Bigfoot DNA

Status
Not open for further replies.
xtifr said:
According to Wikipedia, ChupacabraWP is most likely someone's confused memory of the monster from the movie Species, overblown into full-grown urban legend status. Mangy coyotes, though, seem to have been the main source for subsequent reports, so your "wild canine" is pretty much on the money.

Chupacabra is an excellent example of how people can trick themselves into believing they've seen the most ridiculous things, which, in turn, is an excellent reason for being skeptical of most eyewitness BF reports. It's also an excellent example of how something invented quite recently can pass off as an "old legend".



I think the highlighted point really bears emphasizing. Most people do not care whether BF exists or not, and therefore feel no reason to take a strong position one way or the other. It's as easy to say, "sure, there might be" as it is to say, "nah, I doubt it", especially if you have no particular reason to care.

I don't really mind the people who say, "sure, whatever". They may be insufficiently skeptical, but their lack of skepticism stems from a lack of interest in a not-very-interesting topic. What concerns me is the people who are so determined to believe, despite the lack of any credible evidence, and who feel compelled to try to convince others at all costs. These are the ones who fall prey to profiteering fraudsters, and unscrupulous con men. Which is why I keep emphasizing the "why do you care" question.

Guys, even the majority of those who do casually believe in bigfoot think you're crazy for caring so much! Dial it back, and try to gain a little perspective! Then maybe you can at least rejoin the group of reasonably sane people who may, vaguely, think that bigfoot exists, but don't insist on making public fools of themselves in defense of that not-strongly-held belief.
Click to expand...



I understand that the whole Chupacabra legend has been dilluted over the years.

From what i've seen of the supposed animal, its certainly not supernatural in any way, its interesting that the DNA came back as being a cross between a Coyote and a Mexican wolf.

I'm not too clued up on the subject though.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Oh. I definitely have my stupid moments.

It seems some Bob Marley-sized spleefs showed up for Solstice.
Click to expand...

No one can tell me it wouldn't be fun to talk bigfoot with ABP after a monster one. Mulder would harsh my buzz though.
 
Last edited:
tsig said:
Are you seriously attempting to claim that people don't lie? :eye-popp
Click to expand...

In the immortal words of George Costanza, it's not a lie if you believe it.

Example, when I was young kid driving up north to some land my parents owned, I saw a little girl walking a bear (I was probably 6 or 7). I was amazed. I thought it was cool. I was convinced.

A few years later, as a teenager having all but forgotten the incident, I met the very same girl with the bear, now also my age (pauses momentarily to re-live some fond memories).

It knew it was her because her property was the location we had passed. In any case, she used to have a hug At the time, I was convinced it was girl walking a bear.

I think some people that have "encountered" Bigfoot have simply seen or heard something large and hair they could not explain it freaked them out. Having an experience like that, so palpably real to the individual, can convince someone of many, many things. So I think some / many people are telling the truth as they perceive it. These people make very credible witnesses, because they fully believe it. Their conviction is hard to ignore and creates many converts.


Bit of an aside... has anyone read ]Them + Us by Danny Vendramini. His theory is neanderthals preyed on early humans. His view is that these neanderthals were more ape-like than they are often portrayed. Because they preyed on early humans, they left an indelible psychological residue where large hairy humanoids create an archetype of something that scares the piss out of us today. I've only done a cursory read, but I found the idea interesting.

When reading this NP (neanderthal predation) theory, it struck me that if true, this could inadvertently contribute to the idea of why people believe they see and experience Bigfoot today - the Jungian archetyp eworking at it's best (worst?). A person attributes and attaches elements to that fear which did not acutally happen, but have awakened a slumbering collective unconsciousness in the individual.

Thoughts?
 
musketsatdawn said:
Bit of an aside... has anyone read ]Them + Us by Danny Vendramini. His theory is neanderthals preyed on early humans. His view is that these neanderthals were more ape-like than they are often portrayed. Because they preyed on early humans, they left an indelible psychological residue where large hairy humanoids create an archetype of something that scares the piss out of us today. I've only done a cursory read, but I found the idea interesting.

When reading this NP (neanderthal predation) theory, it struck me that if true, this could inadvertently contribute to the idea of why people believe they see and experience Bigfoot today - the Jungian archetyp eworking at it's best (worst?). A person attributes and attaches elements to that fear which did not acutally happen, but have awakened a slumbering collective unconsciousness in the individual.
Click to expand...

Where we encountered them, we prevailed. Tens of thousands of years ago. We haven't even established who has a fear as dramatic as you pose it. Most people don't even think bigfoot exists. There isn't evidence this is even a categorized fear among humans. Footaphobia. We have phobias about snakes, spiders, all kinds of things. Africans that live amongst the great apes - do they have fears of them this grave? Google doesn't bring up anything on that.

A nonexistent fear can't be lasting tens of thousands of years.
 
His theory is neanderthals preyed on early humans. His view is that these neanderthals were more ape-like than they are often portrayed.
Click to expand...

