
Patty, the alleged sasquatch in the legendary 1967 Patterson footage
This October will be the 50th anniversary of the legendary Patterson footage, widely considered the single best evidence for the existence of Sasquatch (a bipedal ape believed to live in the Pacific Northwest). The Patterson footage is a piece of video captured by Roger Patterson, a rodeo cowboy in his 30s who headed out to the Pacific Northwest with his buddy Bob Gimlin to make a documentary about Sasquatch, and returned with footage that has fascinated the World for the last half century.
To skeptics, the film is just a man in a monkey suit, but to believers, it’s indisputable proof that Sasquatch exists. Supporters cite the extreme height, powerful muscle movements, and non-human limb proportions and walk, and the fact that it was much harder to find a realistic costume in the 1960s, as proof that the video is authentic. Watch the video and judge for yourself.
I must admit I’m a skeptic, and it’s mostly because what are the odds that the very people who were trying to get sasquatch on tape would be lucky enough to do so. Much more likely that this was a scam to get publicity by some self-promoting aspiring film makers.
I also think that believing in Sasquatch (as some HBDers do) is somewhat inconsistent with believing in racial differences in intelligence, because if high intelligence did not evolve until humans migrated North (a major tenet of HBD), how could something as dumb as an ape have walked to North America?
Indeed the strongest evidence that mainstream science marshals against Sasquatch is the fossil record’s remarkably consistency in showing no apes have ever been indigenous to North America.
None.
Or have they?
The scientific consensus is that modern humans did not leave Africa until about 70,000 years ago and did not colonize North America until about 15,000 to 24,000 years ago, however as commenter Melo informed me, there’s shocking evidence that someone or something was making stone tools in California, 130,0000 years ago!
However MeLo cautioned:
While it is a very interesting discovery the evidence isn’t really strong. From what i’ve read they didn’t find any hominin fossils or tools, just rocks that could have been tools and a mastodon fossil that has wear and damage similar to other prey of archaic humans.
It’s very possible that the mastodon died 130,000 years ago, but was “dug up” and then broken and butchered by native north american homo sapiens. Further studies need to be constructed in order for a more clear picture to resonate within the details.
However if this really is evidence of 130,000 year-old tool making in North America, then who, or what, made them, since modern humans were confined to Africa at that time? Is it possible that some sub-human hominin made it to North America before we did, and that Sasquatch are the descendants of these things? If sub-human hominins only went extinct because they were replaced by modern humans, and modern humans didn’t arrive in the Americas until relatively recently, and only in small numbers in places like Canada, then perhaps such a creature could have survived.
An ancient legend
If you get some Native Americans drunk enough, they’ll tell you that he’s still out there. Some kind of demented creature, half-man, half-beast, surviving in the wilderness, raping Native American women for centuries. The hybridized offspring of these unwanted sex acts were said to be very slow, and have trouble learning Native American language and customs.
The skeptics
Scientists dismiss sasquatch as just a myth because such a large creature (2 to 3 meters tall and weighing over 500 lbs) could not possibly have gone undetected all this time, especially given the large population such a creature would need to be reproductively viable.
However believers note that the mountain gorilla wasn’t discovered until 1902 and the Komodo dragon wasn’t discovered until 1912, and probably in both cases, they were also dismissed as myth until a white scientist saw one, although admittedly, nothing big has been discovered lately. About decade ago there was talk of a giant new ape being discovered in the Congo, but this turned out to just be another type of chimp.
Finding undiscovered large land animals is a bit like finding undiscovered multi-billionaires. In the first few years Forbes magazine began tracking the richest people, there were many super rich people who had evaded detection, but now, almost all have been found.
Still, extinct hominins are increasingly being discovered, and some having existed more recently in time than thought. If there is currently only one extant hominin (us) then this is perhaps the first time in millions of years that this has occurred.
Especially interesting is Homo floresiensis, an extremely short bipedal hominin thought to have lived as recently as 12,000 years ago. If such a creature could have lived so recently, perhaps it’s still alive, and this has created much speculation that it is Orang Pendek, an alleged bipedal sub-human primate less than 5 feet tall that Indonesian locals have long claimed to have seen. However the idea that floresiensis could still be alive took a hit when it was discovered that their remains were not only 12,000 years old, as originally thought, but over 50,000 years old.
And of course Sasquatch is vastly larger than Orang Pendek, and thus should be much easier to detect. On the other hand the Pacific Northwest is huge. As a Canadian I can tell you there’s nothing scarier than flying solo over British Columbia’s 62 million acres of century old forest, and an astonishing 73 aircrafts flying from California to Alaska simply vanished, never to be recovered from the utter vastness of the forest.
If 73 aircrafts can hide in the Pacific Northwest, then why not sasquatch, especially if it’s an endangered species with only a few dozen individuals left?
The perfect hoax
If I was going to attempt one of the many sasquatch hoaxes that have been tried over the decades, there would be two people I would contact. First, Sun Fang, the tallest woman in the World, with an astonishing height of 7’3″.
I would try to pay her to put on an authentic looking monkey mask and then place fake hair all over her naked body and then run through the Pacific North West as I filmed. No one would believe a woman could be that tall and so it would be assumed to be a man in a monkey suit, but what monkey suit could have such realistic naked breasts (since it would be an actual woman), and thus the film would be judged authentic.
But to please even the hard-core skeptics, I would need DNA evidence and for this I would need a second person. If Albert Perry, a recently deceased African American who lived in South Carolina, has a living male descendant, I would try to pay him for a sample of his hair, since it’s known that Perry had an extremely rare Y chromosome. Unlike virtually all other men, who trace their male heritage back to a man who lived about 100,000 years, ago, Perry’s male lineage diverged 338,000 years ago.
I would tell the scientists that prior to getting the female sasquatch on video, there had been a male, but he ran too fast for me to film but I got a hair sample. When the scientists would DNA test it, they probably wouldn’t remember Albert Perry (if they heard of him at all), and would be stunned that the hair sample’s Y chromosome diverged 338,000 years old, and see this is as evidence of an archaic proto-human.
Further, when CNN came to interview, I would talk like a country bumpkin so no one would suspect I’d have the sophistication to pull off such an elaborate hoax.
Too bad I’m not a sociopath. I could have been really, really rich 🙂
“…how could something as dumb as an ape have walked to North America?”
I’m pretty sure many animals walked to North America from Asia long before modern humans got there; e.g. bears, moose, wolves, the now extinct American horse, and many others that are found in both places. Apes like other animals are coverred in fur (Sasquatches like Japanese macaques—and earier hominins in colder climates, like EuropeanHeidelbergensis, some Asian Erectus, and teh early homonins found in the Causasus—would have been cold adapted). The ape Gigantopithicus made it to China, and there are monkeys elsewhere in Asia.
Erectus was supposedly “as dumb as an ape”, yet a ton of evidence has come out to the contrary.
Not as dumb as an ape, but much dumber than homo sapiens, or heidelbergensis, or neanderthals.
Also, some have claimed that sasquatch may be a primitive hominin (descended from homo erectus), other claims are; that it might be an ape in the chimp/human /gorilla lineage, and that it is descended from gigantopithicus (whose closest living relative is the orangutan).
To Jm8,
“Also, some have claimed that sasquatch may be a primitive hominin (descended from homo erectus), other claims are; that it might be an ape in the chimp/human /gorilla lineage, and that it is descended from gigantopithicus (whose closest living relative is the orangutan).”
I’m more confident in a hominid answer given it’s bipedal nature and physique (assuming the footage is legit) rather than some missing link as the only creatures with resemblance to the LCA of Chimps, Gorillas, and Humans that I’m aware of with even remotely bipedal characteristics were smaller tree climbers like Orangutans.
In comparison, Gigantopithicus would’ve been primary a knuckle walker despite the popularity of bipedalism theory by Krantz, any associations like indicate a common tree-climbing ancestry based on modern understanding of bipedalism.
I’m more confident in a hominid answer given it’s bipedal nature and physique (assuming the footage is legit) rather than some missing link as the only creatures with resemblance to the LCA of Chimps, Gorillas, and Humans that I’m aware of with even remotely bipedal characteristics were smaller tree climbers like Orangutans.
I agree. If sasquatch were real, it would likely be a hominin rather than a descendent of the knuckle dragging gigantopithicus. Even though I think evolution’s progressive, it’s a stretch to think bipedalism would have independently evolved twice in primates at around the same time.
Some, such as Sasquatch researcher Jeff Meldrum, believe that it developed bipedalism independantly. Evidence (such as fom footprints—if even any such evidence is real) are said to show that its feet do not have arches or not in the way that hominin feet (which haven’t really changed too much since australopithecus) do, suggesting a sepparate developement.
Jm8,
You mean nigfoot when you talked about arches, correct?
In that case I could believe independent bipedalism but unlikely from a Gigantopithecus, probably something closer to Hominids if not a true one.
To Jm8
https://books.google.com/books?id=hPST5ZLI4dAC&pg=PA223&lpg=PA223&dq=gigantopithecus+footprints+arches&source=bl&ots=8I5YVJ5Hyj&sig=waNbY1qg2hYpN5UKXTq2x9wSnCw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVo9eSzePTAhVKsVQKHRYDBtYQ6AEITjAI#v=onepage&q=gigantopithecus%20footprints%20arches&f=false
Found his book regarding the topic, but his info on oreopithecus is now outdated.
https://news.utexas.edu/2013/07/25/extinct-ancient-ape-did-not-walk-like-a-human-study-shows
And even if it did, the specimen was quite smaller than Gigantopithecus, as apes who walk bipedally the most generally have smaller body size (bonobo) and gorillas generally exhibit this rarely on the ground.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2011/01/gorilla-walks-like-man-/1#.WRIjDfQrLrc
So if Gigantopithecus was at all capable at it’s theoretical size, likely not as long as even Gorillas without some plausible adaptation.
“Jm8,
You mean nigfoot when you talked about arches, correct?”
Yes. I meant bigfoot.
Australopithicus (the immediate ancestor of hominids, before the early/proto-hominid homo erectus) had arches.
Actually Jm8 Australopithecus was a hominid & a hominin
It was an ancestor of the genus homo is what you probably meant, but the term hominid includes humans and all apes, even chimps & gorillas
The term hominin includes humans and all bipedal apes i think
You’re look for a term for only all members of the homo genus but that term is not hominid or hominin
Actually jm8 i shouldn’t have corrected you because you might be right but you’re just using an older definition
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hominid
Scientists stupidly change the definition of words everytime a concept changes when they should be creating new words
so from a purely sexual preference perspective the most racist people in the US are…
according to dating websites…
???
white women.
which is weird…
i’m not a homo but there are lots of very handsome black men…and the average white man is disgusting!
whatever.
it proves my point.
the division occurs at puberty.
something like 90% of white women are 100% un-interested in non-white men.
and that’s heteros.
even weirder is that male homosexuals are yuge racists too…in the sexual sense.
milo notwithstanding.
just goes to show what mugabe has always said…
all love is narcissism.
all sex is masturbation.
there’s beer girl and that silurian girl from hs. other than that, i’m a total ir-ist! blue eyes or…not interested.
why? see above quote from mugabe.
afaik i have no non-blue eyed ancestors. and i know…back to my great great gps.
I like strawberry blonde girls.
This is completely false.
I would estimate about roughly 30-50% of white women are open to non-whites depending on who controls the media and culture in a country (it differs massively e.g. Australia vs UK).
Thats right!
I imagine if Denmark controlled the Chinese media, books and music it could engineer asian women to be all over blacky.
So its quite amazing that theres still some resistance to magic negro considering.
Women are herd animals. Media targets them more than men per se.
In my opinion, young white women in France would give the following answers if asked whether they are attracted to black men or not:
20% not at all
40% some of them look good
30% most of them look good
10% they usually look better than whites.
80% wouldn’t mind having a sexual experience with a black guy, there is even a non-negligible contingent of black fetishists in the female population. I guess a good third of young white women in France have at least kissed a black guy. maybe 20% have had full sexual intercourse, we’re just 5% of France’s male population so it’s not that bad, if accurate.
I think French white young women’s preference order is:
1- Dark European white
2- Middle Eastern
3- Mulatto
4- Fair European white
5- Black African
6- All other common races and mixes
7- North-East Asians
From what I can see thats closer than what Robert says.
But still very far off. Robert lacks the social intelligence and you lack the quant.
I estimate about 30%-35% of young women in London have had an experience of some sort with magic negroes based on some handy little techniques I use.
London is 16% black. So ~ X2.
As an aside women outside of London are markedly less open to it due to less herding, anonymity not being there, less hedonistic lifestyle, closer to family etc etc. I’ve noticed that a lot with the country girls I met.
Of the french girls I’ve met and lived with, I do see much more rac-ism. You can see it with then national teams – the English one has much more mulattoes.
I would estimate France as a 1.5 or 1 multiplier. So 9% black = mayb 10-12% have mudsharked there.
Afros figures are probably about right for Paris though, which ties in with my observation of the mudshark capital of Europe, London being of a magnitude higher in relative terms by our numbers. English men are notoriously feminine and gentle. Thats why they suffer!
The reason why the French soccer squad has fewer Mulattos is that Blacks in France are mostly African and Africans are a lot more endogamous than West Indians. A lot of them are Muslim and won’t marry a non-Muslim lady nor have children out of wedlock.
Black immigration to France is also more recent, it became significant in the 90s whereas Caribbean Blacks arrived en masse to the UK in the 60s.
It’s clear that France is less racist than the UK as far as blacks are concerned. The scapegoats here are the Arabs and Blacks aren’t the focus of xenophobic hostility.
I guess my estimates are about right for young urban women.
Logical inconsistency there for Afro – middle easterners/north africans number 2 would imply sth like 40% of french women have slept with muzzies.
Thats patently stupid.
I talked about young women. In younger cohorts, blacks are probably closer to 8% of the population, MENA maybe 15%.
MENA guys are a bit less integrated and less attracted to white girls than blacks. On the other hand, many Arabs and Turks do not live Muslim lives and pass for Southern Euros. So maybe 30% of young white chicks have had some sort of sexual experience with a MENA guy.
This is the type of question they ask at McKinsey e.g. how many test tubes are made a year in France?
My question was – and it was a fucking shitty one – estimate the size of the OTC FX hedging market for German SMEs.
That was the worst case scenario I was hoping against. But I got it a tiny bit of aid when I realised he was open to some less ‘scientific’ techniques and method.
The golden rule is – if the men are feminine, the women will abandon them.
I’ve lived in Asia for a while and that was what was happening. I’ve lived in London. And now my home nation. Its patently obvious that men who shave their womens heads for mudsharking or exile them are doing exactly what the instictive response should be to protect their genes and risk of community raising a foreignors baby.
And Denmark has known this for at least 80 years but lies about why masculine men have those ‘evil’ feelings.
Thats right!
was d b cooper killed by a sasquatch?
that’s the question!
you guessed it!
bill walton!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus
it’s obviously fake.
bigfoot walks like george jefferson….too much arm movement.
i can’t find a vid. sad!
it’s hilarious…the george jefferson walk.
One of the strangest arguments I’ve heard about the Patterson footage is that it must be real because no human could possibly walk like that. WTF?
That’s not an argument. It’s an assertion. And the people who believe the video are fools, seeing what they want to see because they’re looking for it and finding it. I find it hard to believe we’ve never found any remains of one. And I doubt this is it.
I think it’s erectus. I’ll do my article on this soon.
No its legit. Deal claimed bigfoot had a paternity test to see if he was the father.
That’s not an argument. It’s an assertion.
It’s an argument based on an assertion
“It’s an argument based on an assertion”
No it’s just an assertion. You can say that “it must be real, because no human can walk like that” could be an argument, but it’s fallacious since one can’t know all of human movement patterns. Just saying it “doesn’t look like a human walk” doesn’t make it an argument.
It’s the “argument by assertion” fallacy.
No you’re confusing the argument with the premise upon which it’s based.
The argument is valid, the premise upon which it’s based is not.
The premise is “the footage must be real” and the assertion is “because no human walks like that.”
“The argument is valid, the premise upon which it’s based is not.”
The argument is fallacious. I don’t want to take the time to point them out. Saying “X must be real cuz Y” is fallacious.
The assertion is “no human walks like that”, and that assertion is used for the argument as a whole. So if that assertion is wrong then the argument is not valid.
An invalid argument is when the conclusion is false but all of the premises are true. It’s also impossible to have a flash conclusion if all the premises are true. If the premises are true then the conclusion must be true.
The premise is “the footage must be real” and the assertion is “because no human walks like that.”
No, the premise is no human can walk like that. The conclusion is that the footage must be real.
An invalid argument is when the conclusion is false but all of the premises are true.
Well in this case both the conclusion and the premise are false, so by your own definition, it’s not an invalid argument. And the reason it’s not an invalid argument is because the logic is sound.
If no human can walk like that, it’s 100% logical to infer that the subject in the video is non-human, and thus the footage must be real. 100% valid argument. No logical fallacies at all.
The flaw lies in the assertion upon which the logic is based (the premise), not the logic itself.
Got it?
“No, the premise is no human can walk like that. The conclusion is that the footage must be real.”
“No human can walk like that” is an assertion. You are right though, I concede there. I wasn’t thinking my comment through fully.
