Bigfoot, an evolutionary argument for it's non-existence.

I seriously can't imagine how something could be too heavy to walk on four legs, so it has to walk on two. (Assuming the thing we're talking about has four limbs, of course.)

We don't see among living mammals any evidence of columnar (graviportal) limb structures specifically designed to carry great loads in anything less than about a 2000 lbs. I interpret that as indicative that weight isn't a particularly important limitation for general locomotion in anything less than that weight. Just how heavy does Meldrum think bigfoots (say, Patty) are?
 
Honestly, the "too heavy to walk on four limbs" sounds way to crazy for me. Even for a footer. Heck, even for those who hate science, even for those with anti-evolution ideas.

Perhaps (OK maybe I'm trying to see what's not there) Meldrum was misquoted or experessed himself poorly. Maybe he increase a gorilla's size and decided King Kong's spine would be under a very high stress due to that big belly... Still, four legs divide better the weight than two. Not to mention most animals are quadrupeds and we, the naked bipedal apes, are the ones with spine problems...
 
Correa Neto said:
Honestly, the "too heavy to walk on four limbs" sounds way to crazy for me. Even for a footer. Heck, even for those who hate science, even for those with anti-evolution ideas.

Perhaps (OK maybe I'm trying to see what's not there) Meldrum was misquoted or experessed himself poorly. Maybe he increase a gorilla's size and decided King Kong's spine would be under a very high stress due to that big belly... Still, four legs divide better the weight than two. Not to mention most animals are quadrupeds and we, the naked bipedal apes, are the ones with spine problems...
Click to expand...


You can go back to my post #122 and watch him explain it. He uses the gorilla as a model and even holds his own arms and hands as a gorilla would when knuckle-walking. He specifically says that the shoulder would be the problem with great weight. If you look at the skeletons of ground sloths, Chalicotheres and gorilla you will see differences in shoulder structure and geometry.
 
I agree with your theory; however, I am now one of the many who believe in Sasquatch. My belief has nothing to do with other's opinions, facts, etc. Until 24 months ago, I gave no thought into the existence of a Bigfoot type creature actually being real. Occasionally I saw the made for T.V. shows about Bigfoot, Lochness, UFO's etc. but my opinion on the matter was, "Until they actually capture one of these creatures or shoot down a UFO, I will not consider the possibility of these things existing."

I have hunted the woods of WV my entire life and I am very famaliar with all of the wildlife that lives in the woods around me. I currently lease 1300 acres of property for hunting/game management purposes, and I have numerous food plots, feeders, etc. I have been part of West Virginia Game and Fish the Magazine's hunting segment, so I have a very good idea of what should and should not be roaming the woods of the eastern U.S. This brings me to my point. On July 23rd, 2009 at 1215a.m. I had a "run-in" with a Sasquatch on my property. I live in a very rural, desolate area with only a hand full of neighbors. (Three to be exact.) No businesses, no practical joking teens, etc. This creature entered my property and was observing me. This "thing" then proceeded to roar/howl for a few brief moments. Another creature called back to it from across the hollow by making a series of howls. The vocalizations from these creatures was so loud and powerful that my house literally "shook." I am a retired WV State Trooper and I have been in shootings, bank robberys etc. These things scared me so badly that I have yet to fully recover. To summarize w/o going into further detail, my wife; who coincedentally is of sane mind, college educated, and very rational thinking, saw the creature a few days later in broad daylight. I had many more instances where we had these "things" striking wood together, removing our trash, etc. I have had no occurences lately, however I do believe that these things exist. What can I say? I once would have never excepted this prior but, "seeing is believing." I have much more info. on my sighting but I wanted to "throw this out" to the readers to get some feedback. I realize that some people love to make up stories like this but I am a sincere about what has happened to me as a person can be.

FYI: I am considered an expert witness in federal court, I have taken and passed numerous psychiological evals. while performing different duties as a Trooper and being federally duputized. I do not drink, I do not do drugs, I do not necessarily believe in ghosts, ufo's, etc. I am currently employed as a teacher in the public school system.
 
The Shrike said:
Just how heavy does Meldrum think bigfoots (say, Patty) are?
Click to expand...


"My assessment of the evidence suggests that Bigfoot is a great ape, like a gorilla or chimp, which is not a hominid and does not possess material culture or the ability to control fire," Meldrum said.

He described the unknown ape as standing 6.5 to 8 feet in height, weighing 450 to 500 pounds, muscular, small brained and flatfooted. Analysis of the footprints suggests it walks "like a human carrying a backpack," with flexed joints to carry the body's weight. He based some of his determinations on the famous 1967 "Bigfoot" video footage shot by Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin.
Click to expand...

Source.

So can anyone take the OP "silver bullet" argument to Meldrum... that evolution could not produce a bipedal 6.5-8' tall, 450-500 lb. great ape, and have it work? Remember that if you push the height or weight outside of his own stated parameters you are strawmanning his position.
 