As an archaeologist I have to say that this NOT supported by contemporary research. Just the opposite actually.
The Neanderthals was most likely more like us (modern humans) than we thought just a few years back.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Where we encountered them, we prevailed. Tens of thousands of years ago. We haven't even established who has a fear as dramatic as you pose it. Most people don't even think bigfoot exists. There isn't evidence this is even a categorized fear among humans. Footaphobia. We have phobias about snakes, spiders, all kinds of things. Africans that live amongst the great apes - do they have fears of them this grave? Google doesn't bring up anything on that.

A nonexistent fear can't be lasting tens of thousands of years.
Click to expand...

For the record I was not attempting to prove Bigfoot was real. Instead I was trying to suggest a reason why people might see a large hairy hominid instead of a bear, wolverine or other more common creature. I don't think that everyone that "sees" a Bigfoot is a liar, just mistaken, but subsequently convinced that they saw a Bigfoot.
 
Maldon said:
As an archaeologist I have to say that this NOT supported by contemporary research. Just the opposite actually.
The Neanderthals was most likely more like us (modern humans) than we thought just a few years back.
Click to expand...

Ok, I had read that behaviourly there was increasing evidence of similarities, but hadn't read one way or another about the physical make up being more/less than had been previously thought.
 
Muskets-
We have discussed the idea that humans have some archaic memory of a beast that came to their caves at night and grabbed children from their cradles.

Perhaps Grendel and The Odyssey were depicting such an ancient human memory of a giant beast which tormented us. Perhaps, however they were simply recounting a story, told by generations of ancient people, which was scary. Scary stories get told, someone adds "This is all true" to it, the next generation adds fangs to the beast. Of course the children are supposed to heed these stories and not wander off, but some do, and in order to avoid getting in trouble, they tell their parents that THE BEAST was chasing them. Then when he is old, he recounts the story, and adds "THIS HAPPENED TO ME PERSONALLY".

The archaic thing sounds cool, but really, are bigfoot tales anything other than Bogeyman stories, except grown-ups are the ones filling in the embellishments? Is there any other way to gain instant notoriety / fame in the BF world, than to tell a good, believable story? If there is one thing about Roger Patterson, he loved the spotlight, he loved telling stories, and he looked cool with his cowboy hat, and years of entertainment experience. The video, meh., the story behind the video in 1968, cool. Especially to kids.
 
Drewbot said:
The archaic thing sounds cool, but really, are bigfoot tales anything other than Bogeyman stories, except grown-ups are the ones filling in the embellishments?
Click to expand...

I agree. Little doubt that parents have told children tall tales to control kids' behaviour and prevent them from being taken by [insert predator].

Even an ordinarily non-lethal animal can kill as this macaque incident shows.

Religion strikes me as a serving a similar purpose for children AND adults, especially before documented laws governed our behaviours. It was the law in the absence of common law with eternal damnation acting as a pretty stiff sentence.
 
Last edited:
And yet . . . the more we learn from Archaeology/Anthropology about our distant past, the more we get a picture of ancient Homo sapiens living alongside other species of humans, e.g., Flores people, Neanderthals, Denisovans.

Think of how racism in our modern world makes bogeymen out of people with different ethnic backgrounds. Heck, just check out how we demonized the Japanese after Pearl Harbor or how blacks were portrayed in print media and film in the early 20th Century. Now imagine species-ism among our illiterate ancestors. Many thousands of years ago, there really were brutish, hairier people of enormous strength and comparatively simple ways living in some isolated valley way off in the boonies. I can not only imagine how stories of such people would be passed down long after they were gone, I would expect it. This is why I think bigfooty-type bogeyman are almost universal in modern cultures.
 
The Shrike said:
And yet . . . the more we learn from Archaeology/Anthropology about our distant past, the more we get a picture of ancient Homo sapiens living alongside other species of humans, e.g., Flores people, Neanderthals, Denisovans.
Click to expand...

Lived alongside, I suppose, until the part where they were completely absorbed by the dominant species.
 
Drewbot said:
Lived alongside, I suppose, until the part where they were completely absorbed by the dominant species.
Click to expand...
That works too:

1) Plunder Neanderthal encampment, killing all the adults.
2) Take 1 or 2 baby girls to raise as slaves.
3) Take liberties with those girls when they mature.

Viola. There's an easy explanation for extermination of Neanderthals by the dominant human on the planet, including the persistence of Neanderthal genes in modern human DNA. It doesn't preclude the demonization of Neanderthals, however. What better way to brag about one's power than to ascribe great power and ferociousness to the thing you conquered?
 
Castro said:
The (hypothetical?) Neanderthal cannibalism as the origin of the ? The idea looks sexy.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to wonder about the early interactions with humans and neanderthals - did they actively hunt each other to proactive reduce competition as lions do with cheetahs, or were the interactions more like Hyenas vs Lions fighting over a downed resource. Did the humans always have the upper hand or did they just learn to hunt and kill their opponents better?

Certainly this article suggests humans also ate neanderthals.
 
Drewbot said:
Lived alongside, I suppose, until the part where they were completely absorbed by the dominant species.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if your using sarcasm here Drewbot, what mammal species has been absorbed by a dominant species :confused: Are you suggesting there is evidence that supports Neanderthal was absorbed by Homo Sapiens Sapiens?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom