Once again Correa Neto, you bring up valid arguments and ones I can not deny are an issue. But, are you saying we should always find tracks with a midtarsal break? I would have to disagree, as I believe it would depend on the soil, amount of organic matter (leaves etc) and the moisture content of that soil. I am not disputing the midtarsal break is at issue - but I am saying it is something worth considering if this is in fact a feature found within primates.
Nope. I am just saying I think his conclusions regarding this issue are at least debatable for the reasons I presented.
How many footprints would show the break (assuming the animals are real and have this feature)? I don't know, but I suppose not all of them. Of course it would depend on a number of variables, some related to the substract and some depending on the creature itself. But I would expect to see registers of folds in the skin where the "break" is, even if the foot itself was kept rigid when it impacted or stood over the soil. The smooth surfaces seen on some casts (even in those with alleged dermals) are indications, at least for me, that's something is wrong with Meldrum's interpretation.
I dont think anyone knows with 100% accuracy just how far (or if) Gigantopithecus may have migrated. Could this animal have adapted to the climate? I see many animals that live in various climates doing very well because of adaptation. This does change things like size of that animal, take for instance Deer - they are here in Texas and doing well, as well as the Northern States, their size is smaller in Texas but I would think thats an adaptation to climate and food supplies. I could be wrong, Im not a wildlife biologist. So, I really dont think its a big stretch to think IF Giganto moved in a migration it may have "downsized" to fit the environment. That is of course - IF..
But, there are scientists looking into whether Giganto was also in Thailand, India and possibly other locations.
Could these giant apes have lived outside their known range and evolved? Well, they could... But they also could not... I'd rather stick to what we know and not be too bold when it comes to speculations. Yes, knoweledge is always subject to change.
People may be looking and who knows, eventually find bones of Gigantopithecus in Thailand and India, but their climate and vegetation are very different from North America. Findings in Northern China would certainly be a better support.
Its true that some animals are quite widespread. The many species of deer and wolves come to mind. But species say, of wolves from Europe, Asia and North America have similar diets and their bodies are not very different. When it comes to bigfoot/Gigantopithecus, we would have to change (according to our current knoweledge status) locomotion, body shape and diet... Such a change is possible? But what if Gigantopithecus we bipedal? Given the evidences we have so far I think its too much of a stretch. But again, I may be wrong. And when I look in to the various descriptions and renderings of bigfeet...
Im not saying that Gigantopithecus is in fact what we now call bigfoot, but again the precedent is there for a large ape capable of reaching the size of a bigfoot. Just something worth looking into.
I do enjoy our discussions Correa Neto - thank you.
OK, we do have an ape about the size. If it weren't interesting and worth looking in to, we would not be discussing it here!