William Parcher said:
Source.

So can anyone take the OP "silver bullet" argument to Meldrum... that evolution could not produce a bipedal 6.5-8' tall, 450-500 lb. great ape, and have it work? Remember that if you push the height or weight outside of his own stated parameters you are strawmanning his position.
Click to expand...

He doesn't have any evidence of bigfoot though, and as a professor he knows that, so what is he talking about?
 
William Parcher said:
You can go back to my post #122 and watch him explain it. He uses the gorilla as a model and even holds his own arms and hands as a gorilla would when knuckle-walking. He specifically says that the shoulder would be the problem with great weight. If you look at the skeletons of ground sloths, Chalicotheres and gorilla you will see differences in shoulder structure and geometry.
Click to expand...

The shoulder girdle is adaptable to huge loads. look at the ungulates. It's not the shoulder that determines evolution. The niche determines evolution and the shoulder will come along.
 
The Shrike said:
More to the point, why does he think 450–500 lbs is too heavy for knucklewalking?
Click to expand...

He didn't say that. You're not paying attention. He says that 1000 lbs (Gigantopithecus) is too heavy for a knuckle-walking ape.
 
Last edited:
Wiki seems to think logically, unlike Meldrum.

The majority view is that the weight of such a large, heavy animal would put enormous strain on the creature's legs, ankles and feet if it walked bipedally; while if it walked on all four limbs, like gorillas, its weight would be better distributed over each limb.
Click to expand...
 
LTC8K6 said:
Wiki seems to think logically, unlike Meldrum.
Click to expand...

Meldrum "builds" his Bigfoot with robust bones, ankles and feet. This is what he sees in Patty. I think her ankle and foot are like a rubber boot profile.


c392c63d.jpg
 
Why would anyone thing that bipedal was better for a large, heavy animal? Especially an extremely unbalanced, tailless biped? As the wiki article points out the strain on the knees, ankles and feet would be pretty nasty.
 
LTC8K6 said:
What was his evidence for the weight of Giganto?
Click to expand...



A gigantic ape, measuring about 10 feet tall and weighing up to 1,200 pounds, co-existed alongside humans, a geochronologist has discovered.
Click to expand...

Jack Rink


According to Ciochon et al. (1990), Gigantopithecus blacki was 10 feet tall and weighed 1,200 pounds. This is speculative, since it is with some uncertainty that one reconstructs such a massive creature from a few jaw bones and teeth, however many. The way they arrived at this picture was first to estimate the size of the head from the jaw, and then to use a head/body ratio of 1:6.5 in order to determine the body size. For comparison they cite a head/body ratio of 1:8 for the Australopithecus afarensis specimen known as 'Lucy'. The more conservative ratio for Gigantopithecus was arrived at out of consideration of the massive jaw as an adaptation to the mastication of fibrous plant matter (probably bamboo). Gigantopithecus was probably proportionally a markedly big jawed creature. For the head shape they based their assumptions on the orangutan, since evolutionarily they place Gigantopithecus on the same line as the orangutan, finding a common ancestor for them both in Sivapithecus. However, the orangutan could not serve as a model for the body, since it is unlikely that a 1,200 pound ape would be as arboreal. Therefore they chose the largest primates known, the gorilla and the extinct giant baboon Theropithecus oswaldi, as their models for the body. They gave Gigantopithecus an intermembral index 108 (gorilla at 120 + Theropithecus at 95 divide by 2 = 108 rounded up - very scientific!) (Ciochon et al., 1990).
Click to expand...

Source

Our direct ancestor, Homo erectus, had close ties to a 10-foot-tall, 1200-pound ape called Gigantopithecus.
Click to expand...

Ciochon, Olsen & James
 
Last edited:
William Parcher said:
You can go back to my post #122 and watch him explain it. He uses the gorilla as a model and even holds his own arms and hands as a gorilla would when knuckle-walking. He specifically says that the shoulder would be the problem with great weight. If you look at the skeletons of ground sloths, Chalicotheres and gorilla you will see differences in shoulder structure and geometry.
Click to expand...

I was trying to say that maybe his argument was not properly made. Maybe it was a case of bad editing. Its too weird.

I do not expect the skeletons from these beasts to look the same. All I am saying is that there are (OK, were) knuckle-walking beasts larger than gorillas and about the size if not larger than gigantopithecus.

As I said before, one can dump data on gorilla's bones on certain software and estimate how large they could be before breaking their bones. The same could be made for humans and was made for sauropods. So, I would really like to know how Meldrum derived this seemingly weird conclusion, what were his bases? Guessworks or numbers? If numbers, good, reliable numbers or GIGOfodder?
 
Parcher, you still don't think he is contradicting himself by saying Giganto was too big to be a knucklewalker? If he has changed his stance, I'd like to know how he came to that determination, or if it is just the desire of a Bigfooter to say Giganto must have been a biped because of it's size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom