Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
William Parcher said:
I suppose you would also like those Bigfoot believers to be honest, non-malicious, non-manipulative and trustworthy as they are given free access to the fossil drawers.
Click to expand...
Who says free access? My idea is for them to pay for it--and that includes the hoard of councilers/advisors/whatever we want to call them double-checking their work. ;)
 
Dude. A museum of fossils and bones rearranged for maximum Squatchy potential in the form of full skeletons might be really awesome.

Who says bigfoots can't have a beak and horns? They could really revolutionize our conception of what qualifies as an ape!
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Ray, I'll accept your invitation if everyone here will agree to accept mine. And since we're now putting a deadline I must amend my invitation to include factual scientific evidence collected by others as well of course. Agreeable?
Click to expand...



Are we going to see someone actually eat crow over bigfoot? I gotta see this. Video tape or invite me please. (so I can video tape lol)
 
River said:
Are we going to see someone actually eat crow over bigfoot?
Click to expand...

Nope. As I've demonstrated, ChrisBFRPKY won't accept scientific data if it contradicts what Chris wants to be true. The facts simply don't enter into the equation.
 
But Chris isn't just a believer. He says he's seen them himself on different occasions, so I doubt anyone will convince him that they aren't real. How does one prove that Bigfoot isn't real anyway? I can look in my closet and know for a fact that there isn't a dragon in there, but can I know that there isn't a small population of uncatalogued intelligent hominids somewhere in North America?
 
OntarioSquatch said:
but can I know that there isn't a small population of uncatalogued intelligent hominids somewhere in North America?
Click to expand...

Can I know that there isn't a conspiracy in the U.S. government to cover-up the martian civilization that has plastered their planet with tunnel structures and other constructions?
 
OntarioSquatch said:
I can look in my closet and know for a fact that there isn't a dragon in there, but can I know that there isn't a small population of uncatalogued intelligent hominids somewhere in North America?
Click to expand...

You didn't say it right. It's supposed to go...

I can look in my closet and know for a fact that there isn't a dragon in there, but can I know that there isn't a small population of uncatalogued dragons somewhere in North America?
 
Seriously how many times do we have to explain "But how can we know for sure?" is anti-intellectual horse piddle to Woo Slingers?
 
OntarioSquatch said:
How does one prove that Bigfoot isn't real anyway?
Click to expand...

Who's job is that?

The simple fact is that there's no bigfoot to be found. If you disagree, then by all means show us where they are. No skeptic is unreasonable about this--we just want to clearly see the bigfoot if they're real, but that's forever withheld from us.

All we get is hot air and empty promises, which come to think of it is all the bigfoot cult gets as well. The difference is that they love getting the big hairy pile of nothing that is bigfoot. They can't seem to get enough of it. Skeptics want evidence instead, and no one has any that passes muster.

That pretty well sums it up.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
But Chris isn't just a believer. He says he's seen them himself on different occasions, so I doubt anyone will convince him that they aren't real. How does one prove that Bigfoot isn't real anyway? I can look in my closet and know for a fact that there isn't a dragon in there, but can I know that there isn't a small population of uncatalogued intelligent hominids somewhere in North America?
Click to expand...

That's one reason I mentioned the fossil record. It's one thing to say there may be some population of modern organisms unknown to science--after all, wild animals are skittish and don't approach researchers. Bones, though--they tend to stay where they're put. If bigfoot came from somewhere, it had to do so at some time. And life through time is my domain. If bigfoot were real, it would leave a trace--we have too many lagerstatten (and if Chris wishes to dispute this, I invite him to list the lagerstatten; that alone will demonstrate his competance in this field, as most only know the big one) for there to not be ape remains were bigfoot real.

We know what intelligent hominids look like in the fossil record. "Peopling of North America" outlines the lines of evidence that demonstrate it. We do not see it before Homo sapiens sapiens. Therefore not only do bigfoot believers expect us to believe that something exists without physical evidence--they also expect us to believe that something existed outside of time.

How does one prove that Bigfoot isn't real anyway?
Click to expand...
Who is John Galt?
 
