Who believes in Bigfoot?

Lelantos

maninasia wrote: »

Use logic to start with.

If Big Foot exists where does he come from.

Are you getting it now?

Apes and primates and various human species have migrated all over the world for millions of years. There have also been many instances of feral people discovered in history, some of them remarkably hairy which is probably a cold adaptation. This is why it is not IMPOSSIBLE that Big Foot exists in North America in one of these forms.

It's not likely that Big Foot exists, but it is CERTAINLY possible.

How many homo erectus remains have been found in North America. How many feral children have been reported in North America.

maninasia

Move the goalposts again. A feral person could look like a bigfoot, so where is the borderline, I don't know?
As for Homo remains in N.America, there haven't been any discovered to date (obviously) but that doesn't mean they weren't there in some form.

Many human species FIRST fossil finds were only discovered in the last TEN years..I'm talking about Denisovans (2010) and Red Deer People (DNA needs to be analysed) and Flores man (2003).

Myrddin

maninasia wrote: »

Jeez are you as dense as your really appear to be.

Relax with the personal insults please. We're the most advanced of the great apes, let's not act otherwise.

maninasia

The so called eye witness descriptions of witnesses.
The facts are, that there are no non hominid ape/primates native to the north Americas

So called eye witness descriptions are called eye witness descriptions. Interesting.
I don't recall Homo Sapiens being native to Europe or Asia last time I looked, at least if the Out of Africa theory is correct.

no where else in the world do apes live in the cold latitudes that bigfoot is claimed to habit on America & Canada.

Hello Eskimoes and Lapps and welcome our hard drinking Russian friends. People are apes, remember. Not only that there were plenty of other apes living in those regions in the past. I've even made it easy for you for by posting a picture of one guy who got around most of Africa, Europe and Asia and stayed around for the guts of 2 million years.

The claim of feral children being responsible for the bigfoot myth is you making things up I'm afraid, best follow your own advice & stop with the rubbish

I'm not 'making things up'. It's called a supposition. It's a possibility, nothing more, nothing less. In fact it could be the strongest possibility beyond bears, if you think about the vastness of N.America and the fact that feral people have been proven to exist in history! They are not mythical but real. The population of N.America is what, around 330 million. So imagine you had 10 feral people at any one time. What percentage is that of the population.. .00000000303%. It could happen extremely rarely and yet still result in a few ferals running around. Now does that mean they should look like the typical Big Foot..probably not, unless they grew up in the cold environment and somehow grew hair to adapt to the cold environment through an unknown evolutionary mechanism which is suppressed by people wearing clothes when young.

EDIT- Seems that excessive hairiness can be linked to malnutrition
http://ukraine.adoptionblogs.com/weblogs/what-can-be-learned-from-feral-children

degrassinoel

Some interesting reading on feral children here.

lots of hoaxes there but it's a possibility.

DangerMouse27

Whatever baffles David Attenborough, peaks my attention.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-10184835-71.html

I reckon there is some sort of a type of ape living in these forests in America.

Thats cryptozoology folks.. it doesnt exist until someone finds one. Love it!

Myrddin

Bigfoot Files, tonight @ 8pm, channel 4

Dermighty

Sully34 wrote: »

Who believes in bigfoot?

Idiots.

MRnotlob606

probably just a legend originating from native americans

Myrddin

Dermighty wrote: »

Idiots.

If you've nothing constructive to post, either for or against what others believe in, don't post at all. Consider yourself warned

Myrddin

Myrddin wrote: »

Bigfoot Files, tonight @ 8pm, channel 4

Did anyone watch this? Some very interesting DNA results from the samples taken from the high altitude regions

Star Lord

Yeah, a somewhat surprising conclusion to the whole thing, but it all stood up, and seems completely believable!

The Nazi one looked fabricated if I'm to be perfectly honest! The clay jaw and the upside-down teeth being just one obvious pointer to the thing not being completely legit.

Myrddin

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

Yeah, a somewhat surprising conclusion to the whole thing, but it all stood up, and seems completely believable!

Agreed, given the credentials of Brian Sykes, & how logical it all seems, I think for me, this question has been answered. And the best thing about it is, it's not a mundane explanation, it's still a remnant of something ancient

The Nazi one looked fabricated if I'm to be perfectly honest! The clay jaw and the upside-down teeth being just one obvious pointer to the thing not being completely legit.

Definitely. Looked like the head of a wolf, with a clay jaw, & upside down teeth. Still, freaky looking thing!

Princess Peach

I was intrigued and pleased with the conclusion to the Yeti, hopefully they continue research into this!

They never answered the question of whether the director got off Everest alive though.

bigbaz

Looks like the yeti has been identified if the program on tv last night is anything to go by,a hybrid polar/brown bear according to dna evidence!

oceanman

well at least we know now that yeti dose exist, which should hopefully put an end to all the arguments between skeptics and believers. peace at last.

Star Lord

Yeah, it really does. Still plenty of unanswered questions, but I doubt that we'll ever have those answered. Like given that there was interbreeding between the polar and brown bears, how did they then end up in the Himalayas?

I'll be keeping an eye out for further shows in the series for sure!

Myrddin

Next week its in the goo ole US of A, looking at bigfoot evidence

Princess Peach

The preview looks a bit funny.... The study of bigfootology and these guys who seem to have made it their job to hunt Big Foot?

I want to be open minded, but from that short clip they look like nutters anyway! Looking forward to seeing the full episode.

Star Lord

I'd honestly expect a similar result, but I like their approach, so I'm really looking forward to seeing more!

Pity that the DNA in the hair from that Nazi... thing... was too damaged/destroyed to test. I thought it looked a bit like a wolverine with it's face somewhat squashed in.

maninasia

Two hairs are not enough to make any conclusion.

bigbaz

maninasia wrote: »

Two hairs are not enough to make any conclusion.

Is that your opinion or is there contrary scientific evidence?

long range shooter

Sully34 wrote: »

Yeah but the Easter bunny or the tooth fairy have never been captured on camera

Same as an alien autopsy then,or the loch ness monster

Myrddin

maninasia wrote: »

Two hairs are not enough to make any conclusion.

The DNA evidence that shows the different samples taken from sighting locations hundreds of miles apart, are from a hybridized Bear that contains DNA from an extinct form of Polar Bear, & a Brown bear. It's highly likely, that this previously unknown form of Bear, is responsible for the 'Yeti' myth.

As well as the DNA evidence, the gait-test of the brown bear was also able to recreate the infamous giant footprint photo. I think Fox Mulder himself would accept, that there's a very rational {albeit still a fantastic} explanation to this one.

googled eyes

Anyone going to watch the second part of this tonight? Found last weeks episode good.

maninasia

Myrddin wrote: »

The DNA evidence that shows the different samples taken from sighting locations hundreds of miles apart, are from a hybridized Bear that contains DNA from an extinct form of Polar Bear, & a Brown bear. It's highly likely, that this previously unknown form of Bear, is responsible for the 'Yeti' myth.

As well as the DNA evidence, the gait-test of the brown bear was also able to recreate the infamous giant footprint photo. I think Fox Mulder himself would accept, that there's a very rational {albeit still a fantastic} explanation to this one.

There are many types of hybridized bear, and the polar bear is genetically related to the brown bear anyway. The polar bear bit could be just to get some attention and hype and the hair could come from a regular brown bear in the area. Two hairs is not enough to make a conclusion.

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

The evidence from DNA analysis is more complex. The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of the polar bear diverged from the brown bear, Ursus arctos, roughly 150,000 years ago.[15] Further, some clades of brown bear, as assessed by their mtDNA, are more closely related to polar bears than to other brown bears,[17] meaning that the polar bear would not be a true species according to some species concepts.[18] The mtDNA of Irish brown bears is particularly close to polar bears.[19] A comparison of the nuclear genome of polar bears with that of brown bears revealed a different pattern, the two forming genetically distinct clades that diverged approximately 603,000 years ago,[20] although the latest research is based on analysis of the complete genomes (rather than just the mitochondria or partial nuclear genomes) of polar, brown and black bears, and establishes the divergence of polar and brown bears at 4-5 million years ago.[21]

However, the two species have mated intermittently for all that time, most likely coming into contact with each other during warming periods, when polar bears were driven onto land and brown bears migrated northward. Most brown bears have about 2 percent genetic material from polar bears, but one population residing in the Alexander Archipelago has between 5 percent and 10 percent polar bear genes, indicating more frequent and recent mating.[22] Polar bears can breed with brown bears to produce fertile grizzly–polar bear hybrids,[16][23] rather than indicating that they have only recently diverged, the new evidence suggests more frequent mating has continued over a longer period of time, and thus the two bears remain genetically similar.[22] However, because neither species can survive long in the other's ecological niche, and because they have different morphology, metabolism, social and feeding behaviors, and other phenotypic characteristics, the two bears are generally classified as separate species.[24]

So until the mystical polar bear-brown bear Yeti hybrid appears, it is most likely hairs of the well known brown bear in the area that they found. I will be happy to be proven wrong.

Myrddin

maninasia wrote: »

and the polar bear is genetically related to the brown bear anyway

The polar bear they matched the DNA to is an extinct form of polar bear, not a modern day one.

The polar bear bit could be just to get some attention and hype

and the hair could come from a regular brown bear in the area. Two hairs is not enough to make a conclusion

Well then the DNA tests would have said a regular brown bear wouldn't they?

So until the mystical polar bear-brown bear Yeti hybrid appears, it is most likely hairs of the well known brown bear in the area that they found. I will be happy to be proven wrong.

Yeah you're prob right, Professor Sykes prob never thought of that.

Myrddin

googled eyes wrote: »

Anyone going to watch the second part of this tonight? Found last weeks episode good.

Just watched it this evening on 4OD. Another very interesting episode, somewhat disappointing that all of the samples in this case were proven to be known animals

googled eyes

I have a feeling that if any of the samples they'd collected was bigfoot or even an unknown animal we'd have heard it by now.
Its an interesting show. These guys were all fairly upset not to be correct.

Myrddin

googled eyes wrote: »

I have a feeling that if any of the samples they'd collected was bigfoot or even an unknown animal we'd have heard it by now.

Normally I'd agree, but last weeks result was really surprising I thought. Two samples taken hundreds of miles apart, showing identical results, DNA from an extinct type of Polar bear, mixed with a Brown bear. It could well be a previously unknown type of animal/bear, & yet we hadn't heard about the finding until the show aired.

Its an interesting show. These guys were all fairly upset not to be correct.

Yeah I thought it odd that the first guy who buried his 'kill', & provided a sample would want to go through all this knowing in the end that he'd be found out.

BorneTobyWilde

Best part is two bigfoot believers , one on each side of the forest banging tree's with logs and thinking
'' see he's replying''

maninasia

Myrddin wrote: »

Normally I'd agree, but last weeks result was really surprising I thought. Two samples taken hundreds of miles apart, showing identical results, DNA from an extinct type of Polar bear, mixed with a Brown bear. It could well be a previously unknown type of animal/bear, & yet we hadn't heard about the finding until the show aired.



Yeah I thought it odd that the first guy who buried his 'kill', & provided a sample would want to go through all this knowing in the end that he'd be found out.

If they showed their research on the existing brown bear population and how different it is to the supposed 'polar bear hybrid' hairs that no specimen has ever been found of..then it will be more interesting. To do that they would have to take samples of brown bears from all over Nepal and Tibet.

If one read the link I provided above they would know that some brown bears are very closely related to polar bears (basically a polar bear is a subspecies of brown bear that evolved to live in the Artic and during the Ice Age..but there are also hybrid bears that would be product of mating of these subspecies), and the fact that the DNA is similar to extinct polar bears could simply mean the current brown bears in Tibet are a product of ancient matings between subspecies of brown and polar bears, of which is not surprising.

Anyway...the yeti is most likely a product of the imagination when somebody confronted these rare brown bears for the first time....a theory that is not exactly new now is it?

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

The Tibetan bear or Tibetan blue bear (Ursus arctos pruinosus)[1] is a subspecies of the brown bear (Ursus arctos) found in the eastern Tibetan plateau. It is also known as the Himalayan blue bear,[2] Himalayan snow bear, Tibetan brown bear, or the horse bear. In Tibetan it is known as Dom gyamuk. One of the rarest subspecies of bear in the world, the blue bear is rarely sighted in the wild. The blue bear is known in the west only through a small number of fur and bone samples. It was first classified in 1854.

maninasia

I think this would be worth a read, at least he's gone out into the field for years and done his homework too.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/06/11/reviews/000611.11jarvist.html

Myrddin

Episode 3 tonight @8pm, channel 4

Wibbs

It was a good one, however the Zana story was wrapped up to quickly IMHO. Great that they found she was of sub saharan origin, however that leaves nearly as many questions. Now they hinted at it right at the end, but didn't delve further, which is where it should have gotten interesting, which I thought a pity.

We know there were Africans in the region because of the Ottoman slave trade. OK but so did the locals at the time. This raises the question why they would have seen her as a "wild woman", something very different? Also all of the reports mention her hairiness. African peoples are less hairy than Europeans and is usually tightly curled yet the descriptions say the opposite.

Most of all they had access to her son's skull and even used a tooth to get clear DNA. However the skull only showed up a couple of times and it merits much more probing IMHO. Professor Sykes did note that the skull measurements were unusual, but brilliant boffin though he is* that's not his line of work and I'm surprised they didn't get in someone from that field.

He did muse that maybe Zana might have been from a relict population of much earlier African sapiens, but it seems the DNA couldn't tell them that(if it could he'd know). The skull would be a major indicator in that. It is clearly more robust than the local average skulls. Sloping forehead, bigger eye orbits, incredibly heavy brow ridges and the structure of same is more akin to an archaic human than modern peoples that show larger brow ridges than average. The ridge runs across the entire eye socket, in moderns if present is more globular and is concentrated near the bridge of the nose. Most of all, if she was a modern African, this wouldn't fit. Africans have the least brow ridge development of modern populations. They also have smaller eye sockets compared to Europeans. IIRC the skull shows other archaic features. Again IIRC when the skull was first shown to Russian experts many years ago they concluded that it was "primitive" and more like a cromagnon type early sapiens skull. If this is a case of a relict sapiens/early migration out of Africa making it to historic times that would be amazing. Plus we have previous examples, like the various negrito populations dotted around islands in the far east who are obviously African peoples, one of the early waves of migration(not that early as they don't show archaic features).

The neandertal theory is highly unlikely for any "bigfoot" creatures that may exist. Neandertals had a culture, language, were effective big game hunters, they were noticeable in the landscape. Hell their fires would alert people to thier presence. While I'd not be too shocked to find out that they lasted to slightly more recent times than currently discovered, I really doubt they'd have lasted into anything approaching historic times.


EDIT, give that Professor Sykes has risen to the top of his field because of crazy amounts of scientific curiosity as well as brains, I'd be surprised if he leaves this skull/archaic African question up in the air.


*understatement of the year

maninasia

Here is another interesting observation of the Altai-Sayan region of Western Mongolia and Southern Russia.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129533.800-iceage-animals-live-on-in-eurasian-mountain-range.html#.UuJZtRCwrIU

The team discovered that the combination of mammals found together in the Altai and Sayan mountains of western Mongolia and southern Russia – such as horses, reindeer, saiga antelopes and wolverines – is similar to the ancient glacial communities. There are a few obvious differences, however, such as the lack of mammoths.

These animals do not normally live together anymore, says Pavelková Řičánková. She says the Altai-Sayan is one of the last places on Earth to retain an ice age fauna (PLoS One, doi.org/q2n).

"You've basically got a really good modern analogue for the Pleistocene communities," says John Stewart of the University of Bournemouth, UK.

The Altai-Sayan has not been fully explored, so could hold more surprises. In 2010, snails thought to have died out when the ice melted were found alive there (Journal of Biogeography, doi.org/d4vn4n).

.....

The Altai-Sayan may also have been vital for humanity's success. The mountains are home to Denisova cave, famous for the 2010 discovery of 50,000-year-old fossils of a new kind of human, the Denisovans. Since then, Neanderthal bones, and tools crafted by Homo sapiens have also been found in the cave. This makes it the only place where we know all three hominins lived.

Who knows, there may be a few hold-outs....

redbaron_99

I watched a documentary about the Yeti recently in which they tested hair samples. The results were astounding. They actually came from a type of proto-polar bear that was thought to have died out thousands of years ago. Guess anything is possible.

redbaron_99

redbaron_99 wrote: »

I watched a documentary about the Yeti recently in which they tested hair samples. The results were astounding. They actually came from a type of proto-polar bear that was thought to have died out thousands of years ago. Guess anything is possible.

That was the BBC documentary, it was quite good but they were really relying on the Bear theory but neglected to mention that most of the sightings Bigfoot is either walking or running at high speed on 2 feet.

There was another documentary called "Yeti: the killer exists" recently. They focused on the Dyatlov Pass Incident. I found it a strange documentary very one sided for Bigfoot theory. It also seemed like it was acted.

maccored

the last issue of the ASSAP magazine had a nice article on a big foot type being. Damned if I can remember what they called it though.

cfuserkildare

Hey folks,

A theory has been bouncing around in my head for a while,
Unfortunately most people would think it nonsense.

What if sightings of Bigfoot type creatures are actually a paranormal manifestation of a relatively intelligent creature that died out hundreds of thousands of years ago?

This is the only way I can account for multiple sightings without physical evidence.

cfuserkildare

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Hey folks,

A theory has been bouncing around in my head for a while,
Unfortunately most people would think it nonsense.

What if sightings of Bigfoot type creatures are actually a paranormal manifestation of a relatively intelligent creature that died out hundreds of thousands of years ago?

This is the only way I can account for multiple sightings without physical evidence.

I thought of that. But its kinda like using the bigfoot theory to explain werewolf sightings, which has been done.

Using something unproven to explain something else.

degrassinoel

similar to the bigfoot is an alien theory

apparently the theory goes something like this, the bigfoot creatures are used by the greys for heavy lifting and other menial work while they're here, supposedly below human level of intelligence, they do as they're commanded by the little guys. Bit far fetched i know.. but there it is

iirc i seen or heard that from the ancient aliens show, definitely one of the later series

cfuserkildare

I think I posted before with a theory.

My theory is fairly simple,

When we " See A Bigfoot/Squatch or whatever, We are seeing a " Ghost " or an Ethereal manifestation of a creature that was here thousands of years ago.

Yemowt

Myrddin wrote: »

All this time & nobody has found a dead one, the remains of one, actually, not a single hair of one has ever been found.

Im saying no. I know the areas are really massive but still, if we were to cross paths with them so often then we're either close to them or there's loads of them. The complete lack of evidence is what gets me.

And as for that video? Masterful hoax

I have watched a few shows about teams going into forests trying to find bigfoot and there was a few teams who do find hair. There was one or two of the types of hair that was not registered to any known animal. Maybe it is just a mistake in the system or the hair is old.

I used to believe in bigfoot but I am not sure anymore.