Sasquatch/Bigfoot/Yeti?

Yitzhak Rabin

So, lets have a thread where we talk about the possibility of Bigfoot existing.

Personally, I don't think there is a bipedal great ape wandering around N. America.

There has been a huge number of sightings, and there is other evidence such as footprints, and even hair samples of an unknown primate. There is also photo/video evidence, famously the patterson/gimlin film:




and in 2007 this image of an alleged Bigfoot juvenile:



However, I am unsure about the N American fella. The Patterson/Gimlin film is certainly quite convincing imo, and aparently the technology didn't exist in the 60's for someone to make a monkey suit as convincing as the the one in the video, where the muscles are seen to move under the hair.

However, the vast majority of sightings can be explained by upright bears.



Its an easy mistake to make if you were in dense forestry, and tired/on edge. I think that at this stage there would be stronger evidence, if there really was a population of breeding bipedal primates wandering acoross the western coast of America/Canada.

However I do think there is a decent chance that Orang Pendak exists. The area which it roams is relatively unexplored. It is spoken of by the locals, and not in a mythical way, but in a matter of fact way. We know that hobbits existed until quite recently on Flores, and Orang Pendak, doesn't sound a whole lot different, so they could be related species.



Debby Martyr, a Zoologist living and working in the area once saw the creature and said of the encounter:

It walked straight across the valley in front of me, thirty meters away. So close! I didn't expect it. I certainly didn't expect to see it so clearly. It was walking between two trees, vegetation to about hip level. This gorgeous, graceful, very strongly built primate, a big ape, walking out of a legend and into broad daylight, lit up by the sun. If I'd seen it concealed in undergrowth, I could have said, "Well, I saw 'something'." But I didn't see "something". I saw an orang pendek...

I think this testimony is very convincing. Also the three major 'peoples' (Orang Kubu, Orang Batin Simbilan, and Orang Rimba) that live in the forest all have the same description and all matter of factly say they share the forest with Orang Pendak. We have seen time and time again how natives have known about the existence of creatures long before official scientific recognition.

Adam Khor

This is always a great subject to debate

I have always been skeptical about Bigfoot. I mean, a huge bipedal primate in North American forests? It should have been photographed (like, REALLY photographed) by now. Crappy pictures and blurry videos are just not good enough in this age of technology in which almost everyone carries a cell phone with a camera on it, or an actual camera for that matter. Even the worst cameras today should take better photos than we see as "evidence" of Bigfoot.

The footprints are easily faked; the hair samples always turn out to belong to an already known animal. The fact that all the carcasses supossedly recovered have turned out to be hoaxes doesn´t help either. And speaking of carcasses, where do all the dead Bigfoots go?
Shouldn´t we find them as ocassional roadkill, or their bones laying in the middle of the forest?

Its a cool idea but, there's just no reason to believe the critter's out there. Then again this doesn´t mean it was NEVER out there. Maybe what remains today is a race memory of its presence in ancient times. If the Orang Pendek is a hobbit-like hominine, a survivor of prehistoric times, then perhaps the Bigfoot is a late surviving Neanderthal or some other kind of ape, which crossed the bridge to North America (like the tiger and the dhole and many other animals, including Homo sapiens did).
It eventually went extinct but the memory of this large hairy man-like beast survived.

Problem with this is we don´t have fossils of any kind of ape from North America to prove this, but if the creature was rare and survived only for a brief time in the continent it MAY be possible that these remains are yet to be found. After all, tiger and dhole remains have been found in North America. I don´t think the people that found those remains expected to find those creatures in the new world.

steddyeddy

I met a person who saw bigfoot and what can I say only hes either lying, mistaken or telling the truth. My area of study within zoology would be primatology and I find it hard to dismiss out of hand the number fo sightings which quite realistically detail ape anatomy. Wibbs from boards has a friend who saw bigfoot so Ill try and get him on to talk about that.