OntarioSquatch said:
I can look in my closet and know for a fact that there isn't a dragon in there, but can I know that there isn't a small population of uncatalogued intelligent hominids somewhere in North America?
Click to expand...

Do you know there aren't mermaids?
 
Dinwar said:
We know what intelligent hominids look like in the fossil record. "Peopling of North America" outlines the lines of evidence that demonstrate it. We do not see it before Homo sapiens sapiens. Therefore not only do bigfoot believers expect us to believe that something exists without physical evidence--they also expect us to believe that something existed outside of time.
Click to expand...

Genetics is a type of physical evidence although we don't always have a fossil record to indicate how the variance might affect morphology. I think in the particular article I'm citing below it simply indicates that we are much older than we think we are, and that the lines of demarcation segregating "modern" from "ancient" might not be so distinct.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/afri...sparks-shift-evolutionary-timetable-1C8710411

That goes further back than the fossil record goes for anatomically modern humans, Hammer said. "The fossil record speaks to 195,000 years or 200,000 years," he said. It also goes further back than the previous date for the most recent common ancestor based on Y-chromosome analysis, which is in the range of 142,000 years.

Here is a link for the abstract to the original research article:

http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-9297(13)00073-6

This underscores how the stochastic nature of the genealogical process can affect inference from a single locus and warrants caution during the interpretation of the geographic location of divergent branches of the Y chromosome phylogenetic tree for the elucidation of human origins.
 
Last edited:
Jodie said:
Genetics is a type of physical evidence although we don't always have a fossil record to indicate how the variance might affect morphology. I think in the particular article I'm citing below it simply indicates that we are much older than we think we are, and that the lines of demarcation segregating "modern" from "ancient" might not be so distinct.
Click to expand...
I have some issues with genetic clocks, but that's another topic. It's certainly accepted that the FAD of any organism is not the origin of the organism, so range extensions aren't really problematic to paleontology. I will say that therer's very good evidence that hominid species weren't as genetically isolated as people tend to think--that said, I think that's more an issue with the species concept than anything else.

My point here was to illustrate the fact that apes entering a new continent leave a distinct signal in the rock record, and that we have extremely good analogs for what to look for in regards to a Gigantopithicus population moving into the New World. If it did so, we'd see it in the rocks. We don't; therefore, we can rule out such an event (with, of course, the standard caveats in paleontology).
 
Dinwar said:
That's one reason I mentioned the fossil record. It's one thing to say there may be some population of modern organisms unknown to science--after all, wild animals are skittish and don't approach researchers. Bones, though--they tend to stay where they're put. If bigfoot came from somewhere, it had to do so at some time. And life through time is my domain. If bigfoot were real, it would leave a trace--we have too many lagerstatten (and if Chris wishes to dispute this, I invite him to list the lagerstatten; that alone will demonstrate his competance in this field, as most only know the big one) for there to not be ape remains were bigfoot real.

We know what intelligent hominids look like in the fossil record. "Peopling of North America" outlines the lines of evidence that demonstrate it. We do not see it before Homo sapiens sapiens. Therefore not only do bigfoot believers expect us to believe that something exists without physical evidence--they also expect us to believe that something existed outside of time.

Who is John Galt?
Click to expand...

And yet we do have fossil remains of Giganto. An almost exact match with the description of Bigfoot.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
And yet we do have fossil remains of Giganto. An almost exact match with the description of Bigfoot.
Click to expand...

Nothing other than a couple of jaws and some teeth, as far as I know. We have no idea whether it was bipedal.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Krantz was hooked in by one of the worst hoaxers too, Ivan Marx. Krantz fell down the rabbit hole at Bossburg.
Click to expand...
bolding mine.

Yes he did. But just because a good man was taken in by a hoaxer, it doesn't mean he was wrong about everything he did does it? When one completes a work such as "The Origin of Man" I think it a little dismissive to label his entire career as wasted just because a dishonest person told him a convincing lie.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
And yet we do have fossil remains of Giganto. An almost exact match with the description of Bigfoot.
Click to expand...

With a few exceptions:

1) Wrong continent

2) You can't know the highlighted part, as all we have no post-craneal anatomy

3) Wrong time period

Gigantopithicus is not going to save you, not without providing proof it lived in North America.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom