Comments on: Russian Relic Hominids

By: Kronprinz_adam

Kronprinz_adam — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:16:16 +0000

The drawing ist just…scary…

By: mystery_man

mystery_man — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 02:37:02 +0000

What about footprints? Has there been any comparative analysis done between the footprints found in North America and the ones in Asia?

By: mystery_man

mystery_man — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 02:35:07 +0000

Ok, The_Carrot. I see what you meant. That makes sense. It is a very interesting possibility to consider.

By: joppa

joppa — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 00:21:26 +0000

I would give up fire if it kept those pesky humans from hunting me down. Interesting, perhaps several of these creatures “lost culture” in order to survive.

By: things-in-the-woods

things-in-the-woods — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:29:21 +0000

The_Carrot: ya got there before me…

By: The_Carrot

The_Carrot — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:26:41 +0000

What I meant by the possibility of surviving H. Erectus populations ‘devolving’ was not physically devolving, but (for some reason) losing some of their existing culture.

For example, the evidence strongly suggests that h.erectus used fire, but I don’t know of any reports of almas using fire. I’m hypothesizing that IF there are surviving pockets of erectus decendants that are responsible for the reports of almas they seem to have lost some of their culture.

H. erectus had a thinner layer of culture than Neandertal; I find it very hard to believe that surviving Neandertals would lose almost every vestige of culture (use of fire, clothing, sophisticated tool creation/use, probable language) simply because there was soo much to lose. Erectus didn’t have that much to lose and may have found it much easier to give up certain cultural elements.

In any event, in my opinion the alamsty reports sound an awful lot like uncultured h. erectus both in physical description and behavior.

(Note: I’m just talking about almas here, NOT Bigfoot-like creatures. The more I study the subject the more I’ll reluctantly agree that this is a multi-species problem).

By: things-in-the-woods

things-in-the-woods — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:23:04 +0000

Hi,
I also tend towards the erectus theory for the claimed old world hominids (or at least the eurasian ones- the picture the russian guy painted almost certainly isn’t a neanderthal, and the lack of material culture almost certainly rules them out- neanderthal material culture was very sophisticated; they had hafted weapons, clothing, used fire), and i’ve also come round to it for the north american sasquatch. This is not because there is any real evidence pointing that way- but rather only because the more i think about it, the more improbable the giganto theory seems.

I used to consider this the best explanation, but as someone on this site pointed out, if we are to put any credence by the footprint evidence for sasquatch, then what we have is a hominid rather than an an ape (and if its a hominid its most likely erectus or a closely related species). Ape feet have divergent big toes that just aren’t reported for sas. I suppose they could have evolved more hominid-like feet, but it just makes it all so much more unlikely. We also have erectus distributed at least as widely in east asia (the putative route into north america) as giganto, and probably much later in time.

It still isn’t very likely, but i think it’s more likely that this hominid that had so successfully emerged out of africa and spread across large swathes of europe and asia, could make it to north america across the bering land bridge, than what was probably an ape that was much more specialised in its adaptation to tropical or sub-tropical forest.

Incidently, I don’t put much weigth in the painting that is shown- did the guy see the creature himself? if so, how long after the event did this guy paint it?

If he didn’t see it himself, it looks to me like he might just have talked to some locals who had stumbled out of the local cinema having just seen king kong.

By: mystery_man

mystery_man — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 16:28:14 +0000

Giganto is a good theory for the North American version, but the descriptions from Asia tend to be a little different. There is every possibility that they are not the same species at all or even two different earlier ancestors of man. Of course without any evidence this is mostly speculation, but just going from eyewitness accounts, the two seem to be different creatures.

By: Al

Al — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 15:24:49 +0000

Personally, I find all of the above comments interesting. One angle that I have on my mind though, is that of locomotion. Unless we are talking about multiple species here (which is entirely possible), is there any information or evidence that Erectus was equally comfortable in quadrupedal motion as bipedal? Here in the US, these animals appear to be able to change their method of motion and are equally comfortable in either mode.
At present, I would have to stick with the Giganto descedent theory.

By: MBFH

MBFH — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 14:36:30 +0000

Great stuff Loren. I agree with Joppa and Tengu, in a way. I think that Asia is the place where a Bigfoot type creature/creatures is/are likely to survive. There is an incredible amount of virtually untouched wilderness in which an adaptable creature coudl survive undiscovered. As for capturing one out there, you’d have to find it first…