yahoo news is reporting a story about a giant ape called Gigantopithecus blackii. To my skeptical eye, it looks like someone pulled a fast one on yahoo. every google search i’ve done turns up links to bigfoot “researchers” talking about this aminal.
anyone know of a legitimate source to debunk/confirm this thing?
Pleistocene giant ape, contemporary with “humans” (members of Genus Homo) living in the same area of mountainous Southeast Asia. It is for real, with some confirmed fossil finds. Naturally it’s been a hot topic with all the “cryptozoological researchers,” but that doesn’t suggest anything about the validity of the legitimate research about it.
National Geographic had an interesting piece a couple of years ago by the researchers who were then investigating the remains and searching for more in the general area that the fossils were found.
The remake of King Kong will be in theatres for Xmas.
I suspect a connection between the articles.
No, G. Blackii is a genuine fossil find, the largest primate known to have ever lived. But there is a tale floating around on the Internet about some gorilla sized chimpanzees supposedly living in Congo. They’re mentioned in Wikipedia and one or two other places, but authoritative cites are rare to nonexistent.
I never suggested that G. Blackii was not real.
I merely suspect the cause of its getting press right around this time.
Yeah, G. blacki (one “i”) was a very large ape that lived in Asia, estimated to have gone extinct about 5M years ago. Here’s a decent article about it.
The Congo chimp that you’re thinking of (can’t remember what it was called) is just a chimp. I’ve seen the pictures, and it just looks like you’re everyday chimp.
As Snopes never tires of reminding us, the Yahoo news pages include a couple of supermarket tabloids as “sources”. So now and again there’ll be an Elvis Lives! item mixed in with the real news. The obviously silly ones are mostly ignored by the readership, but the borderline cases get spread as real news.
I’m not suggesting this particular article is a fake.
Am I the only one to whom the Latin name sounds like a horrible racist joke? ‘Giant-o-pithecus blacky’ for crying out loud!
Apparently, however, it has a valid derivation:[
](http://www.uiowa.edu/~bioanth/giganto.html)But it is very easy to understand how it could raise massive red flags.
There’s no reason to consider this articlce a fake. The species mentioned has been known to science for decades, and Bigfoot aficionados have been latching onto to since it was first discovered. Any popular press reporting about G. blacki is going to mention bigfoot-- that’s how they get people interested in reading the article!
i remember when yahoo reported that Andy Kaufman was alive and well.
i was suspicious because the linked source is heavy on the bigfoot/ufo/loch ness monster stories.
That’s a real stretch. If a scientist had meant “black,” the name would be nigra. To anyone who actually knew Latin, and thus knew the meaning of the genus name, it would be obvious that “blacki” would refer to someone named “Black,” rather than to the color (or to blacks).
Colibri: Well, it was weak. That’s why I said bad racist joke, as opposed to the highbrow racist joke that would have been made by Klansmen who studed Latin and the scientific system of binomial nomenclature.
From what little I’ve been able to piece together ( the Internet being loaded with G. blacki=Yeti speculation), the original type fossils from China were of Pliocene age, being, as John Mace notes, about 5,000,000 years old. Paleontological fieldwork in the Southeast Asian mountains, done within the last decade, seem to have identified a population that hung on in that area well into the Pleistocene, being contemporary with Homo erectus.
