Many pardons if it’s already been mentioned but I did a search of the thread and didn’t find the term Homo floresiensis.
From what I gather, it may be a small modern human with microencephaly, or it could represent a new species within the genus Homo.
If it is a new species, it lived contemporaneously with modern humans up to 12,000 years ago, there are no gaps in the human fossil record suggesting it should have existed but we simply hadn’t found it yet, and we only found it in 2003.
I’d say the odds of our finding God, dragons, or space aliens is pretty slim. I highly doubt Bigfoot exists. But of the four, finding out that Bigfoot has managed to exist undetected right up to modern times is the least likely to make me faint.
Some of you have mentioned Bigfoots have been sighted in areas near humans where you’d think if there were one, there’d be more and it would be impossible for someone not to have found conclusive evidence of them.
But what if it’s a case where someone really did see one deep, deep in a forest someplace, far away from human settlements, word got around and pretty soon everyone was seeing them. Kinda like UFO’s. Once the idea is put out there, pretty soon people’s imaginations get the best of them and you start seeing them in places where they probably aren’t really.
About H. floresiensis- AFAIK it’s only the *original * specimen (LB1)that’s argued to be “small modern human with microencephaly”, however, there’s plenty of debate, in any case. I prefer the “it’s a subspecies” argument myself, but I am hardly an expert.
However, it is from a relatively small, isolated island, which is apparently the only place where it ever occurred. And it is quite closely related to other hominids, probably simply a dwarf form of Homo erectus, which is known from the same archipelago. So, surprising as this fossil is, it is not nearly as unexpected as finding a hominid in the New World would be.
See? This is why you need to go to a bigfoot convention! People will stand up and give you a lecture about how bigfoots are smart enough to only walk on hard ground, rock, or riverbeds (therefore leave no footprints), can move with such dexterity that they never break a twig (hence, no signs of passage), have an intense dislike of metal (which accounts for avoiding automatic camera traps), and hate humans (so we never see them). Then they tell you how there are up to 4 different species of bigfoots to account for the differences in foot prints (three to six toed prints have been recorded), differences in appearance (heights from 7 to 12 feet have been reported), and different demeanors (some people claim bigfoot tried to kill them, some say bigfoot wanted to have them over for tea and cookies). Most tellingly, a guy stood up and presented “Bigfoot as a social study” and showed us how you can fake most of the ‘evidence’ that has been recorded, how reporting correlate with increased publicity (reports happen in clusters and as someone upthread said, all started with a novel written in the 50’s), and how closely the bigfoot crowd and the alien abduction crowd align on psyciatric tests.
Just because the hairs found don’t match any ‘known’ animal doesn’t mean that they don’t come from a known animal. I was watching a Forensic Files type show (I don’t remember which one) where they solved a crime with ‘unknown hair.’ They eventually figured out that the source of the mystery hair was a squirrel tail. It turns out that squirrel tail hair is nothing like squirrel body hair and had never been examined microscopically. I think we can all agree that squirrels aren’t exactly rare.
This is known as island (or insular) dwarfism, which can occur due to allopatric speciation resulting from extreme pressures. There is also island gigantism, which results from a similiar geographical barrier, but in this case in herbivores owing to relief from predation. Neither case would apply to an allegedly intelligent primate with free range over the entire North American continent, and it would be highly suprising that any rapid evolutionary change or saltation would occur on a large land mammal with free range.
Furthermore, there is significant question about the biomechanics of such a creature. A quick perusal online gives estimates of Bigfoot range from 300 lbs to over 2000 lbs, and heights from >6ft all the way up to 12 feet. The upper end of the scale is almost certainly untenable for a biped, certainly one derived from hominids; the hip and leg structure of a hominid simply can’t be scaled up to support that kind of weight. The lower end of the range–say, about 8ft in height and around 500 lbs–is biomechically the limit for plantigrade bipedalism without a major restructuring of the basic anatomy of a hominid.
Then there’s the evolutionary impetus for achieving such height. Even if we dispense with the issue of a lack of fossil record, there’s no explaination for a biped to have developed to such an extrema of height. Unlike, say, the giraffe–whose extended neck and accompanying phenotypical features–originally come from pressure to get leaves on the relatively sparse savanah plains of southern Africa (though the sexual dimorphism suggests that subsequent factors came into play), a primate in North America would have no conceivable reason to develop such height, especially one allegedly as intelligent as the sasquatch. A shorter, stalkier body might make sense in terms of warding off the large mammalian predators of the previous era, but that comes back to a creature more alike a gorilla or bear than an upright biped.
And the supposition that “they bury their dead”? Seriously? While there are examples of some of the more intelligent mammals performing apparent “burial” rituals (covering a body with loose sticks or rocks), there is no precident in the whole of zoology, save for the “advanced” members of Homo–modern humans, Neanderthals, perhaps Heidelberg Man (Homo heidelbergensis), for regular burial of deceased members. To assert that an entire species directly unrelated to genus Homo has developed social traditions and advanced tool-making ability sufficient to cause said species to conduct effective and undiscovered burials without a single shred of physical evidence is an absurd breach of reason. If they are advanced tool-makers, we should expect to see occasional incidence of lost or broken tools, scaled to their size and (presumed) strength. If they aren’t advanced tool-makers, they can’t be constructing the kind of underground vaults hypothesized to explain the lack of skeletal remains.
All of this is naught, though; the fact that this is an allegedly extant species but has never been reliably documented, tracked, or indentified on a heavily populated and industrialized land mass is an extraordinary claim. Before asserting that it is “likely” that Bigfoot/sasquatch/the Swamp Ape exists, you ought to have at least some small amount of credible evidence (beyond tufts of hair and murky photographs). And if you’re going to claim that they’re tool users, I bloody well want to see at least some primative tools.
There’s value in being critical about what “the experts” know, 'cause they’re often blinded by their own limited perception. But there is also great value in understanding why the experts are skeptical, and the weight of evidence it takes to convince them. The intertia against adopting a new (and frankly very weak) hypothesis is what makes the most radical revolutions in science credible. And in this case, skepticism is far more justified than advocacy.
Once again another brilliant post by Stranger On A Train.
Incredibly well written and thought out and halfway to being a complete staff report in a single post.
[QUOTE=Stranger On A TrainAnd the supposition that “they bury their dead”? Seriously? While there are examples of some of the more intelligent mammals performing apparent “burial” rituals (covering a body with loose sticks or rocks), there is no precident in the whole of zoology, save for the “advanced” members of Homo–modern humans, Neanderthals, perhaps Heidelberg Man (Homo heidelbergensis), for regular burial of deceased members. [/QUOTE]
Not only that, but they bury them in such a way as to render the burial sites undetectable. Apparently, they can bury 500lb. plus bodies in such a way as to leave the ground undisturbed.
Well you could always do what I did and buy one with a few books. Otherwise contact C K Dexter Haven if you are really interested. I believe that is part of his duties as an admin. Of course Colibri could tell you what the process was he went through.
I have the impression from various threads, that you take on a few questions from the mail bag as a guest contributor and the PTB take a secret vote and put you through the initiation to be an SDSAB like **Bricker ** & Q.E.D. recently went through.
Jim {Good luck, I really think you have the chops for it, both your writing and your ability to communicate technical issues for the general public}
I think a dead specimen with a clean shot through the center mass would bring the likelyhood of additional protection from approximately zero to a non zero chance. I think it’s a bit disingenous to say that we don’t protect the habitats of rare animals (especially rare, popular and telegenic animals), we may not do enough but it does happen you know.
Another tangent from the bigfoot convention: one guy was circulating a petition to be heard by some Congressional committee to propose the preservation of all the “prime Bigfoot habitat” in Maryland and Pennsylvania.
2, with the emphasis on “unlikely”. I am always put in mind of the fact that gorrillas were mythical beasts for years. And then…there they were. But I think in the US where the even the unpopulated spaces are pretty populated we would have found some by now.
So, there’s a slight chance they’re out there, I just don’t think they’ve been on a UFO with Elvis.