Scientific Name For Sasquatch: Homo sapiens hirsutii?


Editor’s Note: This is a guest post by 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.

As the debate continues on what exactly Sasquatch or Bigfoot is, some have been asking whether the name Sasquatch/Bigfoot should still be used to describe the species once this hominoid is proven to exist. What will be the scientific name given to the species?

As the weeks and months continue, the results of the Ketchum papers are still unclear on when they will be released or what exactly the answers may be. There is a lot of speculation from both the scientific community and the many researchers and believers of Sasquatch.

While doing some research recently, I found the scientific name that might be given to Bigfoot; the species will be known as “Homo Sapiens Hirtsutii”.

We all know what the words “Homo Sapiens” mean, but what exactly does the word “Hirsutii” mean? The word actually comes from the adjective “HIRSUTE”, which means, having or covered with hair. So, basically he will be known as “Man covered with hair”.


We all know that the most identifiable description of Bigfoot is the amount of body hair usually described as fur; like most animals. So, it makes sense that the scientist and researchers might have come to an agreement on exactly what scientific name to give this species. As for the common name usually given to the species as Bigfoot or Sasquatch, some are saying that more than likely, the species will be known to the general public by the slang names of Sasquatch/Bigfoot, used by popular culture to describe this hominoid.

The Scientific name may have to be changed to something more specific to the species, but the name which has been use for decades will probably remain the same.

The planned “Pacific Northwest Conference on Primal People (Sasquatch)” May 4th, 5th and 6th, 2012 in Richland, Washington, will probably give us more insight into the species that will be known as “Hirsutii’’ and hopefully it will give us more clarity of this possible species. Dr. Melba Ketchum will be one of the Speakers at the conference -- which is surprising to see, with the possible release of the papers on her DNA study of Homo sapiens hirsutii.

Damian Bravo
www.sasquatchlives.com

Comments

  1. Great article, this is what I'm talking about. Let's stay relevant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also a premature discussion until the DNA is out and the world hopefully has some solid data on how close, or not, these are to Homo sapiens.

      Thanks for the info on Dr. Ketchum being at the May conference. At least we have a probable end date to this interminable wait for her paper.

      Delete
  2. I actually like the name Hirsutii....why you may ask? I think it gives the Sasquatch its on true idenity, for far to long we have been calling the species man ape and other colorfull names in the english language.

    Now the American Indian names those can stay, love them all, they have a cultural significance, but giving good old Sasquatch a good scientific name I think thats cool. Atleats it sounds cool to me :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Homo sapiens hursuti would suggest that bigfoot is a modern human. Ostensibly with modern human DNA. Interesting.

    Also, we already have humans covered with hair, they suffer from the condition hypertrichosis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Modern humans are homo sapiens sapiens. The name homo sapiens hirsuiti suggests a subspecies of home sapiens that naturally has hair all over.

      To the ear it sounds more like homo sapiens in a hair suit. :)

      Delete
  4. And if Dr. Ketchum's paper does posit that bigfoot DNA is that of a modern human, wouldn't that suggest that Justin Smeja has committed homicide?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if you ever stood there and looked at a giant one, or took a full scream from one, the idea that they are "Human" is ludicrous. This will not be the "Missing Link" and if Smeja shot one, (while i don't agree as he told the story) he did not murder a PERSON!
      Who is blood thirsty, a man who shot an unknown beast, or all of you who want to crucify him before you even know if the story is true?
      If this thing has any human DNA, IT IS A HYBRID!!!!!
      The next question is, Who or What is responcible?

      Delete
    2. The taxonomy "homo sapiens hursutii" would suggest that bigfoot is human. That's all I was comment on. I personally don't believe Smeja shot anything. But if the sample that he provided to Ketchum is allegedly from a creature he shot, and the.DNA comes back as human, then he's admitting to shooting a human.

      As far as a I know its still a crime to kill a human, even if they're "giant" and scream at you.

      Delete
  5. my vote is for "Bigacus Footicus" hah

    ReplyDelete
  6. I vote for Giganticus Erectis Furballerous.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Homoerectusnofind that's what I'm going to go with. In all seriousness good article! I really enjoyed reading it.
    Bigfoots Broski

    ReplyDelete
  8. Homo Sapiens translates to "Wise man" or "Knowing man." I'm not sure Bigfoot qualifies. Perhaps just plain Homo Hirsuiti (hairy man) would be more appropriate if it turns out they're hominids of sorts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems pretty wise to me. They've managed to elude us for this long and we've only caught glimpses of them on their terms. But there is no helping all of you brain-washed BFRO shmucks that have been screaming your non acceptance of them being anything but an ape on here. Even though your fearless leader claims your highly scientific and critically thinking. Yet to do that you have to consider ALL possibilities and that hasn't happened yet.

      Delete
    2. You're aware that humans are apes, right? So if they aren't apes, what are they?

      Also, leprechauns have eluded us as well, so perhaps we should make up taxonomy classifications for them as well?

      Delete
    3. They have to be pretty wise if we cannot find them. Hell we got the best sasquatching team the world has ever seen on APL every Sunday at 7pm in California (dish network) and yet we still can't find a 500 lb 8ft hairy giant who screams, throws rocks, doesn't bother our cattle, and evidently loves bacon. Pretty wise IMO.
      Bigfoots Broski

      Delete
    4. Homo sapiens hirsuiti translates to "Hairy Wise Man". I like that! However, I don't think DNA will be sufficient to make a solid/lasting taxonomic definition... unless the good doctor managed to rustle up some Australopithecus or Paranthropus DNA to show a homonin that crosses into Homo. Otherwise, it will take observation of active morphology and knowledge of culture, learning and application of thought... something that is not as forthcoming as the DNA study.
      PS- based upon the prerequisites to be considered sapiens, a dead specimen won't make that case either.
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    5. Humans are Primates, we are not apes lol.

      Delete
    6. You water heads are hell bent on sticking to that "humans are apes/primates" thing aren't you. It's time to abandons ship or else your gonna drown with Meldrum and Mobeymaker when the proof is released. I don't blame them their is still a lot of money to be made by all the book sales and paid expeditions. My problem with the whole thing is to truely be scientific you need to accept any and all possibilities and use deductive reasoning to weed them out to get to the bottom of things. Not automatically dismisses it because it doesn't fit into your money making skeems.

      Delete
  9. I like the idea of Homo Sapiens Hirsuiti. I also think "Hirsuiti" on its own makes a fine nickname for this legendary individual.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Name Sasquatch / Tribe Salish Indian / translation wild man of the woods / N Skopkum / T Clallam Indian / T Evil god of the woods / N Oh Mah / T Hoopa Indian / Tran Boss of the woods / N Tah Tah kle'ah / T Shasta Indians / Tran Owl women monster /N Chiye tanka/ T Lakota ( west ) Sioux Indian / Tran Big Elder Brother / N Chiha tanks / T Dakota (east) Sioux Indian / Tran Big elder brother /N Tso Apittse / T Shoshone Indian / Trans Cannibal Giant

    ReplyDelete
  11. The hursutii nonsense is old news. It was advanced awhile ago by Richard Stubstad and others. In the end, there will not be a scientific name given to this alleged creature until there is a scientific BODY to scientifically study. No bigfoot was shot in California or anywhere else and pinning your hopes on Melba Ketchum is a fools errand. Is there a thread on this blog that will be available for comment in say 6 months? If so, lets all meet there at that time and discuss what has happened>

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To completely define or rule out the species homo, a dead body will NOT be sufficient. Aside from morphology, you need factors like applied thought/knowledge, learning, etc... A corpse cannot tell you that.
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    2. Homo is a genus not a species and a simple finger bone would probably suffice as far as finding it a spot on the old species board.

      Delete
    3. My bad. Yes, "genus". One of the difficult things about the human description (especially homo sapiens sapiens) is that it relies on physical AND cultural definitions, so without that info documented, it is hard to make a case, scientifically. We kinda painted ourselves into a corner. Maybe out of safety of our beliefs?
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
  12. If its old news why do you care and why even give your opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  13. How about homo sapien hirsutii giganto.

    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
  14. BFF has had a few threads and is collecting suggestions, not like we have a choice right? But, interesting the many suggestions.
    My favorite is Homo indomitus, translates to "man beyond the law, or untamable man."
    It's a little romantic, distinguishes a key differnece (they don't obey our laws, sub-species or not) and is not attached to regional or past ideas...

    until the Big Cheeses of Anthropology decide I guess I can use that over hairy homo sapiens? Which is accurate, and yet such a traditional/sterotype we moderns like to draw in general?
    "hairyness"
    Don't we diss people for being hairy? SAo, it kinds of gives Bfs a disadvantaged start...:)

    ReplyDelete
  15. And if this turns out to be Homo Heidelbergensis would they still change the name?

