Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

Status
Not open for further replies.
manofthesea said:
I guess this makes another 'bigfoot paradox'. If this animal exists then there must be bones and fossils that were misunderstood and misidentified. It could be beneficial to have All existing inventories (of all museums and universities) of bones classified as human or undetermined reexamined. I think that is actually a worthwhile pursuit with all of the advancement in biological sciences that has occured since the conquistadors first arrived in the Americas.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as a true paradox. When a paradox is encountered, it's the paradigm that is faulty. So there is either a bigfoot who defies all laws of archaeology, zoology and paleontology; or there is no such thing as bigfoot.

The first case, "there is either a bigfoot who defies all laws of archaeology..," requires a boatload of special pleading to make it feasible.

The second case, "there is no such thing as bigfoot," requires no special pleading, explains the utter dearth of evidence and gives a well-honed shave using Occam's razor.
 
manofthesea said:
Aha. This is considered a filtration issue. You've discounted misidentification on what grounds?
Click to expand...

I haven't addressed misidentification, so your response is a red herring. If misidentification is your evidence, then you should show me a bone sample that researchers have misidentified in the peer-reviewed literature. Do you know of a fossil that has been misidentified as h. sapiens that can in fact be assigned to bigfoot?
 
Last edited:
manofthesea:
The contrary to fact fallacy is always tempting. For instance, I could say, if wishes were horses, beggars could ride. But wishes are not horses, so no rational person would be looking for a parade of beggars on horseback. Likewise, who thinks they would find a bigfoot bone in museum collections?

So in order to make this a rational idea, you need to at least provide something that would make a rational person think there might be a chance of success.
What evidence do you have that remains in museum collections have been misidentified as human? seriously. identification of human bones is not that hard; I would be surprised if you were to suggest that the muscle and tendon and weight and strength and locomotion and brain and nutritional needs of a bigfoot was the same as a human, and those are some of the things that create bone structure. Of course, you can postulate anything similar to humans you want for this purpose, then tomorrow on another forum you can say Bigfoot is 8 feet tall, weighs 700lbs and can run 35 mph. And you can do this because bigfoot is a creation of the mind, not the physical world we live in.

Lastly, a fragment so small as to be unidentifiable would be of no interest to a museum, so you wouldn't find many of those.

There are probably fewer human remains in NA museums than you might imagine. Since North American tribes put up a stink, most "human but unidentified person" bones have been restored to their presumptive tribes for respectable treatment. Of course, bones of identified persons or remains from identified human cemeteries are not in question.

Lastly, of course, since no bigfoot bones have ever been identified in any somewhat intact remains, there is no evidence that such bones exist.

So if i were chairman of the Association of North American Museum Directors, I 'd have to say, come back when you have something more than "if bigfoot exists, museums have bigfoot bones."
 
Last edited:
au contraire, i have loved fossils since I was a kid but I don't know jack about them. Phylogeny ditto except I have never loved it. ha ha.
 
Last edited:
Vort my question was regarding modern great apes (gorillas, chimpanzees, etc). Are any of those on your previous list? Sorry I was not clear. Is there a fossil record for these animals?
 
No African fossil apes have been found from between 10 - 7 million years ago (the period during which African apes and hominids diverged).

(Hominini (humans and chimps) split off from Gorillini some 10 mya. Genus Homo (humans) split off genus Pan (chimps) some 7 mya.)

From about the 7 - 6 mya period, several possible ancestors of chimpanzees have been found in East and Central Africa, such as:

Sahelanthropus tchadensis (7 mya: Central Africa) Teeth and skull more hominin-like than ape-like. Possibly latest known common ancestor of chimps and humans, or oldest known human ancestor after the human/chimp split, or related to both but ancestral to neither, or is a female proto-gorilla. Thickened brow ridges similar to later fossil hominids such as Homo erectus, but different from Australopithecus and extant humans. Possibly bipedal based on anterior position of foramen magnum. Brain case 340 – 360 cc.

Ardipithecus kadabba (5.8 – 5.2 mya: Northern Africa) Size of modern chimps. Shares certain traits with Gorilla and Pan, indicating proper placement on chimp branch rather than human. Shares “canine cutting complex” with modern chimpanzees, not shared by Homo. Evidence of woodland, grassland and swamp habitat.

Ardipithecus ramidus (4.4 mya: Northern Africa) Size of modern chimps. Shares certain traits with Gorilla and Pan, indicating proper placement on chimp branch rather than human, but has dentition similar to Australopithecus ("Lucy"). Lacks “canine cutting complex” which modern chimps have, a primitive trait lost during hominin evolution. Possible biped based on toe structure. Not considered hominin ancestor by scientists. Evidence of woodland, grassland and swamp habitat.

Even after the 7 mya time stamp, chimpanzee and gorilla fossils are rare, but they do exist. Chimp fossils were first discovered in Kenya in 2005:

These fossils, from the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya, show that representatives of Pan were present in the East African Rift Valley during the Middle Pleistocene [~800 - 125 thousand years ago], where they were contemporary with an extinct species of Homo. Habitats suitable for both hominins and chimpanzees were clearly present there during this period, and the Rift Valley did not present an impenetrable barrier to chimpanzee occupation.​

As to gorillas, the fossil record is similarly scarce, but some fossil 'gorilla' teeth from about 10 million years ago were found in Ethiopia in 2007 and given a new species name, Chororapithecus abyssinicus.

the teeth, eight molars and a canine, are collectively indistinguishable from modern gorilla subspecies in size, proportion and scan-revealed internal structure.​

Does that satisfy? Or may I be of further assistance? :cool:
 
Hateman, sorry if I offended you.
The " bones in museums" talking point is simply another flavor of the "It's SCIENCE's fault we haven't found bigfoot" theme. Other flavors include "Science is afraid", Science should mount an expedition", Science is a conspiracy, Science is close-minded, and on and on.
The reality is that "Science" has little or nothing to do with finding large animals in North America. It would be more realistic to blame the hikers, mountain bikers, joggers, drivers, police, sheriffs, fish and wildlife field officials, sanitation workers, loggers, road builders, hunters, fishermen, bird watchers, mushroom hunters, bigfoot hunters, and anyone else who spends time in the woods; and they certainly aren't to blame either. It's the non-existence of bigfoot that's to blame.

blaming acid soils, porcupines, museums, "Science"...read the late Grover Krantz or watch him on videos...it's just the same blame stories year after year for 40 years.