All of the reported behaviour or sasquatch finds a corelate in the behaviour of other great apes. I get that some sightings might be bears (more likely in a lot of cases) but I have difficulty believing hunters would make the same mistake. A particular encounter I remember details two fishermen who were drifting down an inlet and spotted a large grizzly bear, all of a sudden the bear seemed to catch wind of something. The bear, a big one by all standards ran away. While the fishers were wondering what could frighten a grizzly enough to cause it to flee a animal they described as a nine foot bipedal gorilla walked out of the clearing, looked at them and sprinted beyond human capibility up a hill.

As regards the Yeti the evidence (trace evidence eg footprints sightings ect) are lacking.

David attenborough is a proponent of the yeti and sasquatch existing as is Jane goodal, George Schaller and daris swhindler so that makes it harder for me to dismiss out of hand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWC-m_zY2Rw

Adam Khor

I don´t think such a creature is an impossibility. I just say that there should be much more evidence by now. North America is nothing like the African rainforest or the Amazon. Its forests are fragmented and there's plenty of people going into the woods all the time.
Why is there so little evidence and so unconvincing?

Even the rarest creatures have been photographed and filmed by now- snow leopard, Javan rhino, Asian unicorn, you name it.
Why not Bigfoot?

If the creature did exist, which I think its perfectly plausible, it is probably extinct or near so by now. :S

Yitzhak Rabin

Adam Khor wrote: »

I don´t think such a creature is an impossibility. I just say that there should be much more evidence by now. North America is nothing like the African rainforest or the Amazon. Its forests are fragmented and there's plenty of people going into the woods all the time.
Why is there so little evidence and so unconvincing?

Even the rarest creatures have been photographed and filmed by now- snow leopard, Javan rhino, Asian unicorn, you name it.
Why not Bigfoot?

If the creature did exist, which I think its perfectly plausible, it is probably extinct or near so by now. :S

Thats the main reason I don't really think that there is some undiscovered ape in N America, but hold out hope for Orang Pendak. The jungles of Sumatra are much denser and much less accessible than the fragmented forest of N America which have plenty of roads disecting them.

This guy is an interesting youtuber, and in this video he talks about why he no longer believes in Bigfoot. Its a funny story. It starts around 7:25.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdbRcxVYWSY

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

I don´t think such a creature is an impossibility. I just say that there should be much more evidence by now. North America is nothing like the African rainforest or the Amazon. Its forests are fragmented and there's plenty of people going into the woods all the time.
Why is there so little evidence and so unconvincing?

Even the rarest creatures have been photographed and filmed by now- snow leopard, Javan rhino, Asian unicorn, you name it.
Why not Bigfoot?

If the creature did exist, which I think its perfectly plausible, it is probably extinct or near so by now. :S

Well this thing comes down to opinion untill we have a body. There is a debate as to wheter the famous film was real or not. If its an ape suit its a good one!

As regards evidence for me the sightings strike a chord with me and my experience of great apes. There is behaviour being reported (pre internet sightings) that have me wondering how these people knew exactly what behaviour, anatomy and even teeth morphology to make up. As regrards bigfoot being in north america I would be more inclined to believe it lives in canada. Say somewhere like british columbia.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well this thing comes down to opinion untill we have a body. There is a debate as to wheter the famous film was real or not. If its an ape suit its a good one!

As regards evidence for me the sightings strike a chord with me and my experience of great apes. There is behaviour being reported (pre internet sightings) that have me wondering how these people knew exactly what behaviour, anatomy and even teeth morphology to make up. As regrards bigfoot being in north america I would be more inclined to believe it lives in canada. Say somewhere like british columbia.

Maybe, but British Columbia is home to LOADS of black and brown bears.

Not saying sightings should be ignored, but we should be careful when they come from bear territory. I wonder if there are sightings coming from places where there are no bears at all. I haven´t studied Bigfoot sightings deeply so I really don´t know...

Yetis in Asia however, that I find more plausible. There's still lots of places in Asia where unknown animals may be hiding. In India's Western Ghats it is said that a big cat different from either tigers, leopards or snow leopards still exists. No one has ever caught it on film, though.
However, many new species HAVE indeed been found in this region. It is this kind of place where I would expect to find something like the Yeti.

aidoh

Two things I'm always asked:
1. Are you a zookeeper?
2. Is bigfoot real?

Mickeroo

I find it hard to believe there's a primate of that size wandering around the US and no-one's ever spotted one properly yet, I'm not writing it off completely I just think it's highly improbable. The Yeti on the other hand, I don't find it much of a stretch to think there could be a creature like that wandering the vast relatively unexplored expanses of the himalayas/siberia, would be the more probable of the two in my opinion.

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

I find it hard to believe there's a primate of that size wandering around the US and no-one's ever spotted one properly yet, I'm not writing it off completely I just think it's highly improbable. The Yeti on the other hand, I don't find it much of a stretch to think there could be a creature like that wandering the vast relatively unexplored expanses of the himalayas/siberia, would be the more probable of the two in my opinion.

So we think the same.

Birdnuts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/10/siberia-home-to-yeti-bigfoot

These chaps seem pretty conviced - probably a more likely possibilty then North America in any case.

Mickeroo

Birdnuts wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/10/siberia-home-to-yeti-bigfoot

These chaps seem pretty conviced - probably a more likely possibilty then North America in any case.

Hate to say it but that article sounds far from convincing, if there's "irrefutable evidence" then why haven't they presented it to the scientific community? Still I'm sure it can only be good for Kemerovo's tourist trade

This article linked on the same page basically sums it up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/12/yeti-hunters-scientific-russian-cryptozoologists?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

Hate to say it but that article sounds far from convincing, if there's "irrefutable evidence" then why haven't they presented it to the scientific community? Still I'm sure it can only be good for Kemerovo's tourist trade

This article linked on the same page basically sums it up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/12/yeti-hunters-scientific-russian-cryptozoologists?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Doesn´t convince me either, but one could argue that they haven´t presented their evidence because they just found it

Mickeroo

Adam Khor wrote: »

Doesn´t convince me either, but one could argue that they haven´t presented their evidence because they just found it

Very true, but releasing it to the media like that without showing anything conclusive just reeks of a publicity stunt to me. However if I'm wrong I will be absolutely delighted

snowstreams

Adam Khor wrote: »

....

Its a cool idea but, there's just no reason to believe the critter's out there. Then again this doesn´t mean it was NEVER out there. Maybe what remains today is a race memory of its presence in ancient times. If the Orang Pendek is a hobbit-like hominine, a survivor of prehistoric times, then perhaps the Bigfoot is a late surviving Neanderthal or some other kind of ape, which crossed the bridge to North America (like the tiger and the dhole and many other animals, including Homo sapiens did).
It eventually went extinct but the memory of this large hairy man-like beast survived.

That's interesting that there might be a cultural memory of a neanderthal or other hominid in north America.

I remember coming across stories about red haired giants that lived in parts of the US but were killed off by modern humans. A few Indian tribes have the stories about them in their culture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si-Te-Cah
Has anyone ever heard about these 7 or 8 feet tall 'giants'. Unfortunately evidence looks slim that they existed too.

Adam Khor

snowstreams wrote: »

That's interesting that there might be a cultural memory of a neanderthal or other hominid in north America.

I remember coming across stories about red haired giants that lived in parts of the US but were killed off by modern humans. A few Indian tribes have the stories about them in their culture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si-Te-Cah
Has anyone ever heard about these 7 or 8 feet tall 'giants'. Unfortunately evidence looks slim that they existed too.

I had never heard about them... but the fact that there were so many stories about "wild men" in Europe and that they look so much like Neanderthals always caught my attention...
Also, many mythologies around the world talk of "giants" existing before the "golden age" of humans so to speak. Many of these giants were described as savage and beast-like...

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

Maybe, but British Columbia is home to LOADS of black and brown bears.

Not saying sightings should be ignored, but we should be careful when they come from bear territory. I wonder if there are sightings coming from places where there are no bears at all. I haven´t studied Bigfoot sightings deeply so I really don´t know...

Yetis in Asia however, that I find more plausible. There's still lots of places in Asia where unknown animals may be hiding. In India's Western Ghats it is said that a big cat different from either tigers, leopards or snow leopards still exists. No one has ever caught it on film, though.
However, many new species HAVE indeed been found in this region. It is this kind of place where I would expect to find something like the Yeti.

Hey Adam and all apologies for the delay in getting back to this I was working on a project and I have the mental energy of a a old age pensioner recovering from brain surgury!

Any way I have to admit I have put more time into looking at the bigfoot sightings than some of my actual studies!! :O

If I could recommend some books on the subject I would recommend sasquatch the apes amongst us by John Green and sasquatch legend meets science by Jeff meldrum.

I mention John green's book becuase he documents all the reports he thinks valid, gets multiple opinions on each from different primate experts, details multiple witness encounters and throws out the ones that look fake!

Jeff's book deals exclusively with the science of the foot prints, body and hand prints and recorded vocalisations. Its a good read because Jeff himself is an esteemed palaeontologist that im sure some on the palaeo forum would have heard of. He deals with relict hominids and is a leading expert on how we became bipedal. The footprint evidence tells us a lot more than people think.

As regards bears in British columbia the fact there is a lot of bears, black and grizzly wouldnt bother me. Most reports featuring grizzlys or black bears running on sight or smell of sasquatch.

On the asian side of things I would be more inclined to beleive there are yetis to be found in the sub tropical valleys of the himalayas rather than than at high elevations. It would be very hard to find nutrition there.

One the mande burung of india I find that quite plausible and the garo hills were it is sighted are remote enough to hide such a creature. If there is yetis sighted in the himalayas I think they are passing through rather than living there.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

As regards bears in British columbia the fact there is a lot of bears, black and grizzly wouldnt bother me. Most reports featuring grizzlys or black bears running on sight or smell of sasquatch.

No worries.

As much as I try to take the bigfoot thing seriously, I have lots of trouble to believe most of what its said about them.
In this case, why would bears run away from them? Is there any logical explanation to that? I can think of two, but one as unlikely as the other.

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

No worries.

As much as I try to take the bigfoot thing seriously, I have lots of trouble to believe most of what its said about them.
In this case, why would bears run away from them? Is there any logical explanation to that? I can think of two, but one as unlikely as the other.

Thats fair enough with me aswell man. My agenda behind this is not trying to convince people but to analyse the research for my own purposes and interests in the order, primate.

Regarding the bears running away from sasquatch the himalayan brown bear is also said to avoid the Yeti according to the locals. The chuchunya which is what the scientists in siberia have claimed to have found proof of in Siberia (its not a yeti the legends and descriptions are completely different, the media simply uses the term Yeti because it catches the eye), Is also said to have no natural predator.

Incidently its worth skipping to the 15 mark on this video to hear an escapee of a siberian gulag describe his encounter with a "wild atone age man". Also follwoing that it deals with a red army colonols encounter with a similar wildman. Myra shackely a neanderthal expert is convinvced their neanderthals (I dont think they are but its important to get a multitude of opinions).

I suspect bears avoid wild men for the simple reason that they are bipedal and in the case of sasquatch, huge.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Thats fair enough with me aswell man. My agenda behind this is not trying to convince people but to analyse the research for my own purposes and interests in the order, primate.

Regarding the bears running away from sasquatch the himalayan brown bear is also said to avoid the Yeti according to the locals. The chuchunya which is what the scientists in siberia have claimed to have found proof of in Siberia (its not a yeti the legends and descriptions are completely different, the media simply uses the term Yeti because it catches the eye), Is also said to have no natural predator.

Incidently its worth skipping to the 15 mark on this video to hear an escapee of a siberian gulag describe his encounter with a "wild atone age man". Also follwoing that it deals with a red army colonols encounter with a similar wildman. Myra shackely a neanderthal expert is convinvced their neanderthals (I dont think they are but its important to get a multitude of opinions).

I suspect bears avoid wild men for the simple reason that they are bipedal and in the case of sasquatch, huge.

You may be right...

I actually like the idea of Neanderthals as a possible explanation for yetis and the like, should they be real.
I know most bigfoot fans favor Gigantopithecus or Gigantopithecus-descendants but, the fossil remains of this ape are so fragmentary that there's no way of saying if Gigantopithecus actually looked like these cryptids, and the little evidence we have says it probably did not.