    Hypothetically speaking, if this creature is known to science and looked the other way due to what it would mean to Darwinism and Dr Ketchum is forcing it to the mainstream, is this what will happen? They simply log it as a "New Species"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well I think that will depend on the contributions of more research, if and when they are proven to exist, I think even if they do give it a name now, it might change once they truly study them.

      Delete
    2. I think that is a good bet, when I read older texts many fossils had differnt designations than today.
      I hope it is shown to be evolved erectus of some kind, not sure why, except there are seemingly significant differences, more so than we understand Neanderthals and until recently wern't they a speerate species..like H. neanderthals or something?
      Hhirsuti doesn't give much tribute to their amazingness..and mythical survival.

      Delete
    3. What evidence do you have that anthropologists or evolutionary biologists are "looking the other way"? "Darwinism" is challenged regularly in research science. There's certainly no cabal of scientists conspiring to keep evolutionary data from the public.

      Also, h. heidelbergensis had a hairless body and was short in stature, quite different from what is typically described as bigfoot.

      Delete
    4. Where do I start? First off your claim that "Also, h. heidelbergensis had a hairless body and was short in stature, quite different from what is typically described as bigfoot."

      Wrong!!! The only body found mostly intact was was of a Juvenal form 5-8 years of age and already over five feet tall. And what evidence do you have that they had no hair? This brings me to "What evidence do you have that anthropologists or evolutionary biologists are "looking the other way"? "


      Okay for starters, how about all the other hominids? look at the pictures that they want you to believe that they looked like, then look at the actual skeletons. They all look like each other, Neanderthal included. None look like us. None of them had a forehead, none of them had a squared off ribcage, none of them had our bone structure what so ever.

      But look at the artwork and they look just like us with bigger noses or brow-ridges. It is their way to fudge the evolutionary scale.

      Look at the skeletons. Long upper arms, shorter fore arms. Long A framed torso (like an ape). These reasons alone are your evidence. But why stop there? None of them have our feet.

      You can not fit one of those skeletons into the artwork that they want you to believe. You cannot up-size them or down-size them and fit them into a Homo Sapien frame. But you can fit them into a Sasquatch frame. (using Patty as a model)

      Evolution has never been proven and yet it is taught as fact. Your conspiracy comes from too many evolutionists putting square pegs into round holes to prove their theory.

      "Darwinism" is challenged regularly in research science. There's certainly no cabal of scientists conspiring to keep evolutionary data from the public."

      Challenged by who? Creationists? Mainstream Science looks at creationists as the crackpots because most mainstreamers are hardcore Atheists. Science does not support the possibility of the Supernatural so it would rather believe that matter existed in space with no beginning and suddenly exploded and created the universe. But I digress.

      Point is that if this is a known "Early Hominid" And it is proven, then It throws a monkey wrench into evolution and religion and even politics.

      First off, you have to deal with "Sasquatch Rights" game hunting would probably be outlawed because you are taking these "Peoples" food supply and endangering them. The logging industry would be severely regulated because you are taking their habitat (This is no rare woodpecker or Owl, its a Human.) same for the mining and oil industries.

      Then you have to deal with even more strict protection laws as you would no doubt have religious fanatics screaming "These are the evil Giants the Bible spoke about!!!" while setting forest fires. They would also no doubt effect agriculture.

      Back to the Speech topic, God forbid they learn English... First word they speak might be "Lawyer" then that opens a new can of worms.

      Nope.. absolutely no motive to cover this up at all...

      Delete
    5. @Tzieth, I'll keep this brief... You should totally read "The Finch's Beak" (not recalling author). Deals with some holes in Darwin's evolutionary "theory".
      I could probably have a 3 hour conversation with you based on the topics in your above post... I'll just say I agree and disagree (~80/20). :)
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    6. I can't really address all your statements, but you're wrong that "most scientists are hardcore atheists" and that they "teach evolution as fact."

      I'm not sure where you've done your undergrad or grad work with respect to biology coursework, but if your instructors brought religion into their lectures then you were done a disservice by the faculty. Also, evolution as biological changes to a species over time is indeed a fact. There are theories as to why this occurs, and again, if your instructors taught you that any of these theories are fact, again, you were done a disservice by your college or university.

