What Is The Origin Of Bigfoot And Is The Creature A Relative Of Humans Or A Species Of Hominid Which Developed Parallel To Us?
Editor’s Note: This is a post by Bigfoot Evidence contributor, Damian Bravo, a Sasquatch believer. You can join Damian's group Sasquatch Lives? on Facebook and the group's official page at www.sasquatchlives.com.In my quest to find the truth on the existence of Bigfoot, I found myself searching deeper into the world of paleontology and human evolution within it. It is common for many Bigfoot enthusiasts to believe that Bigfoot has some human-like traits. The interesting part of this idea is that no one has been able to prove this to the world, at least for now. So basically, just like my articles and ideas of what Bigfoot could be, they are just theories based more on ambiguous evidence with no true scientific evidence as of yet to support them.
Recently in the forests of Myanmar (in Asia), scientists discovered evidence that possibly support a theory in which early ancestors of higher primates such as monkeys, apes, and humans began their evolution in Asia. The scientists found some fossilized teeth which curiously resembled the teeth of another anthropoid in Libya (in Africa). If this theory is proven to be even remotely true, it can change the scientific view of our very own origins.
Here is a link to the article Shawn posted about the Myanmar find in case you missed it:
bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/07/scientists-find-evidence-that-suggests.html
Many scientists believe that many of the large creatures that roamed the continent of North America crossed over the Bering Strait from Russian to Alaska during the last ice age, which ended about 10,000 years ago. If Bigfoot was part of this great migration and existed prior to this mass exodus, why in ancient cave drawings from Russia are there no depictions of large hairy creatures? Also, in many Russian sightings of Bigfoot-like creatures (Specific to the Eastern part of Russia) they resemble more of a Neanderthal appearance. If Bigfoot was around, then early humans would have had contact with the creature and should have immortalized them in the drawings found in caves in the eastern Russian plains. This fact not only amazed me but also made me think, could it be that Bigfoots origins are actually not in North America but in South America? In the North & South American continents, cave and rock paintings have been found depicting large hairy men which have also been collaborated by folklore and legends.
 |
| Cave painting discovered in the eastern part of Russia dated to 5000 BC to 7000 BC |
Is it possible in our search for Bigfoot that we are assuming the creatures origins had to be from the cradle of life in Africa? If the Myanmar theory is proven to be right, could it be that the origin of Bigfoot is South America? As we all know, North and South American Indian folklores relate many stories of hairy giants which roamed the jungles and forests of South and North America respectfully. In Peru (South America) everywhere you go there are giant skulls and skeletons on display in museums and tourist attractions. Interesting enough, some of the many giant bones and skulls have been date back only hundreds of years and vary from regular elongated human sizes to double the size of a human skull.
Once again this is just another theory in the many I have posted on Bigfoot Evidence, yet as science continues to discover evidence that connects us to our past, it would be surprising to possibly find that we are looking for evidence in the wrong hemisphere in this side of our world. We are certain that no known full or partial skeleton (except for a jaw bone of Gigantophiticus) of an early hominid has been found in North America. It may be time for scientists and researchers to start heading to South American and see if there is any connection to Bigfoot and the giant skulls and bones found in Peru and other parts of South America.
If this is even viable, it could explain how this elusive creature migrated through Central America from South America and met up with early Indians in North America. These encounters over thousands of years with the Incas, Mayans, and North American tribes could have possibly given them the traits to understand what humans are capable of and made Bigfoot adapt technics to evade us or live near us. If such a parallel but isolated evolution could have possibly occurred for Bigfoot in South America, it would make sense that a creature with such abilities would migrate north in the peak of its population.
Cool!
ReplyDeleteNo offense Damian, but I hope no one here believes anything you contribute has a basis in science or fact. Your theories are no different than the milions about Aliens, all their little subcultures and purposes (greys, reptiles, insectoids) and a million folks to explain and write books......yet not a single fact or item to back it up. oh well
DeleteThe origin of Bigfoot comes from deep within delusional minds.
ReplyDeleteDenier
Deleteanon 6:24 - And yet your still here. Did the UFO blog toss you out?
DeleteNo, they're a whole different type of delusional and not nearly as fascinating as you nutjobs.
DeleteOh you mean the Randi lot, yeah nothing beats them in madness.
DeletePerhaps the deep draw BF has for many is this question of our own beginnings.
ReplyDeleteNo question they are alive and real and have been around long before Euro Americans settled here. And the data seems to show a being that shares the genus Homo with us.
But, obviously there are some deep differences with modern humans, so how close to us are they and when did they branch off?
In my mind anything arising prior to modern humans (say 200,000 years ago) and in the genus Homo are candidates for some kind of concurrent evolution.
The human DNA data seems in many ways a more reliable trace of our migrations than fossil discoveries, because the sample set is so much larger. But, that doesn't help with Bigfoot, but it might in the future. Hopefully, we will know after Oxford analyzes submitted BF samples.
If the mtDNA per Stubstad (pushed out of Ketchum DNA study, see past articles here) is accurate then they were very close to us and able to cross breed, how else human mtDNA?
Or just plain wrong data....
Thanks for the post...
Also, it could be they are Homo sapiens, and merely force a non-material culture generationally.
DeleteIt seems there is less DNA variation between two humans, from anywhere on the planet, than between two Chimps from the same troupe. Interesting if you think about it, how physically variable we seem to be and yet at the most minute DNA level so very much the same...
in other words our differences are just skin deep, which vary wildly depending on where a particular group develops, responding to their environment.
Perhaps our "morphology" genes have a different molecular clock, or are more responsive to stresses? And even with a faster rate of change don't alter our essential difference from apes or relict hominids - our brains?
With that in mind, it might not be surprising if they are human, in that hairiness, barrel chest, and height could have arise for a group that may have been isolated from other gene pools in a colder climate and yet still within the
200,000 ybp modern human line?
Genetic research, conclusions, arguments are way beyond me really, but how can one not at least notice they are going on?
I read that there is an 8X jump in genetic knowledge each year for the last decade. A good time for a bio-chem graduates! And maybe BFers. I wonder if for BFs however.
Also again, if all 6 billion of us arise from an evolutionary bottleneck 75,000 years ago, from a few thousand people living in East Africa, then it is quite likely BF is modern human pre-75,000 years ago and survived, but so isolated from the rebirth of humanity and subsequent migrations out of Africa that those skin-deep physical differences seemed too large (literally!) to overcome upon meeting again...
Deletemost of the time, hence some interbreeding subsequently.
Additionally, it seems our awakening with respect to advanced tool use, art and more complex social groups after the 75,000 bce bottleneck defines us as modern humans.
BFs do not appear to have made that leap, which seems to cut in favor of an earlier split and yet still a form of us genetically, perhaps evolving/splitting right at that 2000,00 year mark.
Can't wait to find out.
correction: 200,000 ybp - not whatever number that is I wrote last.
DeleteEnough from me! Thanks again for the article and forum.
An excellent playlist accompanies this YouTube channel: Evolutiondocumentary
ReplyDeleteI don't want to post the link, but it is well worth the search, as many hours of pleasurable and educational viewing await you!
No gigantopithecus remains have been documented to have been found in the Americas.
ReplyDeleteGod made man, but the sloths supplied the glue.
Who has been looking for any remains? Just because they haven't been found doesn't mean they weren't here. Remember that it was pure luck that the first remains were found in a Chinese market place. The others were found in caves. If no one is looking nothing will be found.
DeleteExactly and why some with agendas try to deter any research being done at all.
DeleteWe don't even know if it exists yet. How about we start with that?
ReplyDeleteYou don't know. many here do know.
DeleteLol..anon 8:30...people lie and u sware to it.
DeleteLol...anon 10:07... I am a witness
DeleteIf I'm going to rip on Damian's articles that are, IMO, poorly written, then I must give credit when credit is due. This was a great read with a lot of food for thought.
ReplyDeletewash up first, please.
DeleteWhere does Kennewick Man aka Patrick Stewart fit in?
ReplyDeletefrom a Christian view and standpoint Bigfoot is a hominid, BF has no relation to mankind, its just an animal that looks similar to us, like Chimps and other apes, so evolution is bullshit, things adapt not evolve.
ReplyDeleteProve it.
DeleteNo relation but still speaks? Apart from Bigfoot we're the only other primate animal that does.
DeleteI'd say these guys are so much like us it scares most people to even consider it yet it's true only question is how long can the cover-up continue about this obvious hominin, so far so good for those with that standpoint but in our world and environment of huge Bigfoot focus and sublime technology a slip-up one day is now inevitable.
Take Dr. Ketchum's silence lately, trolls would like to think she's just disappeared and closed shop when in actuality only two possibilities remain - she's either been put the squeeze on by someone and convinced somehow to let it go for the sake of this unknown species (which would only be a brief hold-up anyway) or it's still in the works and coming eventually.
@ 11:27
DeleteProve that you're not a closet bleever by leaving here and doing something that would interest an adult.
Fury Giant
Deleteevolution is proven, to deny it exists is akin to believing the earth is flat
Settled in for a day of Bigfooting Nick ?
DeleteNick's significant other : Are you going to waste the whole day looking up Bigfoot stuff again !
DeleteNick : I'm not a bleever, I'm a skeptic !
LOL
DeleteThere are no sightings where I live, and I've been all over these bayous, rivers and forests....
DeleteI'm more interested to see if any of the PNW ever can possibly come up with anything, I have my doubts that they will. But that doesn't stop me from being interested.
Parallel development, not a missing link. Same as Homo Erectus, Neanderthal, Denisovans. May have some further back common ancestor(s), but probably not directly linked in line. The word is still out on whether a Homo or maybe an Australopithicene. If no direct evidence of tool use, then is it a Homo? Certainly not as advanced as Erectus or Neanderthal or the Denisovans. Even some earlier in the line so maybe an Australopithicene with not as large a brain as Homo and an offshoot in the Robust Ap. line in parallel to the evolution of Homo Sapiens.
