well i think it’s a primate with a long history.

but none the less it will be caught

amen?.
i think it’s an ape. but very well can be a monkey..

apes are built except for chimpanzee their skinny.. and when i mean built i mean like gorillas and orangutans..

but i could be wrong it could be a monkey.

if it’s indeed a subspecies then wow what primate made that?
and if it’s the original primate that started all the primates. wow lol..

but if Gorillas, Orangutans, Chimpanzee’s..etc. are related then i wonder where did the Gorillas, Orangutans, Chimpanzee’s originated from. Cause i have a feeling Yowl, Bigfoot, yeti maybe resembles or have Characteristics of Apes instead of monkeys.

as far as i know.. from what i read.. no one mentioned an ape like characteristics

I believe in our present time were able to do more then what we expect.. i think were able to catch lots of cryptids, living fossils..etc.

but with patients unless they appear on the spot right away.
;d amen amen.:)

if we don’t have patients and if we jump to conclusion we will be busting a “Destination Truth” (although i love that show) meaning that (if i remember correctly) when they were looking for the Mokele-Mbembe.. they didn’t see it, when their trip was over they said “it isn’t real”… that’s so lame… they can’t assume that just cause they didn’t see it… chances are you won’t see it when you want to, and chances are you will… and chances are you will see it when you don’t look for it. and chances are you will not.

i say if someone is going to do an expedition at least it should be for a week or 2 or more.. but if their able to stay for days it’s cool.. as long as they realize they may not see it…. if i go around my city hoping to see lizards (yes we have lizards “wild ones”) chances are i will not see one. And I won’t see one just cause i want to…and second their able to not be seen by us.. even if their small and have a big advantage of hiding lol… you get my point.
Too many of us jump to conclusions and not realizing the truth is right in front of our eyes.
i know for a fact that if see any spiders, insects and bugs we never seen before we ignore them or kill them.. without even realizing they may be a cryptid or living fossil or unknown species… who knows….

same goes with larger creatures not everybody seen and knows all recorded animals and they may assume the animal they saw is recorded or they will ignore it and walk away… without even realizing it was a living fossil or cryptid or unknown species of animals..etc.

i for sure seen a strange insect or bug or spider.. what ever it was.. in my bathroom although i had no batteries for my camera then.. so i couldn’t have tooken a picture. the only picture i have of it is in my head.

I understand the appeal in developing constructs in which Scripture and popular thought are reconciled. It’s almost as though you can have your cake and eat it too.
However, our Lord Jesus Christ calls us to unflinching allegiance. And He’s worth it.

I’m afraid that you have been deceived by the site that you copied and pasted. As soon as I checked it out, I recognized it for what it is: the site of a “lone ranger theologian.” There are many such sites on the Web.
This guy espouses many positions that have either fallen out of favor with, or recognized as heresy by credible evangelical scholars (KJV Onlyism, etc.).

Without getting into the technicalities of the Hebrew, let me just state that the language does NOT preclude 6 day creationism. It is intellectually tenuous and theologically impossible to read into Genesis an entire pre-Adamic history on the basis of linking verbs that CAN be used in the way that you argue for.

Are you arguing that the material of the universe existed before the 6 days of “forming”? If so, you’ll have to reckon with Ex. 20:11.

Are you arguing that plants existed for more than 24 hrs. apart from the sun?

Most significantly, if there was a pre-Adamic race that was “ruined,” then there was death before the Fall. What does that do to your theology? What does that mean for Romans ch. 5?

What really concerns me is that we have an individual widely considered as one of the foremost experts on the yowie phenomenon who says,

“After 25 years on the trail, I really suspect that the American Indians, the Australian Aborigines and some of the whacked-out American researchers are right: that is, that we’re dealing with shape-shifting phantoms here that will probably remain beyond human comprehension.”

Without delving into the broad strokes with which he erroneously characterized Native American perspectives, I cannot, as a biologist, accept supernatural or intellectually inaccessible rationalizations for yowie sightings. If the same sort of comments had been made by (say) a Jeff Meldrum or John Bindernagel, one would be justified in dismissing them as the ravings of a non-scientist and to conclude that the subject of his interest had no merit.