      Delete
    7. No they were not religious lol. You make my point. But biology aside, there is brainwashing in almost every subject. History, Geology, Psychology, Astronomy, Sociology. Theory is used as a platform and then the "Facts" are based on it. I will give you an example. "Homo Erectus is our ancestor" This they blurt out as "Fact" however the only way that could be a true fact is if evolution was a true fact.

      "The Civil War was about slavery" Do you really buy into that? If you truly research the true History, you will find that Jefferson Davis was in the process of abolishing the slave trade because it would no longer support the confederate economy with the C.S. being it's own sovereign nation and no factories to support it any longer (no jobs). The "Free the slaves" was a propaganda tool to take away British support of the C.S. (Every nation is always the good guy in it's history)

      The Big Bang THEORY. Links right into evolution like a well made lego. And this is the route that Astronomy takes in explaining why things are the way they are.

      Psychology is a whole science based on theory and we commit people over it?

      A-lot very same Sasquatch skeptics, are the very same people who believe what their textbooks say or even worse, they believe what the media says.

      My Degree was in Criminal Justice. But I took college courses in Biology, Sociology and Psychology while in high school as part of the program I was in. Maybe it has changed since then (1993) but I doubt it.

      @Anonymous,

      Thanks, I will look it up :)

      Delete
  16. Homo sapien silvanus. Much more elegant and the etymology has a whiff of legend too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like it but people might think that Todd with his muppet shows from Canada gave it the name :),(Joke)

      Delete
    2. I thought of that but, 20 years from now, people will still be talking about Bigfoot but no one will talking about Todd Standing.

      Delete
  17. So those were puppets after all? I mean I thought they were but was it actually proven yet?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well not really, but Standing will not allow for anyone to have acces to his videos and other material to be analyzed, also he refuses to share his location with actual scientist, interested in his work, so his credability is shot. Just like anything else you got to let your peers analyze your work so it nna be proven to be real.

      Delete
    2. I can understand not sharing the location and I can even understand not letting his peers analyze any of it.

      The red flag for me was that he was releasing these video's to the public for a price. And then I found out he has attempted to pull off hoaxes in the past. Then when I finally saw one of these video clips on youtube "That's a puppet!!!" Jumped right in my head.

      Delete
    3. todd "the super-tool" standing! is a fake! the only good thing about this man is the laws he has tried to get for protecting sasquatch. other than that we all seen finding BF, he wouldn't even put on a coat let alone take them to his cicrle-jerk spot! he just loves camera time. and he's apparently broke. never bring his name up again people. we got to cross out those fakes. one by one.

      Delete
  18. By doing some research you mean reading Robert Lindsay's blog or the Bigfoot Forums from about 6 months ago? What's your next article on, some guys in Georgia have a Bigfoot in the freezer?

    ReplyDelete
  19. WHERE IS LINDSAYS ANONYMOUS SOURCES NOW....WHERE IS THE DNA REPORT LINDSAY.....ITS MARCH 1ST YOU TOLD US THE END OF FEBRUARY...WHERE IS IT!?? WHERE IS IT LINDSAY!?? WHAT HAPPENED THIS TIME.....WHATS THE MATTER "SQUATCH GOT YOUR TONGUE LINDSAY!!?

    ReplyDelete
  20. i hope they use the sasquatch! that's what the indians of old and new north america use to call them so why change. cause after all they (indians) know best. right?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nonnonononnono. It is very unlikely that they are that close to us. I think the scientific name should be Homo pongoides.

    ReplyDelete
  22. These are basically brief term loans that do present you meet your fiscal
    challenges within a desired specific time period. Contemplating time limitations these loans are especially intended above an obligation free of charge platform.

    As such, these are kept absolutely zero cost from
    credential checksums. Troubles such as defaults, arrears, bankruptcy, CCJs
    and even IVAs are not regarded right here. Further, there are also no
    collaterals connected with these loans. There is minimal paper
    work expected on the component of borrower. There are also
    no hidden or further documentation or faxing required right here.

    Applying for these loans is also extremely convenient. Many people basically
    need filling an internet type and when this gets authorized cash is
    received within 24 hours time frame. These loans are commonly
    provided under convenient terms and conditions. The basic basic applicant criteria here is that they will need to be a UK resident and of
    18 years of age.
    My web site - http://manma90.blogspot.co.at/2011/07/chat-sidebar-baru-facebook.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. The government will not allow them to exist. They are hunted and all corpses destroyed. Sadly they'll be extinct soon.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia