The Truth Is: Dr. Bryan Sykes Rediscovered an Ancient Polar, Not The Yeti
Cryptozoologist Loren Coleman just posted an interesting article about the mainstream media's ridiculous reporting on the ancient polar bear that was recently discovered by Dr. Bryan Sykes through DNA. The fact is, Sykes wasn't the first to discover this ancient bear. Through science, he simply proved its existence using DNA from hair samples found a "Yeti mummy" and a single hair found a decade ago in Bhutan, 800 miles to the east. Ancient polar bears have been known to science before the Sykes study, in the mid-2000s when a jawbone was discovered on the Svalbard archipelago in the Arctic. They speculated the jawbone be around 110,000 or 130,000 years old.
In an interview with National Geographic, Coleman welcomes the "Yeti" DNA news, but remains cautious about how the media is portraying the story. It's possible the media is adding the "Yeti" story to the discovery of ancient polar bears just to sensationalize the headlines. Coleman, a cryptozoologist, is excited about the science behind the ancient polar bear DNA:
Loren Coleman, director of the International Cryptozoology Museumin Portland, Maine, said Sykes’s finding could be the “number one story in cryptozoology”—the study of hidden, or unverified, animals—”for the decade.”
Coleman, who also appears in the upcoming documentary, said he thinks Sykes’s findings likely explain only one of the Yeti varieties that have been reported.
“That’s one of the problems with the word ‘Yeti,’” Coleman said. “It’s an umbrella term for three different varieties. There’s the small kind, there’s a man-sized type, and then a larger one that is known as Dzu-Teh. I must assume what he’s looking at are samples from the larger-sized one that many of us in the field have speculated was a form of bear.”
If, as Sykes’s findings suggest, the Dzu-Teh is indeed the same species of early polar bear that once roamed the Arctic, it is unlikely to have a white fur coat, as often shown in popular depictions of the Yeti, since it was one of the first polar bears to branch off from brown bears.
That, Coleman said, actually strengthens Sykes’s case that the larger Yeti is an ancient polar bear species.
“It’s one of the myths of the Abominable Snowman and Yeti that they’re white,” Coleman said.
“The native people actually describe them as brown and reddish-brown.”
Check out Coleman's article here: http://www.cryptozoonews.com/abominable-bears/
Insomniac First!!
ReplyDeleteGetting up early for work...Second!
DeleteDamn I get insomnia once every six months, but it was worth it for my first "first" on a post that got more than five comments!
DeleteKooks like Danny are very arrogantly mistreating their own intelligence, they assume people in Tibet can't tell the difference between canines and primates same crap pulled on Native Americans.
DeleteI still don't fully buy the ancient polar bear roaming around, I think it's more of a descendant (hence only mTDNA) and is most likely a subspecies of bear...not a whole new species that's being talked about.
ReplyDeleteMore importantly, it needs more work by experts in that field. Sykes is a human geneticist and while he can identify and propose hypothesis about his findings, it still needs more work by Ursus specialists.
You don't take your car to be painted at a transmission shop, although both places work on cars.
And if that is the case, it's certainly not the "win" that foolish cryptozoologists are trying to claim.
DeleteClever play on semantics DC, in order to criticize unjustly. I am sensing some sour grapes here. You missed out on the polar bear discovery AND you have been left in the dust in paranormal Bigfoot research, as you have been outdone by complete amateurs. Must be hard waking up in the morning.
DeleteOf course, the bear is not ancient, because it is still alive and has been witnessed by the local indigenous population. Of course, it is a descendant of an ancient polar bear because it had to be a descendant of something very similar for it's DNA to match a previous record. The definition of "whole new species", is not clearly defined here, but you have created your own definition, and found fault with others in their use of the ambiguous phrase. Very clever, but faulty logic. We are not school children here, where you can make up your own definitions and pass them off as gospel. In the context used here, "whole new species" appears to mean "previously thought to be extinct but now it can be described as a "whole new live species for science to study". I just hope the "foolish cryptozoologists" don't beat you to the punch, on the further study aspect. Now that would be embarassing, and ironic!
It's really very simple.
DeleteHow can anyone celebrate Sykes now... And then should he deliver a bombshell down the line go against him? Now I'm not suggesting he has that bombshell... I actually believe that he will find no Bigfoot in this series of documentaries and that the long term results of his peer review will either yield a genetic link from Asia to the America's or something that can be attributed to Bigfoot DNA...
But it merely comes down to caution in the respect of skeptics starting to 'appear' like they have problems with The bear discovery.
Just to add Something for the majority of skeptics that are taking the Asian bear samples as the 'death of Bigfoot'... Two Asian bear samples can without doubt in their minds be enough to prove there is nothing in the Bigfoot legend, and the same amount of samples that have yielded unknown hominid however require 'more samples' to back up those to make them credible?
Peace.
Alan Lowey, is that your bleevin' self posting anonymously?!
DeleteLegitimate response forthcoming.
Dan that guys pretty smart. Be careful. If he mentions me just yell "I love lamp" as Brick Tamlin would do. You may be outgunned.
Delete3:23 is very welcome around here, I could read stuff like that very regularly.
DeletePeace.
Brick is my favorite. When he breaks out the grenade or joins the other news team to laugh at Ron, it does me in Bigdad.
DeleteHow can a huge bear live and breed in one area and be unknown to science this long and not one dead body?
DeleteI'm going to ignore the ad hominem and solely address the points & perceived questions asked.
DeleteBy the term "whole new species" it references an animal that has significant morphological distinctions from known species. In regards to "sub species" it means lumping the bear into the brown or polar bear species because it lacks the significant differences to merit a new species discovery. Take for example the American Grizzly - it's generally accepted to be a subspecies of Brown Bear, not a separate species of the Brown Bear. As I've learned, science has people who lump animals into known species and create subspecies and those who wish to create brand new species distinctions.
As far as cryptozoologists going to study this bear, it's best left to actual scientists seeing as this bear is neither a cryptid nor undiscovered. They have had these results for a few years now, with the testing of the Norway jaw and the previous testing done by Sykes on the Bhutan sample. You can even look up Meldrum quotes from the past on the Sykes "weird bear" results.
The bottom line is that this hype has allowed speculation to run rampant, there are more questions now regarding the testing and results that will only be answered by the full report and peer-reviewed paper. I'm curious as to how much of the genome Sykes was able to decipher and if (or why not after double checking his results) he tested the nUDNA. We have an idea of what momma bear was, why not papa bear?
Time to read PJ's post...
Mike,can't wait til the new one comes out.
DeleteBut seriously, you just gotta love lamp.
PJ, it's not about celebrating or lambasting him or anyone else. It's how the hype factor for the docu series has completely overshadowed the lack of any hard science so far. It's all speculation because of the lack of data at this moment. "More science and less showmanship" as I once read.
DeleteWe also don't have provenance on the two positive samples. There could be shenanigans afoot from the start, not being false samples obviously because you can't fake the DNA (provided it's not hashed science) but a fault of science is that it lacks ability to know or test provenance of the samples (aka lying or hoaxing the story origins)
You seem perturbed by the fact that I doubt bigfootery and mock you, while not accepting Sykes results as 100% truth. It's called bein skeptical. The fact I don't hop on the Sykes killed bigfoot bandwagon should tell you something and I figured you'd be pleased with that outcome. Just because I don't like you doesn't mean it overshadows my skepticism.
BTW - Just so we're clear, you are now completely ditching the months of all that good shit you talked about Sykes coming, how he will shut the skeptics up once and for all, proving bigfoot, all that Ro shit, ALL of it and basically aligning yourself with what I have been saying all along? You sure are a whack job.
Oh I beg to differ Campz... And I think that the only reason that you are not celebrating the bear results is because you know damn well that two samples require more evidence in debunking anything to do with Yeti, or Bigfoot. You think people have very short memories indeed if you think we can't remember you 'jumping on the bandwagon' the day the results came through... It is also a very clever attempt at drawing people's memories away from suggesting the opposite. This effort at evading accusations of closure desperation were then propelled by your change of plan, that my claims over the past few months were your focus of your trolling, when in actual fact... You were cheesed off that I wee-wee'd on your parade with the reality of what the two bear samples means as far as debunking Bigfoot.
DeleteI... With my belief for months that Sykes would deliver positive news to the enthusiasts was off the back off many researchers stating they felt that. I must also remind you, something that has conveniently been forgotten by you; that I was very, very clear in the respect of communicating that if Sykes should do the opposite, that he would be only as good as his samples.
We all did some things in an effort to win a thread of debate... Your's was exposing yourself, mine was to express a false sense of total confidence in that I 'knew' how the results would fall. Again... This is something I was quite open about not days after I apologised and was allowed back on the blog... I admitted this to you and I admitted this to everyone else. I would have had to have been a mystic to have truly of known the extent of his results, but the fact that he was aligning himself with top researchers would have suggested his agenda and in many ways still does as far as what his long term research will unfold as.
I will always admit when I am wrong, and have been on a number of ocassions, but unlike you I can admit that and put faith into the understanding that any field of research should be a self correcting mechanism to secure progress and understanding.
I believe that he will find no Bigfoot in this series of documentaries and that the long term results of his peer review will either yield a genetic link from Asia to the America's or something that can be attributed to Bigfoot DNA... That is not backtracking, that is me being realistic and understanding that any major discovery cannot be put to the world in a documentary series, but must be peer reviewed. Now... It comes down to me 'hoping', not 'knowing' that the two samples he has that will reportedly 'change the world' so to speak... Will be what I want them to be.
You on the other hand are just playing it very safe indeed bro. Wise move.
Peace.
My visual tea bagging had zero to do with Sykes and all to do with footer claims of me being a short and fat basement dweller.
DeleteFooters have short and selective memories, that's a fact. They also have no biological evidence to account for your 'thousands' of years of documented history.
Your top researchers, regardless of exactly what they were looking for have nothing and have been wrong at every turn. You invest faith in people who don't even have a single atom to back up their claims...yet you still heavily invest in them.
You being 'realistic' isn't in your nature or you would call bullshit on half the shoddy material posted here.
Just say it...say you were pwned, say you were grasping at straws, say your taterhole is so gaped that the wind causes a pan flute melody when it blows across it.
I have admitted I was wrong to express confidence in results that were out of my hands... Now you admit that you acted like a pervert and are backtracking due to the long term results.
DeleteLet's see if you can do the same?
Also... All I got from your comment was the lowering of the tone again; "no, you are!" childish school yard dribble with suggestions of directed abuse.
It has been put to you before that simply denying evidence does not mean there isn't any evidence to acknowledge... A convenient cop out when you have had all your counter points kicked right back down the basement at you.
Peace.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteJoe fitz , Canada guy as we watch these things there eyes are totally dark brown and nothing else is there othere animals with this type of eye structure and it also seems as if when they sometime blink there is some sort of second eye lid do u guys now anything about this or can u expand on this it looks like another clear lense that comes down periodically ??? Could only see brown in eyes nothing else except eye lashes which they clearly have also, any suggestions or info be appreciated? Thanks have good day!
DeleteAnd you can honestly, without a doubt state that Sykes is not going to have anything regarding Bigfoot? You know 100%?? Even after the review of his study had suggested that he has two samples that have nothing to do with humans, bears or apes that will change the world... Two samples that oddly; have been suggested in the past to possibly having Bigfoot DNA?
DeleteKinison and blood fueds?
Wild claims and backtracking...
Anyone smell poo?
; )
Peace.
Also, what is this I'm reading about joe f having to leave this site?? Why ? Sounds childish ?
DeleteCanada guy!
DeleteWatch this space I will respond to you ASAP!!
Peace.
99.9% certainty. There's always the chance someone will make me eat my words but using deduction skills and knowing bigfoot history (I've seen, heard, and read all the same material that you have) I can rest easy with the assumption that Sykes comes up with no 9ft 800lb nocturnal Figboot.
DeleteWill he have something regarding human genetics, lineage, ancestory, or migratory time frames? Way WAY more likely than finding the mythical monkey man of North America.
But hey, I'm part of the cover up, so...
You simply do not know the results of any long term study. And anyway... It wouldn't be like you've assessed the situation fairly and come to a impartial conclusion, because though you're not part of a cover up, you would never express anything other than complete one sidedness... To which I can attribute to you being bitter due to your time invested as an enthusiast to a bipedal gorilla. This must have been significant, measuring your hate at this subject and the level in which you are compelled to attack people who in honesty, are not too different from you. You were once an enthusiast Campz, and someone who frequents a blog with the obsessive nature as you do cannot claim in all honesty that they do not still want that bipedal gorilla to be a reality... Impatience.
DeleteHeck, you even think that orang-pendek is a possibility, agree with me that Bigfoot could be a type of human, all of these things that would never materialise in any thread with me involved, because you are too concerned with your little OCD's, me being one of them.
You be careful you don't set yourself up for a result that doesn't automatically align with 'Bigfoot', but something that could easily be interpreted as evidence for it being a possibility.
You at least have your questioning of Sykes' bear findings to fall back on should you end up being wrong.
I should imagine that around about one people will be getting tired of seeing you and me exchanging, so I'll leave it at that old boy...
Peace.
Oh... And please don't suggest you've read the same stuff I have cause you haven't. You've certainly read more than me regarding the bipedal gorilla, but nothing of late. I can make that claim at least in complete confidence.
DeletePeace.
Canada guy...
DeleteDo you have a means of contacting off of this blog. Your account sounds exactly like that of a video that I watched the other day, and is not a very commonly reported feature.
I would like to speak to you off this blog if that is possible?
Peace.
Is Joe still deflecting all his Tick Tock talk?
DeleteAnybody heard of the bonobo primate monkey? it's bipedal and rarely walks on all four limbs and some say is more intelligent than a chimp.
DeleteThis episode was about how he found this bear DNA in a sample he tested for Yeit and how the term Yeti gets used for more than one type of creature. A Bear and A Sasquatch. It was not proving or disproving the existence of either, just testing DNA and then speculating.
DeleteThe rest of the results are yet to be seen and we can only speculate on what will come of them. Nothing can be determined unless you can see into the future.
Hey joe fitz I'll talk to u after I send u some material so not wasting anyones time and its got to be first class stuff until then u have to wait sorry ttl! Going to mount the I phone to gun scope sounds kind of dum but the video or pics are increadable at long distance
DeleteYour to dumb to know the difference between a Bear, or a Deer. Your the dumbest fuck on here!
DeleteAll I got is one word. Bonobo. Google it.
DeleteCan't wait to see what else he may find on this investigation.
ReplyDeleteTwo words:
ReplyDeleteAncient fucking aliens.
You bet, they're right about most things mainstream science will hide from us. We came from the stars, but for some reason must remain a big secret.
DeleteWe are all star dust...Our solar system was formed from the debris of a super nova event...old news...
DeleteHow many more days until Dan Campbell wins the bet and Joe and MIke have to leave the blog forever?
ReplyDeleteA week and a half.
DeleteGive or take a month or two
Delete3:38, what can we expect from you after I'm gone to ....um....fill the void. Insight, humor, commentary on your rich background in.......?
DeleteExpect nothing. Shhh Mikey Shhh.
DeleteI gotta go. Every time he does this I yield. Have a good day.
DeleteFunny when Dan posts as Anonymous.
DeleteDIAF Troll
It's sleeps. We all three prefer sleeps. Not days. I will only remain posting on this blog for as many sleeps as necessary until Sykes states, and he will eventually, that he didn't get Squatch. And then it will make my eyes rain.
ReplyDeleteThen you guys will be left with Randy's pony and the always charming Muir. I wish you well. Good Morning Joe and Good morning Daniel.
ReplyDeleteMorning. I won't be able to keep up with all these posts since I have no computer at the moment and my time will be spent typing up responses on my iPhone to those who posted under my comments above.
DeleteDaniel. Are you really struggling with Sykes finding an ancient Polat bear creeping around the Himalayas. Or are you being polite and suggesting that Sykes had to discover something to justify the time money and expense of these studies. I've already surmised that whatever he got on Bigdoot he got on testing remains of alleged "hybridized " individuals.
DeleteThe only thing I'm struggling with is how people keep thinking everything is one or the other. As in Sykes being the final answer or Meldrum being the final answer, almost as if you see no middle ground. It's a very American trait, polarization at its best. It's either red or blue...God forbid someone isn't a democrat or republican...
DeleteAh..lest I digress from my intentions. Back to reading and replying to those above.
Ancient Polar Bears can be polarizing. You knew I couldn't resist it. So you made me make that god awful pun and ill never forgive you!
DeleteSykes discovered the polarization bear!
DeleteAnd in this corner . . .
No Daniel,
DeleteGod forbid someone try and test any idea or theory with DNA because there will always be assholes like you who cant handle it and have to start hating on something they know nothing about and have no inside knowledge to. You are just taking the easy road and saying "They wont have anything conclusive blah" and acting like you are right in the end when you have no idea how this will end. Every time there is a study there are people like you who are just sitting there saying they will fail because you cant handle what they might find out. Its not about you Daniel, nobody cares what you think. You're not an expert and if you were, you still are not and were not ever involved. So stay in the basement, fat and unhappy where you belong and unplug the internet, you have had enough.
^ somebody didn't get their bottle this morning.
DeleteI know a little about a lot, what of it?
Your shit gets old. You're not even funny its sad because you are living out your life through this site. This is the comments section of a BFE blog, if you cant handle that then I'm not sure why you are here. If you are just here to comment that nothing will ever prove anything, great but nobody cares about your opinion you only get attention with your personal attacks. Atleast Joe cares about the subject matter so he is worth the read, you are just a turd in the punch bowl.
DeleteBALL BOY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DeleteI don't believe in Ghosts. I do not think they exist. So why would I go on a site about ghosts and comment there. You Daniel don't believe in Big foot, so why are you here. Do you live such a boring life, that you live on a computer complaing all the time.
DeleteYou are the dumbest fuck on here!
He used to haunt this place some time back, remember that guy with the four(?) digit numbers nic...
DeleteHes a chump, plain and simple. Nobody here likes him and he is trying to stir the pot. I guess another good word is Asshole.
DeleteDaniel Campbell is an american hero.
DeleteDaniel. Crytozooligists have made some significant discoveries and I'm s huge fan of the old school ones that you to appear in Argosy. Huevelmans and Sanderson, ahhhhh the good old days.
ReplyDeleteThe article's link to Loren Coleman's blog post is broken.
ReplyDeleteI personally suggest you broke it 4:23. I was making coffee and nowhere near the link.
DeleteMaybe the article never existed in the first place and Shawn just imagined it? A broken link is all the evidence I need to stop believing in the article.
DeleteNow that is skepticism at its finest. I'll do you one better. I now believe in neither the link nor Loren Coleman and I have grave doubts as to whether Shawn exists as well.
DeleteAs Dignon once said to Bov in "Bottle Rocket". "You're out of the gang and he's (points to Loke Wilsons character) and hes out of the gang....,and im pretty sure im pit too!". Wes Andersons a pimp
DeleteHe exists! I seent him on a low quality podcast one time...I think. It may just have been a really high Justin Smeja now that I think about it.
DeleteRo used Bud Lit and fine herb to get to the hard hitting questions. That would pretty much break me too.
DeleteI can't type this am. It's worse than usual. I wish MJA were here to shoot it off.
DeleteHa ha ha ha!!
DeleteHey Joe, Frank Evans here. Just to let you know, John's moving to a Sub-base area. He will not be able to communicate out, at this site for a while. I do not want to comment here on why he is moving. I just can not believe what I read on here. Yes, There are sad and very sick people on this site. Well, got to go, the more I type here, the more the worms come out.
DeleteThanks Joe!
Thank you very much for the update Frank, it is very much appreciated. Oh and Frank... You come to deal with the nonsese on here for the sake of expressing what you feel is the truth... That doesn't make it any less acceptable, I know.
DeletePeace.
Thanks for that post John, I mean Frank. If you don't like it, just change the channel and don't look back. You can't react to it if you are not looking for it. Trolandia/BE blog. A rose by any other name is still a rose.
DeleteThe conspirators just wanted to get the press to report on a bear, mere tactics.
DeleteDaniel Campbell is the most credible voice in Bigfootology. Thank you.
DeleteJoe. Correct as usual. Finding one does not preclude the other.
ReplyDeleteHow are you today Mr Brookreson?
DeletePeace.
Joe. You have to email me now. The Shhhh troll has shhhhhed me. He's my greatest arch nemesis. He knows out of respect for Doctor Evil I will obey either a shhhh or a Miley Don't. So I'll email you now. Goodbye.
DeleteMikey Shhh. That was a preemptive Shhh.
DeleteThe secret world of mb, jf. Hugs and kisses.
DeleteSo Sykes says there is still an ancient polar bear in the Himalyas. This is a truly remarkable find. Then why is there no other evidence besides hair in this region. No bones, no fossils, no photo evidence,and certainly no body. If these creatures live then they die and would leave bones that we would have found. Last I new a polar bear/brown bear was a mighty big creature. Surely a creature of this size would not find enough food resources to sustain itself. If this bear really existed than someone would have shot one by now and brought it in. I thereby claim, even though I have never been to the Himalayas, that there is no ancient polar bear there.
ReplyDeleteChuck
I am one hundred percent positive the locals and outsiders who have seen this ancient polar bear are either hallucinating or mistaking it for a bear.
DeleteChuck
It is a bear you idiot!!!!!!
DeleteProbably because it doesn't look that much different than the Himalayan Brown Bear. I think you should learn a thing or two about the types of bear in the Himalayan range and perhaps some local history before continuing with your rants.
DeleteHa ha ha ha!!
DeleteGood post Chuck!!!!
Peace.
Rather, perhaps the locals are mistaking yetis for bears.
DeleteYou see?
There's an example of getting your brain out of the box.
My brain is quite intact. The statements I made above is nothing more than a parody of what the skeptards, cynics, and low information folks use incessantly to describe the North American Bigfoot because this is simply all they know or just want to be a troll. At least Joe and probably a few others here no exactly what I am saying.
DeleteChuck
A very important point very well made.
DeletePeace Chuck.
Then get a web site and moderate the comments and all solved and you can write all you want.
DeleteDon't tempt me.
DeletePeace.
So joe we have a small and maybee big problem with are Canadian adventure here because these things are in big groups and we don't now how to seperate them and can never get one alone in the daylight hours so we have to rethink are whole objective here we dont won't anyone in danger due to there incredable speed through the forest and clear cuts so were almost forshure pushing this till next September and bringing more people for safety reasons any help or suggestions at this point might help us thanks joe fitz Canadian guy!
ReplyDeleteSo joe we have a small and maybee big problem with are Canadian adventure here because these things are in big groups and we don't now how to seperate them and can never get one alone in the daylight hours so we have to rethink are whole objective here we dont won't anyone in danger due to there incredable speed through the forest and clear cuts so were almost forshure pushing this till next September and bringing more people for safety reasons any help or suggestions at this point might help us thanks joe fitz Canadian guy!
ReplyDeleteHow can I get in contact with you?
DeletePeace.
It be buy phone and email when I get emailset up ya I now everyone has email lol
DeleteJoe get in contact with him by using some cloaking and fourth dimension bullshit. You've fucking lost it with that garbage you nut job.
DeleteDestroy these monsters
ReplyDeleteThe Great and Powerful Dr. Sykes has BIG INFO that will literally CHANGE THE ENTIRE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT. I know what it is because I am an insider. Science. We insiders meet on a daily basis in a secret science lab, sometimes accompanied by our peer reviewers, to discuss how little information we will leak out. Often, we decide to let what is essentially nothing get released and pretend it's a GREAT BIG DISCOVERY. Other times we will tell you about bears. But you will never get ALL of our science because you can't handle it. The Secret Society of Super Smart Science Guys (SSSSSG™) will determine how much of our precious information you average peons get to see. Hahahahaha. Oh, it's wonderful to know things you don't know. Science.
ReplyDeleteI took the red pill I can handle the truth. :)
DeleteThe Red Pill is now the Blue Pill. What was the Blue Pill is now a green suppository. Science. Unfortunately, they are all just placebos - which is just another fabulous trick we at the SSSSSG™ Institute have played on you lowly commoners. Science.
DeleteI took the white oblong pill and my reconstructed leg quit hurting. I love you smart people.
DeleteScience.
DeleteIt was confirmed today that Rhettman Mullis had successfully removing his head from his own taterhole. He then proceeded to shove his head up the taterhole of Dr. Sykes. We will bring you more on this as this situation develops.
Delete^Successfully removed his head. Dammit.
DeleteDr. Sykes taterhole has a name. He calls it Stephen Hawking. Dr. Sykes taterhole plays chess with 3 world class chess masters while simultaneously documenting archaic bear DNA and making sandwiches for everyone at the SECRET DNA LAB. You would see Dr. Sykes as a GOD. But we who are in the know understand he is simply a SCIENTIST. Science.
DeleteWhy cant they be bears? why do they have to be apes? whats a bipedal bear going to look like?
ReplyDeleteHairy with a flat ass.
DeleteAn "no" shoulders, unlike, oh, let's see, EVERY single yeti almas bigfoot sasquatch description, EVER.
DeleteAlso the long vigorously swinging arms--no upright bear will ever exhibit this trait. Bears hold the forelegs out in front of them to aid balance while standing on hind legs. No upright walking bear can account for this long-arm-swinging hominid figure seen and described by so many.
No bear, walks like a man.
Primates are smarter, and have much better finger dexterity for typing messages on the internet, in reply to skeptical questions. Nuff said.
DeleteThanks for an article filled with information WE ALREADY KNEW. What would I do without BE?
ReplyDeleteWell for starters, you could get a life. Not that there is anything wrong with not having a life.
Delete