or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Finding Bigfoot
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Finding Bigfoot - Page 27

post #391 of 743
Thread Starter 
I think another potential source for the large ancient human is Meganthropus. Unfortunately the number of finds associated with this sub-species is very small. From what has been found its been estimated they were 8 feet tall and weighted between 400 - 600 pounds.


post #392 of 743
^There was early speculation to that effect, but it is by no means certain that Meganthropus was, in fact, a giant.
post #393 of 743
Thread Starter 
With the limited data there is, its much larger than the other Homo Erectus derived species alive at the time. It seems to be somewhere between Erectus and Giganticopithicus.

Even without Meganthropus, Giganticopithicus is impossible to refute, and we're talking about an 11 foot ape.

Giganticopithicus is compelling for me because of its Asian origins which lend credence to the idea of Yeti feeding Sasquatch in N America. What I cannot explain is this notion of the split happening 15k years ago. That doesn't add up.
post #394 of 743
^The skull reconstructed by Grover Kranz wasn't that big. I think Meganthropus had a very big jaw and that threw the size estimates off.
post #395 of 743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel View Post

^The skull reconstructed by Grover Kranz wasn't that big. I think Meganthropus had a very big jaw and that threw the size estimates off.

This is not my strongest area, but that said, my understanding of the Kranz reconstruction was he speculated it was 9 feet + tall and 600 to 700 pounds. There have been finds since then which lend credence to the idea it was significantly larger than Erectus. 8 feet? Who knows, we dont know enough, but its safe to say it was larger.
post #396 of 743
^Well, Krantz's reconstructed head is a good deal smaller than my head. Obviously, my cranial dome is a good deal bigger, but then my jaw is a good deal smaller. If the critter was anywhere near even seven feet tall, it sure must have been a pinhead. I mean, I'm a fairly big guy, but I'm not that big!
post #397 of 743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel View Post

^Well, Krantz's reconstructed head is a good deal smaller than my head. Obviously, my cranial dome is a good deal bigger, but then my jaw is a good deal smaller. If the critter was anywhere near even seven feet tall, it sure must have been a pinhead. I mean, I'm a fairly big guy, but I'm not that big!

I'm mixing up names. I'm thinking of a guy named Franz Weidenreich. Problem with Meganthropus is so few bones so its hard to judge.


This is pretty cool, if you sort by age you can see how we've changed. There are some pretty BF looking mofos in our past...


http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species
post #398 of 743
At last, the search is over. I have found Bigfoot and solved the mystery.

post #399 of 743
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post


This is pretty cool, if you sort by age you can see how we've changed. There are some pretty BF looking mofos in our past...


http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species

Yeah, but almost all the "BF-looking mofos" are little guys. I don't think any of the prehumans there is larger than a modern human.
post #400 of 743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel View Post

Yeah, but almost all the "BF-looking mofos" are little guys. I don't think any of the prehumans there is larger than a modern human.

We're regularly discovering more and more variations of humans. We found homo floresiensis (the hobbits) a few years ago, they are 1/2 our size, why wouldn't it be possible for something to be 2x our size we just haven't found yet?

Gigantopithecus is proven and its 10 feet tall. That right there says there is space in between. And Gigantopithecus existed even 100,000 years ago, yesterday in evolutionary terms and along side of modern humans. Krantz even suggested it was bi-pedal.



______________


Breaking news:

https://www.facebook.com/norbenp
Quote:
I am currently uploading a video from a recent trip out with fellow researcher Justin Smith that took place on 1-8-2013, as many friends have been watching our progress in not only locating but trying to decide if the Plum Creek Tribe as we call them, are just moving through an area or have an established home in our current research area, Well , I beleive we got one, not a black gaseous Gorrilla looking entity, or even the massive Whitey at 30 yds plus peeking, By using my most trusted longtime technique of filming behind and around me, we have a subject that shows up as clear as day moving on our flank and ducking in the weeds as we move around, the individual has very bushy long hair that even appears a slight blond as the sunlight catches the hair, many stills of this stalker will come, but I wanted to release the video first so all can witness how two grown men , both former lawmen, can be stalked within 15 feet , and never even notice or hear the subject . This video , I am so exited about I can hardly stay calm..the hair is so long it looks like a female human, what we can both agree on at this point is that we were the only ones there that morning, and who the hell is stalking people on this very secluded trail head.The subject does their little appearence near a log structure that was built looking like a representation of a cell phone tower, which stands at least 14 feet tall...stay tuned...Mark , C.S.R.
post #401 of 743
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

We're regularly discovering more and more variations of humans. We found homo floresiensis (the hobbits) a few years ago, they are 1/2 our size, why wouldn't it be possible for something to be 2x our size we just haven't found yet?

Gigantopithecus is proven and its 10 feet tall. That right there says there is space in between. And Gigantopithecus existed even 100,000 years ago, yesterday in evolutionary terms and along side of modern humans. Krantz even suggested it was bi-pedal.



______________


Breaking news:

https://www.facebook.com/norbenp

A) Gigantopithecus were not hominins so they are hardly relevant, and
B) estimates of their height come mainly from fossilised teeth and jaws and range from as low as 6 feet up to around 10 feet so it is simply not true that they are "proven" to be "10 feet tall", and
C) they may have existed as recently as 100,000 years ago but that says nothing about their evolutionary history or closeness with modern humans or "Big Feetses". Our most recent common ancestor would have lived at least 13 million years ago when the rest of the great ape's ancestors speciated from the ancestors of the orangutan. The orangutan being the nearest living relative of Gigantopithecus. Not "yesterday in evolutionary terms".
post #402 of 743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

A) Gigantopithecus were not hominins so they are hardly relevant, and
B) estimates of their height come mainly from fossilised teeth and jaws and range from as low as 6 feet up to around 10 feet so it is simply not true that they are "proven" to be "10 feet tall", and
C) they may have existed as recently as 100,000 years ago but that says nothing about their evolutionary history or closeness with modern humans or "Big Feetses". Our most recent common ancestor would have lived at least 13 million years ago when the rest of the great apes ancestors speciated from the ancestors of the orangutan. The orangutan being the nearest living relative of Gigantopithecus. Not "yesterday in evolutionary terms".

My intention was never to suggest interbreeding, only that a very large relative of ours is possible. And that an ape that size lived along side us. The point being that if it was that large, then there had to be an ancestry which allowed for that size. I'd speculate that the common ancestor is yet undiscovered.

It's true that there is no hip or leg bone to further establish the size, but come on, 6 feet with a monster skull like that? No way. A gorilla can stand 6 ft.


post #403 of 743
Yeah, but 6 feet is pretty much top-end for a gorilla, and 5'4" to 5'6" is more common. A man 6' is unremarkable, and one 5'4" is pretty runty (at least in America), yet look how much bigger the gorilla skull is. Do we even have a complete giganto skull anyway or is that thing an imaginative restoration?
post #404 of 743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel View Post

Yeah, but 6 feet is pretty much top-end for a gorilla, and 5'4" to 5'6" is more common. A man 6' is unremarkable, and one 5'4" is pretty runty (at least in America), yet look how much bigger the gorilla skull is. Do we even have a complete giganto skull anyway or is that thing an imaginative restoration?

AFAIK, not complete.

Its pretty unrealistic to imagine a skull that much larger is shorter. Especially since its narrower than a gorilla. It makes sense its huge.
post #405 of 743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel View Post

Yeah, but 6 feet is pretty much top-end for a gorilla, and 5'4" to 5'6" is more common. A man 6' is unremarkable, and one 5'4" is pretty runty (at least in America), yet look how much bigger the gorilla skull is. Do we even have a complete giganto skull anyway or is that thing an imaginative restoration?

AFAIK, not complete.

Its pretty unrealistic to imagine a skull that much larger is shorter. Especially since its narrower than a gorilla. It makes sense its huge.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › Finding Bigfoot