(side note: I’m withdrawing from the discussion because it doesn’t look like either side is going to give in to the either and I’ve blabbed enough for one thread, heh…)
- Tsugumo
I’m an open-minded individual and I’m waiting to be convinced that the skunk-ape could exist. There have been examples of animals that were once thought to be mythical turning out to be real. There’s the onza that Gadarene pointed out. I also remember a prehistoric fish all of a sudden turning up alive and unextinct.
But I need more than pictures of palms with an orangatan looking monkey hiding behind them to convince me. Stool samples from an “unknown animal” is no proof at all. I mean if the animal it came from is not known, then how do I know it came from a primate? Or even a mammal?
I think it would be great to have our own native ape, I just need some more conclusive evidence --and I’m much easier to convince than a scientist.
Sorry, just getting back here…
Recently Digested writes:
I was unaware that there were purportedly skunk apes (or sasquatch?) in east Asia. Is that right or did I misunderstand you?
I would remind you that all apes are tropical. Humans are too, really, but we have adapted to a very wide variety of habitats through technology (such as clothing and fire). We are the only ape known to have spread beyond the tropics that I am aware of. The Bering land bridge was exposed during an ICE AGE. It was not just a little brisk out. Any ape migrating over it would have to have been extremely cold adapted. It would also have to have left no descendents or remains in the colder areas of Asia, siberia, or Alaska. In the case of the skunk ape, it would have to have migrated completely across North America without leaving any descendents, or even remains, anywhere along the way - at least not that anyone has discovered. So it’s reclusive habits seem to extend to the fossil record, as well. None of this is impossible, but based on everything we’ve learned from studying other species, it seems a bit of a stretch, to put it mildly.
If not the Bering bridge, there is no migratory route through which the Americas could acquire a native ape. The bridge route is extraordinarily unlikely.
None of this is conclusive proof of anything, of course, but it does render the claims of these animals’ existence highly suspect. People have it in their minds that apes are tropical, so the skunk ape is seen in Florida, yet the only imaginable phylogeny for this creature leaves it exactly as likely that there would be a native species of American ape in Maine as in Florida. It sounds loopier to see wild apes in Maine, but it’s just as peculiar to see them in Florida if you consider the species history it implies. I think that’s why reputable biologists are so demanding that the evidence be incontrovertible.
I think the major stumbling block to the idea is this strange nature of the claim TAKEN TOGETHER with the lack of any really solid evidence. The trick is not to rationalize away these objections, but to produce an irrefutable argument. Something along the lines of “Well, here’s a skunk ape anyhow!” would be perfect.
Photos, alas, are not really very good evidence by themselves, and get less so every time Adobe updates their product. Hell, even if it were difficult to fake photos, which it isn’t, I could go to a zoo at night and come away with pictures comparable to those in the link. Maybe it IS a real ape. It might even live in Florida! The plants, whatever they are, might indicate only what the habitat designer planted and nothing more.
As far as evidence goes, a skunk ape body would be good, a live specimen even better. Whatever this creature is, I presume it is not as smart as a human. Humans catch each other all the time, even in the woods. An enterprising fellow could certainly devise some sort of trap for it. We know it’s haunts, because we know where that pic was taken, right? Can’t we just lay out some sedative-doped oranges? The thing is supposed to smell very strongly - can’t we track it with dogs? I mean, it’s not like anyone should require a $44,000 grant to go after this thing. Any Floridiot, um, excuse me, Floridian ought to be able to catch it in his spare time, if he took the notion. Fame and glory await!
Really, the absence of evidence DOES become evidence of absence when you’ve looked hard enough at all the places the subject in question COULD be. After all, we agree there are no Pythons in Manhattan, right? I suspect our disagreement boils down to whether or not we have explored sufficiently to reasonably rule out the skunk ape and sasquatch. I agree it is not a diamond-hard conclusion at this point, but I DO think it is, oh, say, reinforced-concrete-hard, especially considering the a priori unlikelihood that the claim is true.
My long post all full of cites and such was edited…rightfully so, I suppose. The link to the FAQ I mentioned works, right? Aw, hell…I’ll post it again, just in case: http://members.aol.com/Mtgjudge/BigfootFAQ.html
I’d like to emphasize the study of sasquatch footprints (which, suprisingly, nobody had mentioned) found therein.
To wit:
"From Dr. W. Henner Fahrenbach:
‘Footprints are currently one the “hardest” sasquatch data, since they can be measured in the light of day with a ruler and are not subject to distortion by the emotional state of the observer. The data presented here have been generously provided by John Green from his database with added local records. The data span 38 years and all the Western U.S. plus Western Canada. Many of the footprint records pertain to long tracks that were followed, in some cases, for miles, though still only yielding one data point for foot length. By implication, the records have been collected by many hundreds of people, most unknown to each other, without any knowledge of the “normal” size of a footprint {which isn’t known anyway, but see below}. The list consists of raw data and has not been culled according to the “Credibility” of the reporters {a purely subjective value judgement, that would only lead to a graph of the analyst’s personal preference}.’
N= 551;
Mean= 15.80"
Median= 16"
Range = 4" to 27"
Standard error= 0.131
Standard deviation= 3.07
Variance= 9.4223
Skewness = -0.1930
Kurtosis= 2.1616
'The footprint data follow a Gaussian distribution curve such as would be expected from a population. The mean size is larger than commonly cited estimates. A collection of reports fabricated over 40 years by hundreds of people independently would have a non-Gaussian distribution {Sapunov, 1988}. The curve is slightly skewed toward the left side of a histogram {negative skewness}, i.e., slightly more small footprints than large ones about the mean by virtue of the contribution of juveniles to the curve, otherwise composed of the two adult sexes. It has a slightly higher peak than expected at the center of the distribution {kurtosis}1}, a result that I attribute to the overlap of a Gaussian bimodal distribution for males and females, which appear to show sexual dimorphism, though not to the degree that a population foot print histogram would show two peaks. The small standard error suggests that further additions to the list would make no noticeable difference. Given these statistics, even a generous handful of contained fake data would not significantly affect the distribution.
Cited: Sapunov, V.B. {1988} A mathematical analysis of “Snowman” {Wildman} eyewitness reports. Cryptozoology. 7: 61-65."
The above contains a cite, so I’m not flirting with copyright infringement…not that the writer would give a damn. In fact, he’d probably appreciate the increased web traffic.
Folks…like it or not…these footprints ARE hard proof, and the above IS meaningful. One of the most fascinating reports I’ve ever read involved a trail of footprints ordinary (under the circumstances) in every respect except for one: the right foot of whatever or whoever left the print was clubbed. The toes were splayed crookedly and the sole had a deformed, crescent shape to it. While the left foot was characteristic of sasquatch reports (read: like a human’s, but proportionally larger). Throughout the trail, this anomaly was constant. In other words, it wasn’t the result of a poor stepping surface or a loss of balance, etc. The theory posited was (and let’s suspend our skepticism for JUST a second) that, as a juvenile, this creature had either injured its foot and it had never fully healed…OR…it was a congenital defect. OR…I suppose, a perverted hoax. Left out in the middle of nowhere. Anonymously. Randomly. For no good reason.
Tsugumo…damn, dude. What you said was golden:
“And like Recently Digested said, if you say “I’m going to go look for Bigfoot!”, you’re going to be mocked and ridiculed and if you’re a scientist you probably don’t want that. I mean, hell, just look at the response in this thread from even CONSIDERING the POSSIBILITY that the things exist…Instant “you’re an idiot for believing that” type replies. So why would a scientist want to go hunting for the thing when that’s the first bunch of replies he’s going to get?”
I mean, I made it clear again and again that I am NOT CONVINCED SASQUATCH “EXISTS.” The only thing I am CONVINCED of is that it warrents a careful, unbiased investigation. I get “Throwing this over to Great Debates where DavidB can trash the piss out of this thing” and the barely intelligible “Hey! That’s my neighbor’s truck. Gonna have to go find the my kids spud gun. I keep telling them that spud guns are only for shooting skunk apes but they gleefully persist in creatig mysteries for the gullible.” (Get it? He’s sarcastically expressing belief in the creature so as to segue into a hilarious caricature of how gullible and stupid those who take the issue seriously really are! What laffs! Will your rapier wit ever dull, Bare? … By the way, DavidB … would a post such as the one Bare made be considered “crap”? By the way, Tsugumo…when he called your posts “crap,” did you take that as in insult? Maybe it’s just me, but I would be pissed.)
Just ask Dr. Grover Krantz how condusive to your career a proclamation of interest in the subject really is.
DrFideleus: I understand what you’re saying, and I do tend to err on your side when I hear the “bury their dead” argument…but eating cameras and people? I guess what I mean is that one hypothesis is at least theoretically possible, while the other just doesn’t make a whole hell of a lot of sense.
As for hair samples, audio samples, fecal matter…they will ALWAYS be regarded as “of unknown origin/possibly primate,” etc. until there is something to compare it to…I suppose that, in a nutshell, that very paradox pretty much sums up this whole debate. In the minds of science, there’s no reason to search until we find a reason (and outside of a corpse, which would end the debate, anyway, I don’t see there ever being “reason” enough for many of you) to do so, and we’ll never find a reason to do so until we launch a search…or until one falls into our lap. Of course, reason enough…FOR SOME (read the list at the FAQ of scientists who support an expedition)…HAS been slowly compiling all these decades…even centuries.
Why am I passionate about this? IF this creature exists, and there IS a body of evidence to suggest that it MAY…its discovery would reveal the answer to some of science’s most pressing questions. It would most likely be our closest ancestor and, in that regard, it would be the perfect opportunity to study OURSELVES in ways never before imaginable. For me, this, in itself, is reason enough to risk ending up with egg on our faces for “believing” just long enough to try.
Although it sure it would neat if this skunk ape were real, I don’t think it is. I listened to Art Bell last night and the zoologist said that the creature was a gorilla living in Florida.
Who ever heard of gorillas in Florida?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Tsugumo *
**
[QUOTE]
*
So how is anyone supposed to prove it when no one wants to believe it?
End Quote
This is absolutely correct. Speaking personally I don’t “want” to believe in the skunk ape. I have no “wants” either way. My “wants” have nothing to do with whether something exists or not. If Mr. Bell and his saucer-abductee, susquatch-chasing, crystal healing kindred could understand that, it would save a lot of time and aggravation. (Probably put poor Cecil out of business though! S)
Florida is a relatively small place (not the Himalayas or anything) and is densely populated. I cannot imagine how a group (Herd? Tribe?) of creatures the size of Mr. Bell’s “Skunk Ape” could hide themselves unless they are extremely intelligent. Also, what happens to them when they die? Do they eat the dead ones? Or do they bury each other? Why has no one EVER come across one of these things dead.
Regards.
Testy.
Sure, Boo, there’s gorillas in Florida: I saw them myself at Monkey Jungle, along with a whole bunch of other apes and monkeys.
Once, I think I saw a skunk ape driving down I-60 towards Tampa, smoking cigarrettes and snorting coke with an Egyptian mummy 
Thanks for the cites, DDG – I haven’t had that good a time in weeks!
Everyone, make sure you read those first two. Among the amazing claims they make without providing a single cite, external reference or footnote:
–Crop circles are mentioned in academic texts of the late 17th Century;
–It is not unusual to come across designs mimicking computer fractals and elements that relate to fourth dimensional quantum physics;
–[Copycats]do it to disprove or derail researchers, some for profit, some because they are sociopaths, some because they genuinely believe they can communicate back to the phenomenon, with very interesting results;
–The issue is that no man-made crop circle has satisfactorily replicated the features associated with the real phenomenon, and this has baffled scientists and researchers;
–Crop circles are sometimes accompanied by trilling sounds, since captured on tape and analysed by NASA as artificial in origin, with a harmonic component in the infrasonic range;
–It is not unusual to find reports of people experiencing heightened states of awareness and healings in crop circles. People may also experience dizziness, disorientation and nausea- effects caused by prolonged exposure to infrasound or microwave frequencies.
–Other anomalies indicate an increase infra red output within and around a new formation, indicating that both the heat content of the plants and the watershed have been affected. Evidence even exists of four non-naturally occuring, short-life radioactive isotopes in the soil inside genuine crop circles;
–Mathematically, genuine crop circles encode obscure theorems based on Euclidian geometry as well as the unalterable principles of sacred geometry. They have the capacity to alter the local electromagnetic field so that compasses cannot locate north; cameras, cellular phones and batteries fail to operate, and aircraft equipment fails whilst flying over them. Then there are levels of background radiation up to 300% above normal, radio frequencies falling dramatically or rising sharply within their perimeters, animals in local farms avoiding that particular area or simply acting agitated hours before one materializes, and car batteries in entire villages failling to operate the morning after one is found nearby. In some of the major events, entire towns are left without power.
–Genuine formations materialize at crossing points along the Earth’s magnetic energy currents, they are influencing the energy pattern of local phehistoric sites. They reference local Neolithic sites in size/shape/direction, and are dowsable upon entry, with as many as 150 concentric rings of energy outside their physical perimeter.
–Doug and Dave were paid a handsome, five figure sum by the British government- in collusion with the CIA, among others- to admit they made all the formations. There is plenty of evidence to prove this.
No cites backing any of this up. None. No links to NASA, to scientific journals, no news stories, nothing. They keep referring to “mounds of evidence” and never provide any of it. Hilarious.
The other sites are simply secondhand references to this Paul Vigay. They offer no research or cites; they simply say “I hear from researchers that . . .” or “If Paul Vigay is right, then . . .” And the quote you provided from Vigay’s sit is all he says about it. No links to research, no indication that any publication is imminent in any of the scientific journals, nothing. I don’t want to quote from his site, because you have to read from it yourself to really get the full effect. My favorite part is when he links to this photo, which he captions: “A circular marking in Kansas, 1969 - Could this be the same energy that creates crop circles?” Oh, it could be. It could also be from a campfire. :rolleyes:
Pldennison:
Obviously they had cites. The C.I.A and the British Government removed all traces of them though. I’m frankly surprised you didn’t figure that out.
Once you take that first step…
Then it all makes sense.
The thing is, there have been searches. People have been hunting Bigfoot for decades. Lots of folks have gone to extremes to try and be the one to bring a Bigfoot home. Think of the fame, the book deals, the money! People have tromped all over the Northwest to try and find our hirsute buddy and haven’t produced anything for their efforts other than anecdotes and refutable evidence. Same thing goes for Nessie, and ghosts, and the chupacabra. At this point, the burden of proof is on the proponents of such mystery critters. They can spend their money on such a search, rather than expect some science guys to fritter away their grant money on an expedition that has turned out to be a collosal waste, time after time. This is especially true when you consider that everything we already know about primates points to the idea that such critters are wildly improbable.
Name some of them.
Also…my point about the Bering land bridge was in reference to the Pacific Northwest’s sasquatch. From what little fossil evidence we have, Gigantopithicus blacki lived in eastern Asia before its apparent extinction, due in large part (we hyptothesize) to a sudden influx of Homo erectus. The closest thing to a mainstream science explanation of sasquatch is that Gigantopithicus never did go extinct, and that it does well to avoid us, seeing how our ancestors depleted their population so.
Paul Freeman and Grover Krantz
That’s by no means an exhaustive list, just the first few hits that popped up when I put “Bigfoot hunter” into a search engine. But really, you haven’t seen the scads of Bigfoot, Nessie, and ghost specials that have been produced over the years? You haven’t seen books and magazines on these topics?
Two years ago I was driving home at about 4pm, between Cocoa and Rockledge, FL. on I-95 southbound. about 100 yards ahead of me I see something 'loping' across the road. I slowed and pulled to the side to see if it was what I thought. There, sitting at the tree/brush/fenceline was a Florida panther. We looked at each other for maybe 5 seconds, and off into the brush he went. I thought it my obligation to notify the Game and Wildlife authorities of the sighting, since they are endangered. The reception I recieved on the phone was one of disbelief, or mis-identification. Sorry, I know what the loping gate of felines looks like, and this one was big with a very long tail. I guess my point is, that my story was dismissed by the agency that needs to track and protect this species, because it shouldn't have been there.
I also saw a black Fla. panther outside a KOA in Sarasota Fl. about 25 years ago. Nobody really believed that one either.
I will also confirm that those are Palmetto tree/plants in the photo, and they very in size. Seeing these alot in Fl. I’d guess that the object of the photo would be about 3’ in a crouched position (not overall ht.).
If you’ve had the chance to see the composite night photo of the earth, notice the very dark area in south Florida called ‘the everglades’. I’d bet a months pay there are still plenty of unkown species. May I point out how recently indigineous crocodiles were found there?