Smug, Beaver, you want smug, read William Parcher. Not that I mind WP. But at least I address the arguments.
 
parnassus said:
manofthesea:
The contrary to fact fallacy is always tempting. For instance, I could say, if wishes were horses, beggars could ride. But wishes are not horses, so no rational person would be looking for a parade of beggars on horseback. Likewise, who thinks they would find a bigfoot bone in museum collections?

So in order to make this a rational idea, you need to at least provide something that would make a rational person think there might be a chance of success.
What evidence do you have that remains in museum collections have been misidentified as human? seriously. identification of human bones is not that hard; I would be surprised if you were to suggest that the muscle and tendon and weight and strength and locomotion and brain and nutritional needs of a bigfoot was the same as a human, and those are some of the things that create bone structure. Of course, you can postulate anything similar to humans you want for this purpose, then tomorrow on another forum you can say Bigfoot is 8 feet tall, weighs 700lbs and can run 35 mph. And you can do this because bigfoot is a creation of the mind, not the physical world we live in.

Lastly, a fragment so small as to be unidentifiable would be of no interest to a museum, so you wouldn't find many of those.

There are probably fewer human remains in NA museums than you might imagine. Since North American tribes put up a stink, most "human but unidentified person" bones have been restored to their presumptive tribes for respectable treatment. Of course, bones of identified persons or remains from identified human cemeteries are not in question.

Lastly, of course, since no bigfoot bones have ever been identified in any somewhat intact remains, there is no evidence that such bones exist.

So if i were chairman of the Association of North American Museum Directors, I 'd have to say, come back when you have something more than "if bigfoot exists, museums have bigfoot bones."
Click to expand...

Holy moly. That's a whole lotta words just to say "Bigfoot isn't real because I don't believe it". Shades of Neto. I've said tons about bigfoot. Half of it is in AAH.
m_74d199fa54c9aceb173131241f299d9b.gif


Occasionally even experts run up against someone who's mental chi is strong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiBA0lS_lwg&feature=related
 
manofthesea wrote :
Holy moly. That's a whole lotta words just to say "Bigfoot isn't real because I don't believe it".
Click to expand...

Belief systems are the balliwick of 'footers. The facts are that there exists no biological proof of a bigfoot animal, when there is copious proof of all extant large North American mammals. I accept the facts.
 
Last edited:
Why search for bigfoot fossils? The patty cakes say there are 1000's of these things running all over North America with just as many sightings per year. Wouldn't it be easier getting a well placed 12 gauge slug between Mr. Sasquatch eyes rather than finding some jaw bone Fossil 10 feet in the ground? Is this what we are resorting to is finding fossil records to prove Bigfoots existence???....what is wrong with this picture?
 
WGBH said:
Vortigern, thank you very much. Just like I thought the fossil records are scarce.
Click to expand...

All fossils are scarce. Period. Until the 1980's only three t-rex had ever been discovered. The fact is that the living anthropoid apes have a fossil record, as scarce as it is, and bigfoot does not. Three 70myo t-rexes, zero modern bigfoot.

Bigfoot however is supposed to be found in the forests of America, rather than the uliginous rain-forests of Africa. Bigfoot must be compared to other species that occupy its home ranges. All other living N American mammals have left an enormous footprint for scientists to follow (pun intended). Any excuses made for bigfoot are simply special pleadings.

The well-known fact that there are not a lot of chimp or gorrilla fossils, as used by the bigfooters, is a red herring in this case. We're talking about the fossil record of N America, not Africa or Asia. Bigfoot is invisible in the very strata that are supposed to be its home range.

Chimps, bonobos, gorrillas, orangs, gibbons and siamangs are anything but invisible on their home range (or zoos), and their brittle bones have been found on and in the ground.
 
Last edited:
Off the top of my head: Thousands of bison, thousands of bear, thousands of mastadons, hundreds of mammoths, at least 2 species of rhino, American tigers and lions, sabre-toothed cats by the tens of dozens at one site alone, dire wolf, giant sloths, horses of every ilk, giant beavers, camels, cheetas:

Pleistocene
Ended 10,000 YBP
Mammoth
Mastodon
Megatherium
Camel
Ancient Bison
Cave Bear
Cave Hyena
Dire Wolf
Elasmotherium
Mylodon
American Lion
Pygmy Mammoth
Smilodon
Wooly Rhinoceros

Paleocene
Ended 55.8 MYBP
Anconodon
Barylambda
Condylarth
Dinocerata
Gondwanatheria
Microcosmodon
Mimetodon
Pantodonta
Purgatorius

Jurassic
Ended 146 MYBP
Allosaurus
Apatosaurus
Archaeopteryx
Brontoraptor
Ceratosaurus
Condorraptor
Diplodocus
Echinodon
Emausaurus
Fabrosaurus
Gigantosaurus
Heterodontosaurus
Iguanodon
Megalosaurus
Nanosaurus

Paleozoic
Ended 251 MYBP
Trilobite
Archaeothyris
Crassigyrinis
Loxommatidae
Eryopidae
Diadectidae
Edaphosauridae

and not one single bigfoot.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom