It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The first scientific study into evidence of yetis has been published

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: kevinp2300

I'm only speculating but it's possible that the bipedalism was an adaptation related to traversing steep inclines/declines. They would have stood on their hind legs to reach possibly to make the climb easier. Like I said, pure speculation on my part as I don't know much about these guys. The human family tree is more my purview.


so do you believe in the yetti/bigfoot? and if so, what evolutionary timeline do u think they followed? my best guess is they would of had to split from early ape or before neanderthal at least.




posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 03:28 AM
link   
a reply to: kevinp2300

I'm not convinced one way or the other. The ever curious inner child that made me want to study anthropology in the first place would very much like for them to be real. I think it's certainly a distinct possibility and it could be represented in the fossil record. Gigantopithecus Blacki lived as far back as one MYA, were the largest apes to have ever lived( just shy of 10 ft tall and as much as 1200 lbs) and geographically they were from the same areas where most yeti sightings occur, Nepal, China, India and Vietnam. The fossil record stop approx 100,000 yrs ago indicating it likely went extinct around then. However as we've seen with the coelacanth and a few others, just because we think a species died out at a certain time doesn't mean we are always correct and the geography and terrain are perfect places to exist with little outside contact so while I'm not certain I certainly am willing to entertain the notion if their existence.


edit on 2-7-2014 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Yea... I know about that giant ape... its great when they can simply put out a theory based on partial jaws (that particular scale you're talking about was calculated from 1 partial jaw - the biggest one) some teeth and yet... no other bone has been found belonging to that creature and all of a sudden that thing turns "official". Plus you have huge differences in sizes... you cant even draw the average G. Blacki "size". (oh yea some say ones were males and others were females and that justifies the discrepancy found... errrm... ok...)

So I would say that Gigantopithecus Blacki is as real as big foot or yeti... a partial jaw, a few teeth and maybe... maybe a piece of a distal humerus I think, dont really make evidence enough for me to be able to reconstruct a whole missing skeleton.

But if we're in the realm of theories that need no fundament, what would be funny in this case would be that these "little" guys were actually intelligent enough to bury their dead (I mean elephants do) - that would justify the missing skeletons... at least.



posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital

Man,I would love to think that there is a large species of ancient bear(or its modern day descendent)roaming the High Himalayas.Its certainly one of the few areas on earth an ancient animal could have remained hidden all these years.

But part of me thinks the hair sample could have been preserved in ice for centuries,and may belong to a long extinct species.Although its claimed that at least one sample was from a hunter who killed a beast only 40 years ago:



But a golden-brown sample from an animal shot by a hunter in the northern region of Ladakh, India, 40 years ago and a reddish-brown hair from a high-altitude bamboo forest in Bhutan both matched the presumed long-lost bear.
Prof Sykes admitted that the study has not yet come across a hidden human-like creature – the Holy Grail of cryptozoologists – but that the anomalous bear was the next best thing.


www.independent.co.uk...

Notice that word I put in Bold?
Ladakh...the only other time I have heard that location mentioned was years back-It was supposed to be the location of an alien UFO base I seem to remember...
Probably nothing,but as this is ATS-wouldn't it be cool if aliens were back engineering ancient DNA and bringing back extinct bears?
Mammoths next please aliens!!




posted on Jul, 2 2014 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
a reply to: daaskapital

Man,I would love to think that there is a large species of ancient bear(or its modern day descendent)roaming the High Himalayas.Its certainly one of the few areas on earth an ancient animal could have remained hidden all these years.

But part of me thinks the hair sample could have been preserved in ice for centuries,and may belong to a long extinct species.Although its claimed that at least one sample was from a hunter who killed a beast only 40 years ago:



But a golden-brown sample from an animal shot by a hunter in the northern region of Ladakh, India, 40 years ago and a reddish-brown hair from a high-altitude bamboo forest in Bhutan both matched the presumed long-lost bear.
Prof Sykes admitted that the study has not yet come across a hidden human-like creature – the Holy Grail of cryptozoologists – but that the anomalous bear was the next best thing.


www.independent.co.uk...

Notice that word I put in Bold?
Ladakh...the only other time I have heard that location mentioned was years back-It was supposed to be the location of an alien UFO base I seem to remember...
Probably nothing,but as this is ATS-wouldn't it be cool if aliens were back engineering ancient DNA and bringing back extinct bears?
Mammoths next please aliens!!



i have a request for these aliens backengineering dna:
1.raptor
2. t rex
3. sabertooth
4. megalodon
5. bigfoot
6. giant 60 foot snake species
7. manbearpig



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: kevinp2300

I'm not convinced one way or the other. The ever curious inner child that made me want to study anthropology in the first place would very much like for them to be real. I think it's certainly a distinct possibility and it could be represented in the fossil record. Gigantopithecus Blacki lived as far back as one MYA, were the largest apes to have ever lived( just shy of 10 ft tall and as much as 1200 lbs) and geographically they were from the same areas where most yeti sightings occur, Nepal, China, India and Vietnam. The fossil record stop approx 100,000 yrs ago indicating it likely went extinct around then. However as we've seen with the coelacanth and a few others, just because we think a species died out at a certain time doesn't mean we are always correct and the geography and terrain are perfect places to exist with little outside contact so while I'm not certain I certainly am willing to entertain the notion if their existence.



There's a known rule with mammals that when food resources are reduced, future generations become smaller. So those two creatures may not have died off, but actually become smaller. They look very much like orangutans and bonobo apes.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ReturnofTheSonOfNothing

But he is, none the less, right.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: stormcell

Yes, that's very true and evidenced by H. Floresiensis, Pygmy elephants, Pygmy marmoset, Pygmy Tapir etc...
However, that occurs when population sizes do not decrease. It's fully possible that a population could decrease and allow the remaining members to maintain their large size. It's hard to say too much about any of the gigantopithecus with any reliability because the fossil evidence for them is very limited, teeth partial jawbones and not much else. That doesn't mean we can't discern anything about them but there are definitely limitations. We learned a hell of a lot about Denisovans after mapping their genome and all they had to work with was a finger if memory serves me correctly. But I'm digressing... My point ws that based on the teeth we can be pretty certain that gigantopithecus ate only plants such as bamboo which to my knowledge didn't decrease in the last few hundred thousand years AFAIK.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Abkhazia's Robert Kukubaba 0:39 him grandfather and mom youtu.be... great-grandson of snow woman named Zana ,next vidos skull of him grandfather youtu.be... 1:44... I missed the name of the theme there really word the first ? Mashkovtsev and Porshnev in Russia raised the issue in 1960s ! it's about Zana use translator planeta.moy.su...
edit on 3/7/14 by mangust69 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join