ReplyDeleteBut, looking at physiological similarities of the PGF animal Patty to an adult male silverback gorilla, it makes one wonder if we are NOT dealing with a very evolutionarily advanced animal at all. Rather just another primate between gorilla and chimp and orang, but of course slightly more advanced or at least evolved/adapted to a certain niche in the environment. One not covered by tree climbers or in the 4 legged propulsion specii. A two legged or bidel species capable of covering more territory in temperate to drier non-lush or non-rainforest terrain in search of food. More omnivorous to take advantage of grazing and browsing prey species. Ape not human in ancestry. But, the foot/leg development points to a human lineage of bipedalism. So maybe early Ap. or Homo, no not Homo,
it must have broken off somewhere between gorillas and humans 6-7 mya. before Australopithicenes.
Well, I know some men with big barrel chests and little frog legs, maybe more gorilla like than Patty, and pretty hairy too. But, they come from the Neandertal Valley, and ended up French.
Deletegood post, i'm in the australopithicene camp myself
Deletecouldn't be a homo (at that time), but maybe it is now? wowzas
My theory is that bigfoot is a different species of hominid that developed parallel to humans with the volutionary differences being the ability of homo sapiens to harness and use fire and sasquatch not.
ReplyDeleteHumans used fire to cook food allowing our bodies to evolve towards larger brain and less powerful digestive tracts. Sasquatch did not, and further more had to adapt to the changes occurring as humans became smarter. Avoidance of humans/nocturnal. Night vision for bigfoot none for humans. etc. We lost our body hair, bigfoot kept theirs.
How do we even know they're nocturnal they move around just as much during the day, don't they.
DeleteIts pretty simple but mindblowing.
ReplyDeleteAustralopithecus afarensis built a boat. Sailed the seas of cheese and landed in Eureka, CA. Migrated to Bluff Creek, rest is history.
Check please.
Or-Some contemporary relative of Homo Erectus and Homo Sapiens pushed itself through the land bridge from Asia to NA and the rest is cryptoid history.
ReplyDeleteyep. Nice to seem some great comments again!
Delete"We are certain that no known full or partial skeleton (except for a jaw bone of Gigantophiticus) of an early hominid has been found in North America"
ReplyDeleteSince when did a jaw bone of Giganto get discovered in N.A.?
In the common theory of African origins Homo Erectus in one form or another made his way into Asia including India, China, Viet Nam and Indonesia. May even be the ancestor of H. Floriensis. H.Erectus also expanded into Europe and Russia. If H.E. could thoroughly cover this much ground and adapt to this many environs and habitats then why not a parallel species of almost identical capabilities, this side of fire and tool use, of course. Why not be able to make it across a rarely occurring land bridge into N.America? A large animal with the bipedal capability of a large home range and just enough intelligence to adapt and natural migratory instinct to go where the food is and be able to cover large tracts of countryside in search of it and with the size and strength to take almost anything as prey. Maybe, like white tailed deer and coyotes, they are one species that has the ability or their nocturnal traits allow them to thrive near humans or at least not be driven away by our activities. Hence why not follow human movements, migratory movements towards new lands. Across a land bridge.
ReplyDeleteyep again...
DeleteI like the Paranthropus theory, we know that the Australopiths broke into two groups; the gracile and the robust. Modern humans come from the gracile savannah dwelling group, sasquatch may have come from the other group, the robust more gorilla-like forest dwelling group Paranthropus. They supposedly went extinct I think they just headed deeper into the forests where fossils are less likely to occur.
ReplyDeleteI think some of the "intelligence" and paranormal traits attributed to Sasquatch actually come from them being wholely developed to forest living whereas we are purely open savannah creatures. The way they perceive and interact with their particular habitat is probably beyond our comprehension. We are slow, obvious and clumsy in the forest, just as we are when we go into the water in scuba gear.
Oh and also if Sasquatch is real look at the massive jaw and particularly the bulging jaw muscles at the base of the jaw on Patty, very Paranthropus-like.
Deleteyep, again. Paranthopus was really ubiquitous and a good candidate for an ancestor species
DeleteThe whole origins deal is a real mystery with this thing. Before I mentioned the Patty-gorilla physio similarities in body shape but then again, most sighting witnesses that happen to be lucky enough to see facial detail, say that it has a more human hooded nose not a flat ape nose. Most if not all human ancestors and even those not in line with us have some form of tool use. Only in a couple of rare occasions have an A.P. been associated with tools and then very crude. Maybe Sasquatch is an australopithicene. A very, very robust form. But,
ReplyDeleteand there is always a but with this creature, the mid-tarsal break according to some was not in A.P. species or Homo as it disappeared from hominids before 3.2 mya so WTF? Then again Meldrum looking at 3.5mya Laetoli, Africa fossil footprints says definitely in A.P. feet but not in any Homo. So back again to an Australopithicene.
yep as good as any
DeleteYeah, I think the verdict is an Australopithicene maybe A.Paranthropus like Anon 2:29:00 says.
ReplyDeleteproof is in the pudding - a skeleton is all thats needed. i say we drain every mountain lake in the west, bring in some dozers and push some dirt
ReplyDeletedeclare a national emergency and have at it
shovel ready project - get americans working again
or wait for DNA
ReplyDelete