“Well in this case both the conclusion and the premise are false, so by your own definition, it’s not an invalid argument. And the reason it’s not an invalid argument is because the logic is sound.”
P1: No human can walk like that ape in the video.
P2: If no human can walk like the ape in that video, then the video must be real.
C: Therefore the video must be real.
P1 needs to be proven. I contend that P1 is false, so now you need to show evidence for P1. Calling into question P1 calls into question the whole validity of the argument.
We can say “If ~A then B”, meaning “If no human can walk like that (~A) then it must be true (B)”. So if A then B. The opposite is A ^ B, meaning that’s the opposite, “If A then B”, or “If a human can walk like that then the video must be true”. Apparently, the man who said he dressed in the suit recreated the walk as well.
Yet, since the framerate cannot be established because the film is so shaky, this cannot be established. If the framerate were 24 fps, it’d be a human in an ape suit, but if it was 16 fps then it is possible it is ‘bigfoot’. So the framerate not being able to be established is a pretty big deal. The original camera needs to be found to establish the framerate and guess what? It can’t be found.
P1: No human can walk like that ape in the video.
P2: If no human can walk like the ape in that video, then the video must be real.
C: Therefore the video must be real.
No it’s more like:
P1: No human can walk like that
P2: The subject of the video walked like that
C: The subject of the video is not human
P1 needs to be proven. I contend that P1 is false, so now you need to show evidence for P1.
No I never claimed P1 was true.
Calling into question P1 calls into question the whole validity of the argument.
No it calls into question the conclusion of the argument, not the validity. What you don’t understand is that a false premise does NOT invalidate an argument, it just undermines its conclusion. Reliable conclusions require BOTH a valid argument AND true premises, and you can have one without the other. For example if the argument were:
P1: The subject of the video was bipedal
P2: Sasquatch is said to be bipedal
C: Therefore the subject of the video is sasquatch
In that case we have the opposite problem. Instead of a valid argument with a false premise, we have an invalid argument with true premises. So the validity of the argument is independent of the truthfulness of its premises, but BOTH are required to reach reliable conclusions.
But since you don’t believe me, maybe you’ll believe the skeptics guide:
In order for an argument to be considered valid the logical form of the argument must work – must be valid. A valid argument is one in which, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true also. However, if one or more premise is false then a valid logical argument may still lead to a false conclusion. A sound argument is one in which the logic is valid and the premises are true, in which case the conclusion must be true.
in honor of bigfoot…
btw, the above is not meant to make fun of black folk.
it’s meant to make fun of the system, and…
those black folk who believe in it.
and it is funny.
the white equivalent of ridicule is…
my mom loves this show.
she had me watch it on the Disney channel all the time.
my grandmother owned a hotel and a goat farm.
she was a millionaire and liked the show, Gilligan’s Island.
I Fear I May Have Integrated My People Into a Burning House.
what king saw at the end…
race wasn’t the issue.
the issue was class.
oprah was ms tennessee or something like that.
does peepee really not know what oprah looks like…to white men?
maybe not.
i have a crush on a half black/half jew dyke…technically bi…rebecca walker.
so…what’s the difference between her and oprah?
she has a caucasoid facial skeleton.
don’t know what it is. she may be ugly to other men. idk.
she draws me in.
Yes Mug of Pee, I’m well aware that Oprah’s not beautiful in the conventional sense, but that’s the point.
She had every disadvantage: an overweight very black looking black woman from a very poor & prole background, yet her huge brain gave her the adaptability to turn it all around to her advantage
she has a wonderful big heart
oprah looks like a gorilla.
VERY ugly.
Hahahaha.
turns me on.

I COULD HIT IT
MY GOD I’M GENIUS.
Bringing other conversation here.
Melo,
“Well don’t get too ahead yourselves. While it is a very interesting discovery the evidence isn’t really strong. From what i’ve read they didn’t find any hominin fossils or tools, just rocks that could have been tools and a mastodon fossil that has wear and damage similar to other prey of archaic humans.””
It was just the first thing that popped into my head. You even said it yourself that it was erectus—unless you were quoting an article you read, then apologies and source?
“It’s very possible that the mastodon died 130,000 years ago, but was “dug up” and then broken and butchered by native north american homo sapiens. Further studies need to be constructed in order for a more clear picture to resonate within the details.”
Sounds like a ‘just-so’ story. Would you say that most of archaeology is full of ‘just-so’ stories (or, their explanations of their findings)?
