144 replies to this topic

[Jeff Albertson]

cormac mac airt, on 12 December 2012 - 05:51 PM, said:

So you think this is possible and with no real explanation of how it was mis-represented:



What doesn't set right with me about the Bigfoot claim is much the same with the Neanderthal/HSS mating claim. That being that if one started with a small population of Bigfoot having mated with HSS females, since there is no evidence of the continuation of Bigfoot Y Chromosomal DNA (possibly due to their being sterile) one quickly runs out of BF males to continue mating with the females. So how can the line continue for 15,000 years?

cormac

So far there is no evidence to judge it on if evidence is show in a peer revied journal then I can tell you if it is impossable, I can not go by rummors what is  said about it. Once the peer revied journal is released I can judge the evidence, to the best of our curent understanding of science.

[cormac mac airt]

Jeff Albertson, on 12 December 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

So far there is no evidence to judge it on if evidence is show in a peer revied journal then I can tell you if it is impossable, I can not go by rummors what is  said about it. Once the peer revied journal is released I can judge the evidence, to the best of our curent understanding of science.

I can tell you what the evidence can't show. And that's that DNA can change from human to non-human in 2 years, which is what the claims have done. THAT'S impossible.

cormac

[Jeff Albertson]

cormac mac airt, on 12 December 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

I can tell you what the evidence can't show. And that's that DNA can change from human to non-human in 2 years, which is what the claims have done. THAT'S impossible.

cormac

I can not see how you can do this by not knowing the where the DNA that been sequenced without doing a cladistics and applying this to phylogenetics? The fossil record is imcomplete let alone we don't know if bigfoot is repersented in the fossil rercord. What if bigfoot is Meganthropus (Homo erectus paleojavenicus? we do need a body for morphometrics to best determine if bigfoot is in the fossil record). Science is consently taking in new  idea and changing old way of thinking. If this was in the 1970's (if I rember right) we would be having this same confersation on how animals relay on photosynthesis for energy to live, and how it would be impossible by information know at the time.

[QuiteContrary]

Imo, Bigfoot has always asked us to think way way waaaaaaay outside the laws of nature.
And "proving" bf in the lab will be no different.

[cormac mac airt]

Jeff Albertson, on 12 December 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

I can not see how you can do this by not knowing the where the DNA that been sequenced without doing a cladistics and applying this to phylogenetics? The fossil record is imcomplete let alone we don't know if bigfoot is repersented in the fossil rercord. What if bigfoot is Meganthropus (Homo erectus paleojavenicus? we do need a body for morphometrics to best determine if bigfoot is in the fossil record). Science is consently taking in new  idea and changing old way of thinking. If this was in the 1970's (if I rember right) we would be having this same confersation on how animals relay on photosynthesis for energy to live, and how it would be impossible by information know at the time.

I'm not doing anything. That was Ketchum's own claim a couple of years ago, that the DNA was fully modern human. Now she's claiming it's a hybrid. If you have a problem with the claim, take it up with her. Like I said before, DNA doesn't change.

cormac

[QuiteContrary]

Jeff Albertson, on 12 December 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

I can not see how you can do this by not knowing the where the DNA that been sequenced without doing a cladistics and applying this to phylogenetics? The fossil record is imcomplete let alone we don't know if bigfoot is repersented in the fossil rercord. What if bigfoot is Meganthropus (Homo erectus paleojavenicus? we do need a body for morphometrics to best determine if bigfoot is in the fossil record). Science is consently taking in new  idea and changing old way of thinking. If this was in the 1970's (if I rember right) we would be having this same confersation on how animals relay on photosynthesis for energy to live, and how it would be impossible by information know at the time.

Hey, thanks Jeff,  for bringing up Meganthropus. However, I find the part I bolded below in the article goes against what has never found in searching for bigfoot, yet were found for Meganthropus: remains and overly large tools and proof of intelligence  that would, imo,  make advancement/progress of its descendents living among us today noticeable, obvious, found by now.


Meganthropus


(Redirected from Homo erectus palaeojavanicus)

Meganthropus is a subspecies of the extinct hominid species, Homo erectus. Its full name in binomial nomenclature is Homo erectus palaeojavanicus although it was once called Meganthropus palaeojavanicus. Meganthropus was given a subspecies classification to distinguish it from other fossilized representatives of Homo erectus on account of its enormous size. Based on scant, but adequate, existing fossilized remains, H. e. palaeojavanicus has been estimated to have stood roughly 9 feet tall (= 2.75 m) and weighed roughly 750 to 1000 pounds (= 340-450 kg). Remains of this subspecies, including remnants of its cranium, lower jaw, and femur, have been estimated to be roughly 1 million years old.
Meganthropus is a good example of the great variation that existed in the Homo erectus line that is only equalled among representatives of the Homo genus by the similar variations found in modern humans. Its remains were discovered in Indonesia and in Australia where another subspecies of Homo erectus, Homo erectus soloensis, has also been discovered. Although once not considered to be of the Homo genus due to its seemingly improbable size for a hominid, Meganthropus remains were found along with tools normally associated with the Acheulean era, but of great size, making it difficult to refute the intelligence of the titanic hominid.

http://biosphere.bio...palaeojavanicus

Edited by QuiteContrary, 12 December 2012 - 07:48 PM.

[Sakari]

Has there ever been a animal said to exist from DNA results alone, and no other evidence at all?

[cormac mac airt]

Sakari, on 12 December 2012 - 07:52 PM, said:

Has there ever been a animal said to exist from DNA results alone, and no other evidence at all?

No.

It should also be pointed out that the concensus view of Science does not claim that Meganthropus is a subspecies of Homo erectus. Its actual placement is a matter of much debate as well as the claims of its gigantic size. Neither debate of which has been satisfactorily settled.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 12 December 2012 - 08:05 PM.

[Sakari]

cormac mac airt, on 12 December 2012 - 07:58 PM, said:

No.

cormac

Exactly.

[JGirl]

Jeff Albertson, on 12 December 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Science is full of claims that where considered imposable,  I see no promblem with this, as long as the science backs up the claim by a peer revied paper and the science is sound.

i truly hope you've stocked up on provisions for the big wait on this

Edited by JGirl, 12 December 2012 - 08:05 PM.

[Jeff Albertson]

QuiteContrary, on 12 December 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

Hey, thanks Jeff,  for bringing up Meganthropus. However, I find the part I bolded below in the article goes against what has never found in searching for bigfoot, yet were found for Meganthropus: remains and overly large tools and proof of intelligence  that would, imo,  make advancement/progress of its descendents living among us today noticeable, obvious, found by now.


Meganthropus


(Redirected from Homo erectus palaeojavanicus)

Meganthropus is a subspecies of the extinct hominid species, Homo erectus. Its full name in binomial nomenclature is Homo erectus palaeojavanicus although it was once called Meganthropus palaeojavanicus. Meganthropus was given a subspecies classification to distinguish it from other fossilized representatives of Homo erectus on account of its enormous size. Based on scant, but adequate, existing fossilized remains, H. e. palaeojavanicus has been estimated to have stood roughly 9 feet tall (= 2.75 m) and weighed roughly 750 to 1000 pounds (= 340-450 kg). Remains of this subspecies, including remnants of its cranium, lower jaw, and femur, have been estimated to be roughly 1 million years old.
Meganthropus is a good example of the great variation that existed in the Homo erectus line that is only equalled among representatives of the Homo genus by the similar variations found in modern humans. Its remains were discovered in Indonesia and in Australia where another subspecies of Homo erectus, Homo erectus soloensis, has also been discovered. Although once not considered to be of the Homo genus due to its seemingly improbable size for a hominid, Meganthropus remains were found along with tools normally associated with the Acheulean era, but of great size, making it difficult to refute the intelligence of the titanic hominid.

http://biosphere.bio...palaeojavanicus

The thing is we have no evidence for or aganist if bi****ot use tools assuming bigfoot is real.Intresting what is said about Megatrupus do you have any journal refernces for the height by any chance I don't keep up with antropology or have taking any class on it yet.It would be intresting to see a journal on the phylogentics to. It hard to determine what is real in cyperspace. I personal do not think that it is Megathrupus (if bigfoot is real) but resarcher have suggested in based on anadotal evidence of the patty film the sagitily creasted compared to the skull reconstructed by Dr. Grover Krantz the most notable person saying this is Mike from the Bigfoot Discovery Museum.

[QuiteContrary]

No, I just googled from your post and that article came up. Which as usual, came from physical evidence, something we can't find for bigfoot.

[Jeff Albertson]

QuiteContrary, on 12 December 2012 - 08:35 PM, said:

No, I just googled from your post and that article came up. Which as usual, came from physical evidence, something we can't find for bigfoot.

I agree there is no Emperical evidence for bigfoot I keep a open mind on the subject though. But I am not sure on the arctuace of the claims such as in height, and phlyogene is peer revied or just cyberspace claims.

[Jeff Albertson]

JGirl, on 12 December 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

i truly hope you've stocked up on provisions for the big wait on this

You need to read the rest of my post to understand that I am not closed minded on the subject, but willing to look at evidence presented. I don't need any provisions as it does not effect my views on bigfoot.

[Sakari]

Jeff Albertson, on 12 December 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

You need to read the rest of my post to understand that I am not closed minded on the subject, but willing to look at evidence presented. I don't need any provisions as it does not effect my views on bigfoot.

Just make sure you do not open your mind so much that your brains fall out.