As for the paranormal aspect and the idea that some significant percentage of sasquatch sighting report submissions include some “paranormal” component, I have not seen that. In my years with the BFRO and now the TBRC, I’ve reviewed thousands of reports. I’d say that far less than one percent smack of the supernatural. That differs drastically from Healy’s 20% estimate.

While acknowledging the likelihood that many Internet posted and/or published sasquatch sighting reports represent mistakes, misidentifications, or hoaxes, I remain confident that there is a biological basis to the sasquatch phenomenon.

I cannot say that I feel the same way with regard to the existence of the yowie, especially when, as noted, a primary researcher invokes paranormal explanations.

Not sure where your opinion falls on the reality of the Yowie, but I might be able to make a guess.

Per Tony Healey’s: “If we reject everything about the Yowie that smacks of the paranormal we’d have to sweep 20 per cent of the accumulated data under the carpet.”

All I can say is: you can probably say the same, if not worse, for the sasquatch, if you’re counting (1) every obvious prank or lie; (2) all the “paranormal” accounts; (3) all “other,” i.e., can’t categorize them as the first two but they’re not much if anything to go on.

You still have what is left, which is a LOT, and which - many think, me included - seems to point to the reality of the animal.

Fact is, the “tabloid life” of crypto-critters brings all kinds of people out of the woodwork with “I’ve seen one.”

Many of whom may actually have done so.

Guess that’s where I am on the Yowie. If I had to bet house and salary on the sasquatch, up or down, right now, I would bet it exists. But then, I’m more famiilar with what’s left after the woodwork has yielded, well, everything else.

Not so much with the Yowie, given (especially) the complicating factors for nonhuman primates in Australia.

I would think that this would be likely to evolve in Australia more than anywhere else because there are so many large anthrophagic carnivores (i.e., thylacosmiloids, crocodilians, Varanus prisca) there whereas in, say Mongolia, i can’t think of very many.

This doesn’t actually help in the question of identity, but I always wondered why unknown anthropoids sleep like this. I have always felt that there were many kinds of unknown primates in Australia, but these camel-kneed fellows might actually have originated in Australia, and moved north to the Gobi. That is my theory to explain the knee-sleeping behavior. As for identity, I feel that the camel-kneed ones are some primitive offshoot of the earliest members of the genus Homo, whearas the Yeti is a surviving Gigantopithecus and Bigfoot might be distantly related to the earliest hominoids.

The smaller one is called Junjadee.
This one is said to be similar in size to the Orang Pendek and/or Ebu Gogo.

The larger one is simply called Yowie, with sizes comparable to Bigfoot.
The larger variety may or may not come in two variants, one that appears more human than ape, the other appears more ape than human.
The more humanlike variety is always seen walking upright.
The apelike variety often drops to all fours and “knuckle” runs into the scrub.

Just because Australia is isolated, does not preclude them being Hominids or Apes. The Koori (Aborigines) got here. I see no reason why a higher form of Ape or even Hominid couldn’t as well. It would have been just a tad harder is all.

Also remember, the Philippines, New Guinea, the Solomon Islands and other Melanesian Islands are also said to have their “forest Giants” as well. So, these particular cryptid species could well be scattered across a large part of this region.

More research needs to be done and of course, there are few researchers to do it and even less funding to do the research with. So the question will remain largely unanswered for some time to come.

If orang pendek or yowie is real, we might have the ancestor right here. Soo, I’ll stick to the floresiensis theory with yowie too.

If erectus reached flores by boat, then why not Australia as well?

The reason these creatures remain undiscovered is that they’re nocturnal. Also the arm bones of flores man the dminisi erectus show adaptation to moving in trees..

The only thing I find puzzling is the cranial capacity of flores men. How could they have mastered such skillful tool making and even sea faring with brains just a bit bigger than a chimp has?