“Asian Erectus used rafts.”
“Source? Not that i doubt you, I just want to read more about it.”
http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~vaucher/History/Prehistoric_Craft/
http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041027/full/news041025-3.html
https://books.google.com/books?id=Fp-l8IEAFHQC&pg=PA409&lpg=PA409&dq=asian+erectus+used+rafts&source=bl&ots=TCeaW76b_M&sig=ZLQXrgN3xGo8Ld_Ou96L5Ujw9VU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj6wPiGkdrTAhWBSyYKHQuiAHE4ChDoAQgzMAY#v=onepage&q=asian%20erectus%20used%20rafts&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=otK9CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq=asian+erectus+used+rafts&source=bl&ots=nIZKSEXeVM&sig=o92i9VMe1PBIYeSkIo7JMirlzOU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj6wPiGkdrTAhWBSyYKHQuiAHE4ChDoAQg4MAc#v=onepage&q=asian%20erectus%20used%20rafts&f=false
Also, if floresiensis is erectus, then that’s proof they rafted/swam to Flores; same with habilis.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/04/22/the-evolutionary-puzzle-of-floresiensis/
Either way, a hominid got to Flores somehow, (either habilis, erectus, or the ancestor of floresiensis and habilis) and reconstructions of rafts (inb4 studies on raft reconstruction not being a good model for ancient rafts) have shown that it was possible that they could have done so ~2 mya.
Very interesting. I think it’s time to rethink the ‘dumb erectus’ meme. Too much evidence to the contrary.
“It was just the first thing that popped into my head. You even said it yourself that it was erectus—unless you were quoting an article you read, then apologies and source?”
It was in the article I posted, the highest possibility is either asian erectus or denisovan, but honestly the latter diverged form the former so…
“Sounds like a ‘just-so’ story.”
Not really, it’s just they try to claim something extraordinary with ordinary evidence. I mean no fossils or real tools at all, is a red flag.
Would you say that most of archaeology is full of ‘just-so’ stories (or, their explanations of their findings)?”
It’s not really fair to generalize an entire field of science, but yes archaeology is softer than most scientists but of course it depends on which component you’re specifically talking about.
“I think it’s time to rethink the ‘dumb erectus’ meme.”
You thought erectus was dumb?
“It was in the article I posted, the highest possibility is either asian erectus or denisovan, but honestly the latter diverged form the former so…”
Exactly. Those two are the only two I can think of. Combined with Asian erectus’ ability to possibly make rafts, it makes it plausible it may have been him.
“Not really, it’s just they try to claim something extraordinary with ordinary evidence. I mean no fossils or real tools at all, is a red flag.”
True. I want to read the paper but it’s not available yet. You’re right; we shouldn’t jump to conclusions based on small amounts of evidence with no teeth or bones, etc. But it’s fun to hypothesize/theorize about it.
“It’s not really fair to generalize an entire field of science, but yes archaeology is softer than most scientists but of course it depends on which component you’re specifically talking about.”
The AAA says “Archaeology is not a science”. The question is: does it have valid hypotheses/theories that can be tested and be disproven? Yes they can, so it is a science, but it is very very soft, almost psychology-like.
“You thought erectus was dumb?”
I’ve been arguing for the past 6 months that he wasn’t; it’s PP who thinks he was dumb.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/12/30/homo-erectus-was-one-stupid-monkey/
Then he ‘apologized’ to Homo erectus.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/12/25/i-apologize-to-homo-erectus/
It’s clear that erectus wasn’t dumb.
the highest possibility is either asian erectus or denisovan, but honestly the latter diverged form the former so…
I think denisovan diverged from heidelbergensis. If this finding is legit, I think it’s more likely to be denisovans or Neanderthals, just given the possible IQ requirements to get to North America. Or perhaps an undiscovered species.
“I think denisovan diverged from heidelbergensis”
Right. 400kya.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4947341/
“If this finding is legit, I think it’s more likely to be denisovans or Neanderthals, just given the possible IQ requirements to get to North America. Or perhaps an undiscovered species.”
“Possible IQ requirements “. ‘Nuff said. It’s just an assertion. See above, evidence that Asian erectus made rafts. Things migrate. Migration happens for a myriad of reasons. It doesn’t take intelligence to migrate. Reducing everything to IQ is extremely lazy, despite what you may believe. As I’ve said, and have compiled a ton of evidence for, erectus wasn’t “a dumb ape”.