Sid_Justice

no way, complete nonsense.

There are no such thing.

Yitzhak Rabin

Sid_Justice wrote: »

no way, complete nonsense.

There are no such thing.

Which?

Bigfoot in particular? Or any undiscovered bipedal primates?

Sid_Justice

I don't think it is probable there any undiscovered bipedal large primate species.

There are no wild primate species living in North America.

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

You may be right...

I actually like the idea of Neanderthals as a possible explanation for yetis and the like, should they be real.
I know most bigfoot fans favor Gigantopithecus or Gigantopithecus-descendants but, the fossil remains of this ape are so fragmentary that there's no way of saying if Gigantopithecus actually looked like these cryptids, and the little evidence we have says it probably did not.

I feel a bit stupid now I just realised I didnt upload the video I was talking about.

Skip to the 6 minute mark for eye witness accounts of man like primates in mongolia and siberia.

saintsaltynuts

steddyeddy wrote: »

I feel a bit stupid now I just realised I didnt upload the video I was talking about.

Skip to the 6 minute mark for eye witness accounts of man like primates in mongolia and siberia.

Fook me its Trappatoni at 6.20!

Sid_Justice

steddyeddy wrote: »

I feel a bit stupid now I just realised I didnt upload the video I was talking about.

Skip to the 6 minute mark for eye witness accounts of man like primates in mongolia and siberia.

But there are hundreds of eye witness accounts of fairies, witches, ghosts, spirits.

Eye witness accounts count for basically nothing.

steddyeddy

saintsaltynuts wrote: »

Fook me its Trappatoni at 6.20!

He has better english than trap!

Davey Devil

Some genuine proof they exist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9j5e8NUrkys

steddyeddy

I find the Orang pendek to be the most likely of all imo. National geographic are part funding the project to find one. If it does exist I would say it is an extant homo floresiensis.

Yitzhak Rabin

steddyeddy wrote: »

I find the Orang pendek to be the most likely of all imo. National geographic are part funding the project to find one. If it does exist I would say it is an extant homo floresiensis.

Same here. I'd imagine it's not exactly a florensis, but definitely something very closely related. If it exists at all...

steddyeddy

yekahS wrote: »

Same here. I'd imagine it's not exactly a florensis, but definitely something very closely related. If it exists at all...

Agreed in fact the guys that found the skeleton of flores man state that thing think flores man could remain on some remote island in indonesia.

Sid_Justice

steddyeddy wrote: »

I find the Orang pendek to be the most likely of all imo. National geographic are part funding the project to find one. If it does exist I would say it is an extant homo floresiensis.

what's the minimal number needed for a viable population?

I presume no one is entertaining the idea of an individual wandering around. Like they creatures, if they did exist, would most likely have a life span of <50 years. If there is one alive, there would need to be at least 20.

Adam Khor

yekahS wrote: »

Same here. I'd imagine it's not exactly a florensis, but definitely something very closely related. If it exists at all...

Couldn´t it be also a large species of gibbon? Gibbons walk bipedally on land, I believe, and if they spend most of their time up tree tops it could explain why they are so rarely seen (apart from the fact that, if they exist, they must be really, really rare)

Dave!

Don't let the topic die out lads Went back and forth with steddyeddy on this for for ages, over a year ago! Will try avoid getting into it again , but am following this learned discussion with interest!

edit

Me and eddy, for those interested!
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055882185

steddyeddy

Dave! wrote: »

Don't let the topic die out lads Went back and forth with steddyeddy on this for for ages, over a year ago! Will try avoid getting into it again , but am following this learned discussion with interest!

edit

Me and eddy, for those interested!
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055882185

It was good Dave ha ha. Well theres still posts here I have to reply to. Just swamped with college lately! I make a few good ones!

Adam Khor

Well I was the last one to post... no one commented on my idea of a giant gibbon as a possible explanation for those bipedal apes from southern Asia.
Not all bipedal apes HAVE to be closely related to humans, you know...

At least we know that some apes in prehistoric times were bipedal despite their not being part of Homo sapiens' close family- Oreopithecus, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreopithecus

Yitzhak Rabin

Its a good idea Adam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlzRCHASvsw

A larger version of that guy that lives in the trees, rarely seen and is bipedal on the ground could be a very good explanation.

Neither of these drawings look a million miles away from a large gibbon either





Interesting....

Adam Khor

yekahS wrote: »

Its a good idea Adam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMLGuOkK6w

A larger version of that guy that lives in the trees, rarely seen and is bipedal on the ground could be a very good explanation.

Neither of these drawings look a million miles away from a large gibbon either





Interesting....

Haha the last one looks like a bonobo wearing a blonde wig

Mickeroo

A large gibbon seems plausible enough for the Orang Pendak anyway. Although I'm still sceptical, I mean would it really be that difficult to spot them? Even if they kept to the canopy most of the time?

I suppose there's the possibility that they're weary of humans and are quick to avoid one.

Adam Khor

Mickeroo wrote: »

A large gibbon seems plausible enough for the Orang Pendak anyway. Although I'm still sceptical, I mean would it really be that difficult to spot them? Even if they kept to the canopy most of the time?

I suppose there's the possibility that they're weary of humans and are quick to avoid one.

Yeah, and they would also be extremely rare by now- seeing as the larger animals tend to dissappear first, it wouldn`t be a stretch to suposse that they were already scarce, say, at the end of the Pleistocene...

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

Well I was the last one to post... no one commented on my idea of a giant gibbon as a possible explanation for those bipedal apes from southern Asia.
Not all bipedal apes HAVE to be closely related to humans, you know...

At least we know that some apes in prehistoric times were bipedal despite their not being part of Homo sapiens' close family- Oreopithecus, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreopithecus

Hey Adam apologies for the delay! It could very well be a giant gibbon (at least the asian ones). If bigfoot exists its possible that it evolved bipedialty independently of the genus Homo.

On the asian Orang pendek several of the witnesses, native and non native were asked could it have been a gibbon they saw and they generally said it wasnt. Debbie martyr who works in a tiger conservation project over there expanded on the sighting and the gibbon question by stating that the gibbon cant lock the knee when walking and has to "dance" and that what she saw walked very upright.

Jeremy holden a free lance photgrapher who obtained some of the first photos of the sumatran rabbit and clouded leopard is also a reliable witness. He stated that it wasnt like the reconstructions of early man were their basically these hunched bipeds and that ornag pendek walked like a super model, perfectly bipdel.

The real answer imo is who knows what if anything their seeing but I have to say I find it all very interesting.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

Hey Adam apologies for the delay! It could very well be a giant gibbon (at least the asian ones). If bigfoot exists its possible that it evolved bipedialty independently of the genus Homo.

On the asian Orang pendek several of the witnesses, native and non native were asked could it have been a gibbon they saw and they generally said it wasnt. Debbie martyr who works in a tiger conservation project over there expanded on the sighting and the gibbon question by stating that the gibbon cant lock the knee when walking and has to "dance" and that what she saw walked very upright.

Jeremy holden a free lance photgrapher who obtained some of the first photos of the sumatran rabbit and clouded leopard is also a reliable witness. He stated that it wasnt like the reconstructions of early man were their basically these hunched bipeds and that ornag pendek walked like a super model, perfectly bipdel.

The real answer imo is who knows what if anything their seeing but I have to say I find it all very interesting.

That's interesting about their gait... but still,I don´t think one should rule out the possibility of a giant gibbon of some unknown species. After all, bonobos walk bipedally much more often (and more skillfully) than common chimpanzees, and they are very closely related...

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

That's interesting about their gait... but still,I don´t think one should rule out the possibility of a giant gibbon of some unknown species. After all, bonobos walk bipedally much more often (and more skillfully) than common chimpanzees, and they are very closely related...

I cant rule out anything at all your quite right Adam. You made a good point in relation to bonobos and chimps being closely related yet have different gaits. There was previously sightings of a bipedal ape in africa in the 18th century which could very well be the bonobos. I do think we should keep this thread going as Dave has suggested because the prospect of new animals being discovered is always interesting.