For the OP, yes, that is a photo worth considering. Am I sold on there being a skunk ape? I can’t dismiss it with 100% certainty just because someone tells me “It can’t be there.”
later, Tom.
I think you’re all missing the really important issue:
was Skunk Ape allowed to vote???
[sub] sorry. I tried really, really, hard to resist.[/sub]
FTR on the OP, I am part of the group who says “gee, interesting photo”, but absent any physical remains, evidence etc. Yes, I know about the prehistorical fishies turning up, but ya know, there’s vast amounts of ocean that’s involved, vs. a finite amount of physical land. For an animal to continue through the ages, breeding, living and dieing, all within stones’ throw of rampant overpopulation by humans, all without any physical evidence defies reason, IMHO.
RD:
I agree with your statement that we have to be very careful, here. Let’s start with the above statement. It seems to me that basic statistics would lead us to believe that a Gaussian distribution is exactly what we would expect from such reports! I don’t have a library of Cryptozoology available to me; can you please summarize his reasoning on this point?
Also, this is a pretty good link for Gigantopithecus blacki. It reiterates what I’ve been saying, that this ape was tropical, remains being found only in Southeast China and Indochina; lots of teeth remains have been recovered there, but none in North America. The species appears to have gone extinct about 400,000 years ago. The teeth are indisputably herbivorous, indicating a diet of fruit and grains, prompting in me the further question of what the sasquatch eats in the Pacific northwest and WOULD have eaten during a migration over the Bering land bridge (at least the skunk ape lives in a region with fruit, although, again, it would have to have ancestors at some point adapted to the food available in Alaska).
The author of the article briefly mention towards the end the theory about Gigantopithecus=sasquatch, but he clearly doesn’t take it very seriously and doesn’t try to address the issues I’ve raised here.
The sasquatch hunters you mentioned seemed to be in consensus on a number of issues:
1.)Doing this is harder than hell, especially independently. We have day jobs, folks.
2.)We were out in the field, spending a good deal of energy just trying…you know…not to DIE, for a short period of time, and while we didn’t stumble upon any corpses (the only “proof” anybody will ever accept), we found footprints, ass-prints in one case (“The cast of Bigfoot’s buttocks has been closely examined. Grover Krantz, a physical anthropologist, wildlife biologist John Bindernagel and primate anatomist Jeff Meldrum have concluded the imprint is not attributable to any recognized animal species. It most likely was made by a living Sasquatch, they concluded.” Gee…sounds discouraging), recorded cries (the Six Rivers account is especially intriguing…to wit: “Finally, Darwin has asked me to quote his conclusion on these calls, thus: ‘In my opinion, after having heard audio recordings of supposed Sasquatch calls, which I myself was broadcasting in the field, and from what I know of different properties of sound, including many specific aspects of the human vocal system, having studied it for years, I can think of no animal, other than, perhaps, the purported Sasquatch, that can produce such sounds.’”), found hair and fecal matter. Also, while we were deep in bear country, in the words of the Six Rivers site, “only one clear, unambiguous track of a black bear was found during the same period—I made a cast of it—this despite the area probably containing the highest concentration of bears anywhere in the world.”
3.)While the corpse still alludes us, there’s plenty of good reason to suspect that this creature exists. One mentioned the anatomical correctness of many of the purported footprints, and that this was information of which the typical hoaxer (who, by the way, risked his life perpatrating a dangerous prank he had no guarantee anyone would ever discover) would be ignorant.
Summary: these guys are finding everything BUT a corpse.
–
As for the bell-curve…while we remain ignorant as to whether or not such a creature, if it exists, would display a sexually dimorphic bell-curve, my interpretation of the study was that the very fact that it displayed a pattern common in nature seemed to support its authenticity. Quite frankly, I don’t understand what it is you’re contesting.
And as for the Giganto…the webpage you mentioned was the one I consulted, as well.
Its a man. Its a monkey suit. Get over it.
“It’s a man. It’s a monkey suit. Get over it.”
Well…that’s all I needed to here. I’m convinced, Gorka. Thank you for finally resolving this thorny issue with your trenchant commentary.
Sorry, Head, but since what obviously happened to you couldn’t possibly have happened to you…you are, at best, ignorant and/or, at worst, a liar. It’s just that simple, buddy.
I’m being sarcastic, by the way.