(03-31-2017, 09:19 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: ...But then she took the tests further into the nuclear DNA and they found there that it was not human...

Quote:It's intelligence would be one problem, but how do you explain the hair...?

(03-31-2017, 10:20 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: Too much testosterone in the hormones?

(03-31-2017, 09:12 PM)BIAD Wrote:

'...makes you think what forces may be suppressing that...'

(04-01-2017, 06:58 PM)DuckforcoveR Wrote: Great Video!

(04-01-2017, 06:42 PM)BIAD Wrote:

(03-31-2017, 10:20 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: Too much testosterone in the hormones?

(Mystic, I'm going to try to stick with the established way of looking at how Bigfoot
could or couldn't stem from the lineage of primates and move on from there!)


Answer:
I think it must be more than just that, the covering of hair against the inclement
weather and survival in the wild and the endurance levels needed to cover areas
in search of a variety of food implies to me that we're not dealing with an anomaly
in the primate species.

Here's the usual mapping of the primate evolution, notice how we seem to place
modern man as the end of the evolution and the oddity that we're the only species
that lost our hair.



I looked at some articles about why we may have lost our 'fur' and academia tends to
land on three possible reasons.
An early semi-aquatic life foraging for food in shallow waters with hair being a poor
insulator in water.
Parasite control by shedding hair and by doing so, enhancing sexual attractiveness.
Body temperature control under a hot sun.
(However, cold nights tends to make this last opinion suspect)
SOURCE:

So assuming a large hairy intelligent biped exists in the Americas, they forego the
benefits of hunting for food in water, they tolerate lice and endure the hot sun of the
Tibetan and Great North woods sun in favour of not losing their hair!

Really...?!
So every animal that carries fur or hair is less intelligent that the only ape who's shed
his hair? That's main problem here and similar to the humorous discussion Ninurta and
myself discussing intelligence in dolphins, the base-line of logic starts with modern man.

There has been no evidence that primates existed in the Americas... that's a fact.
Then explain Native Americans...? -and before you jump in and comment about the
ice-bridge from Asia to Canada, are we to say that this passage was only selective to
homo erectus and a few species of animals?

It's entirely possible that Sasquatch crossed over for the same reasons the bald guy
with the animal-skin went there, in search of better survival conditions.
It makes sense, sense that any animal wishing to persevere would appreciate, knowingly
or not.

But, the large animal that wanders around Canada and North America cannot exist because
scientists have refused to investigate something that doesn't make sense.
All animals can be trapped because of the need for food. If an animal senses something
is dangerous, they steer clear of the situation, but still  observe from a distance.

Bigfoot doesn't seem to fall for our tricks ... and that takes us towards a perception that
we believe only we have the patent on. Trust.

Quote:Is Bigfoot Real? Emerging Scientific Evidence

Quote:Some of this evidence has emerged from unexpected places.
One of these places is Mount St. Helens in Washington State, U.S.A, where in 2013 and 2014 I along with one of my former college students located three different ungulate rib prey bone assemblages (elk and deer rib bones) that had seemingly inexplicable chewing marks left in them.

We conducted a two year Zooarcheological field research project, which culminated March 26, 2016 at the 69th Annual Anthropological Research Conference, where I presented our conclusions to a room full of respected academic and governmental anthropologists and archeologists.

Tooth and Bite Marks

I presented data in the form of incisor, molar and pre-molar dental signature evidence that we were able to very carefully link with current scientific literature describing historical and contemporary hominin chewing evidence. This published, peer reviewed  literature described a diagnostic framework for accurately separating and identifying hominin mastication evidence recovered from both pre-archaic sites and comparative contemporary chewing studies upon ungulate rib bones.
Furthermore, we proposed the evaluation of a new category of incisal dentition signature termed a Notch, which consolidated the applicable literature and accurately described some of our field research evidence. 

The conference gave us a chance to demonstrate the links between the teeth mark evidence that we recovered in the field with current peer reviewed scientific research covering the same subject.  This current research provided a framework by which we could compare our tooth mark descriptions.  It also helps provide a very effective tool that enables scientists to re-examine other suspected human chewing evidence upon bones.

 

Quote:All three locations contained the same evidence profiles of ungulate (deer and elk) rib evidence with clear and measurable evidence of hominin mastication activity. The dentition of other known local ecosystem specific predators and scavengers was compared against Homo sapiens dentition.
Of the 25 total hominin incisor measurements taken from all three sites, 92% are outside the average lateral incisors size range for modern Homo sapiens . In this same sample 80% are outside the average measurement for central incisor. From this evidence, Upper Inter-Canine measurements can be accurately estimated.  All of the comparative analysis demonstrated hominin dentition physio-morphology of at least two times the size of modern humans. 

Quote:The evidence was clear and consistent across all three locations.  The teeth marks and jaw shapes of bear, cougar, humans, porcupine, and wolverine along with every other potential species that might have been responsible was examined and eliminated or included. After identifying the teeth marks as “Hominin” we measured the geometry of the individual marks and were able to determine that they were primarily outside the upper size range for current humans. From these measurements we were able to estimate mouth size, which again was over double the size of a modern human.

Quote:Rib Peeling 
The Pre-Molar and Molar dentition signature evidence analysis is perhaps the strongest indication of hominin mastication evidence that emerged from the field research. The current peer reviewed scientific literature describes Rib Peeling as a clear hominin assigned bone surface modification diagnostic characteristic. The physical act of rib peeling entails putting a rib in a hominins mouth and using their hands as levers to move the rib in cooperation with using their pre-molars and molars to masticate the ends. This specific force application procedure has been evaluated over several peer reviewed studies both pre-archaic and contemporary as clearly diagnostic of hominin mastication activity. This process creates specific secondary dentition signatures in consistent hemispherical regions of masticated ungulate rib specimens. The pre-molar impressions were triangular in shape while the molar evidence is characterized by double arch shapes. The evidence recovered from all three sites demonstrated clear and consistent rib peeling evidence. 

 

Quote:The physical act or process of Rib Peeling is very simple.  It consists of using your hands to put a rib in your mouth and using those same hands to move the end of the rib around as you chew on the opposite end.  This creates very specific damage and tooth marks in predictable locations on a rib.  It also creates secondary tooth marks in expected locations. This predictable combination of damage and individual teeth mark impression evidence is clearly supported in current scientific research and is an accurate tool that enables the separation of hominin verses predator chewing evidence in bones.

(04-02-2017, 06:21 AM)Daitengu Wrote: Bigfoot in the vid looks like someone wearing a monkey suit .....  they probably dna tested some drunk college kid thinking it was bigfoot .....

(04-02-2017, 06:21 AM)Daitengu Wrote: Bigfoot in the vid looks like someone wearing a monkey suit .....  they probably dna tested some drunk college kid thinking it was bigfoot .....

(04-05-2017, 07:22 PM)BIAD Wrote: Not a big fan of Mr. Standing and I know his name doesn't fare well
in the Bigfoot community. The Sylvanic footage takes this phenomena
into another realm considering how clean the images are, it's the overall
information that's blurry this time around!

That's down-side of this subject, it's full of people waiting to take money
off a zealous public.

Quote:I know this isn't directly connected with what's being discussed here, but it shows the relationship
through our similar ancestory of how once you're part of a group, members of that group see you
as one of theirs.