RR, we know that within our genus, those species with larger brains were able to colonize colder and more distant lands, thus if a pre-human colonized North America, it’s logical to guess it was one of the bigger brained ones like Neanderthals or Denisovans.
Reducing everything to IQ is extremely lazy
At least i’m giving a reason. Your guess that it was erectus is based on absolutely nothing which is even lazier.
Bigger brains allow heat retention. That’s why brains get large. Pelvic width also matters for brain size as well. Climate plays a part in that too.
You always reduce brain size to IQ without thinking of other reasons for its evolution. My guess that it was erectus is due to his possible ability to make rafts. Even then it’s high conjecture because nothing was really found.
People need larger brains for heat dissipation. But keep believing it is due to IQ. It’s kinda cute.
Bigger brains allow heat retention. That’s why brains get large.
Yes that explains why brain size tripled in Africa. Because Africa’s so cold. What a fucking moron.
Pelvic width also matters for brain size as well. Climate plays a part in that too.
Yes and giving birth to bigger brained babies has nothing to do with it, right RR?
You always reduce brain size to IQ without thinking of other reasons for its evolution.
No I think about the OBVIOUS reason first RR, unlike you who assumes the least obvious reason. The function of the brain is to process information, so common sense suggests that’s the first selection pressure you should be looking for.
That’s no to deny heat retention wasn’t a factor in brain size evolution outside Africa, but if the North American hominins got to California from the North, then bigger brained hominins like Neanderthals and denisovans would have been more likely to survive the trip from the heat retaining perspective also. If they came from the South, than bigger brained hominids would have been more likely to have had the smarts to build better rafts.
My guess that it was erectus is due to his possible ability to make rafts. Even then it’s high conjecture because nothing was really found.
Well if erectus could build rafts, its more intelligent descendants could build better ones.
“RR, we know that within our genus, those species with larger brains were able to colonize colder and more distant lands, thus if a pre-human colonized North America, it’s logical to guess it was one of the bigger brained ones like Neanderthals or Denisovans.
Reducing everything to IQ is extremely lazy
At least i’m giving a reason. Your guess that it was erectus is based on absolutely nothing which is even lazier.”
Lets dig deeper.
http://www.ancient.eu/image/5958/
Neanderthals do appear to have a higher range by latitude, and the region that Asian Erectus had wasn’t that cold either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Asia#China
However, Another thing we need to consider is dates even if we assume that they took the Bering Strait.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denisovan
Earliest Denisovan findings in Siberia are much Younger than the 130k tools.
We could assume that the finds were the among the earliest or further range they ever got seeing how abrupt their Northern Passage was compared to their Southern one.
The Same goes for Siberian Neanderthals, who shared the same complex.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/humans-mated-neandertals-much-earlier-and-more-frequently-thought
There is this site which would be earlier, but possibly too young based on the intervals in the passage of 100k to 50k. It’s not even established whether or not they actually are Denisovans but it’s possible. They could also be 120k sapiens who arrived into Asia and possibly mixed with archaics there.
http://www.nature.com/news/teeth-from-china-reveal-early-human-trek-out-of-africa-1.18566
The Cold wouldn’t have been a big deal that that point as it was much warmer.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/04/unknown-humans-were-in-california-130000-years-ago-say-scientists/
Then by physiological observations, lets assume the female here in the video is legit.
While both Neanderthals and Asian Erectus were likely Hairer than Modern Humans, I would assume baded on divergence from Habilis that the Neanderthals’ genepool likely having a smaller frequency of such genes compared to Erectus.
Also noticable is the gorilla like “point” the marks the contours of the head, that being the sagittal crest which occurs to accomadate a large jaw in primate species.
This would be more prominent in Erectus than Neanderthals.
Then you have Dimensions, Female Neanderthals at about 156 cm and Female Asian Erectus at 144 cm, neither really having much of a comparative likelihood of being the 7 1/2 foot creature by this measure.
This is all assuming this creature is a known species or directly descends from a known old world species.
Phil78
I agree that if the video is legit, then it makes more sense to believe the alleged 130,000 year-old North American hominid was a sasquatch ancestor, which would make erectus a more likely candidate than Denisovan or neandetheral, given how primitive sasquatch looked. But I believe the video is a hoax.
Update, I notice despite my date assertions, the author of my 130k article points at denisovans or neanderthals.
