more archaic Hominids like Paranthropus or Australopithecus. It is entirely possible that the morphology we associate with Sasquatch evolved within the old world before it migrated to america, just as it's possible Neandertals  made it to america, lost all of it's technology and re-evolved many basal traits, but none of these claims have direct evidence. There is no need to be so combative.

 

Im going to stop spoon feeding you now like a baby.

 

You can either start researching things on your own or not. Either way I don't care.

 

Good luck.

[ShadowBorn]

4 hours ago, MonkeMan said:

Sorry, I'm not trying to come across as an a$$hole (is cursing allowed here?) that's just how I talk.

Watch the language MonkeMan. Read the Guide lines of the Forum So you understand.

Norseman, Play nice. MonkeMan< has been doing ok with you in the discussion.

Good Info Though from everyone.