This one, however, includes Erectus as a likely canindate.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/04/27/world/science-health-world/shattering-timeline-study-places-humans-america-115000-years-earlier-thought/#.WRB5gPQrLrc
I was also weary of whther or not Erectus would be capable of hunting mastodons, but recalled hunting similar creatures in the levant.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028689
“Yes that explains why brain size tripled in Africa. Because Africa’s so cold.”
That’s why the body got smaller to better dissipate heat, along with evolving sweat glands to better cool in the African Sun.
“What a fucking moron.”
Please try to be respectful, thank you.
“Yes and giving birth to bigger brained babies has nothing to do with it, right RR?”
Right. Natural selection for large brains leads to earlier childbirth and a need for higher intelligence to care for a more helpless infant:
http://www.pnas.org/content/113/25/6874.full
Our modeling has shown that the evolutionary dynamics of caring for neonates may select for intelligence, which in turn requires even more brainpower, pushing infants to be born even earlier to accommodate their larger brains.
Erectus had a wider pelvis than us; this isn’t new information to me.
“but if the North American hominins got to California from the North, then bigger brained hominins like Neanderthals and denisovans would have been more likely to survive the trip from the heat retaining perspective also.”
There is evidence of Neanderthals sailing 110 kya, but 200 kya “can’t be excluded”:
Click to access 10.1016%40j.jas.2012.01.032.pdf
How big were Denisovan brains?
Also, how could it be Neanderthals? How would they have made it to the Americas? They didn’t have the range to get to California; erectus did.
To pp,
BTW, at that point the strait would’ve been warmer as one of my links points out, so the Higher IQs of Denisovans or Neanderthals wouldn’t have matter as much it it was consistently cold.
Plus, assuming the Mastodon bones were real and the video still fake, Erectus has much more of a likelihood date wise.
Then there is the assumption that Asian Erectus never adaped further to the cold during it’s headstart into China, some more evidence that they eventually moved north due the climatic changes.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep02403
Who is to say that they would respond a similar way to the Interglacial period?
what is the ONE event that would make the world a better place?
france founders…
sinks into the north atlantic…
the only survivors are le pen voters.
awesome!
http://questfan.com/Page/The_Dark_Mountain.html
In the Quest Compound’s sporting room, Jonny Quest and Jessie Bannon play ping-pong while Hadji Singh and Bandit watch. A clattering on the window is revealed to be a curious raccoon, and Bandit chases him outside in the snow. The four return to the compound as Race looks on approvingly from a second-storey window. As he lies down to sleep, Iris informs him that there’s a disturbance in the engineering room—and inside, something resembling Bigfoot is lumbering around. Race Bannon discovers him, and Bigfoot throws him against a wall and exits. Jonny comes to Race’s side, then dons a coat and goes out in pursuit of the creature. Two hunters, Deke and Kane, see Bigfoot flee and shoot at him with laser-sighted rifles. As they try for a better shot, they catch sight of Jonny and fire upon him.
if i had a vagina…
i would want rebecca walker to fuck me with her big mulatto cock.
yummie!
You judge a man by his taste in women
looks like a cross between a mongoloid, a negroid and a yid
mannish-looking
just trying to make peepee feel better about her fetish for black women.
i think you mean witch-looking.
i like the witch look to some extent.
steffi graf is the paradigmatic case.
she is 9 years older than me, but I saw a girl just like her same age as me. she was at the church movie but I did not talk to her because I was upset from the movie and it looked like she was with someone. star wars the force awakens is a sad movie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaime_Ray_Newman
She looks like she’s had a lot of work done on her.
I can see the signs of a nose job and lip work
expensive plastic surgery and she’s still a 5/10
Hahahahaa…
Mug of Pee, I responded to your absurd comment on Le Pen vs. Macron debate. Your ignorance pissed me off.
I can’t stop laughing.
“The hybridized offspring of these unwanted sex acts were said to be very slow, and have trouble learning Native American language and customs.”
I’m going to frame this.
This is a topic that keeps on giving.
“and returned with footage that has fascinated the World”
Never heard about it in Europe. North America is not the world. Same with Oprah, she’s not famous here.
Just following on from the above. Its ok to use anecdotal evidence and extrapolate. Not in the – I know a jew and he wasn’t a fraud so they are all good honest people sense – but something like in my town of 20k people there are 4 petrol stations.
If I make the assumption, the stations are operating under perfect competition, this is as much as that population can bear etc etc and move on from that.
And say the assumption.
I wish my job was actually doing McKinsey/Bain interviews all day. Hahaha.