Giant apes from the past? Evolution has been wrong before, could this species of gorilla still exist today? Is this large ape responsible for all of the Bigfoot sightings?

    Bigfoot, is it really just a large ape believed to be extinct, skeletal remains have been found. Evolutions millions of years is ambiguous at best, could there still be a giant ape roaming the wilderness' of the earth?

    Yeti, Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Skunk ape, all of these may just be explainable? We are constantly discovering new species of plants and animals that have been previously unknown to science, could there really be another species of ape that we're not aware of?

    +6  Views: 2974 Answers: 21 Posted: 10 years ago

    21 Answers

    There was a guy on the news recently who videotaped something that looked like it could have been a bigfoot, he was in a remote area.. i don't disbelieve them, but i dont know.. who knows. The 'myth' or legend began with the natives, not with the media. Just as everything the media or hollywood spends time admiring all have ancient origins.. there are countless species being discovered every day, a bigfoot seems like it would be hard to miss, but if they wanted to stay hidden, im sure they have the intelligence to do so.


    Good comment, thanks. Some chimpanzees have learned sign language, I think animals are smarter than what most people, and science gives them credit for. I just think that if people are really as open minded as they say they are, there should always be consideration to the what if questions. T.u. for your open minded comment.

    Has anyone checked Obama's feet?

    sally jane

    NICE :)

    Big foot is as real as the Lough Ness Monster and Men on Mars lol


    You know, I sort of agree with your opinion on this, I just think it's an interesting subject with all the bigfoot sightings all over the world. I was wondering if there could be a reasonable explanation for it? It seems like there could be a possibility, I don't want to say there is no such thing, and try to be open minded about everything as much as possible.

    Who knows, maybe it's just some sort of large ape that doesn't like being around man? There are new species of amimals being discovered all the time. If there is someone on this site that has actually seen one, please leave a comment.

    well my wife was the first one in her family bloodline to walk up right!she also can't find a pair of shoes that fit!

    Wow, she may be related to bigfoot? As long as you love her that's what counts, even bigfoots relatives deserve some love.

    Another possibility is she's related to that missing link fellow, no one can seem to find???? lol
    Picture: new monkey discovered in Myanmar
    ... and the carcass of the newly discovered species, the Myanmar snub-nosed monkey. ... today the discovery of a new species of ape in ... RECENT FEATURES - Cached
    New Monkey Species Found in Remote Amazon
    A previously unknown species of uakari monkey was found during recent hunting trips in the Amazon, a New ... New Monkey Species Discovered in East Africa (May 19, 2005) - Cached
    Primate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    * Evolutionary...|
    * Distinguishin...|
    * Anatomy,...|
    * Behavior

    The first hominid fossils were discovered in Northern Africa ... though to a greater degree in Old World species ( apes and some monkeys) than New World species. Recent ... - Cached
    Hi leeroy..glad to see you are around and slowly dying with the rest of us who feel somehow compelled to answer! (:

    Yes, nice to hear from you, I hope you don't mind that I nicknamed you M.J., if it bothers you I won't use it anymore?
    I have quite a bit of painkillers running through my system today, had a lot of pain when I woke up... Otherwise, I'm doing o.k., you know how difficult life can be, just going through tough times...
    ole hipster

    Leeroy...MJ is cool with me but what does it mean?? haha
    All I can say is "Get ready"!

    Camille is going out to bag a bigfoot cool. Bring a big gun...
    I haven't bagged a bigfoot yet, but I'm working on it. There was a show on History channel about bigfoot and snow lake in Canada, if you get the chance and are interested research it.
    I just wanted to bring this one back up if you haven't read it before it's an interesting theory. It's also a funny joke platform...
    @camile, are you going out to bag you a bigfoot, is that what you meant by,"Get ready?" Or that someone will find proof soon?. Just wondering....
    The strange thing is there are just so many sightings all over the world, how can you explain all of these eye witness accounts.????

    They're just smoking that funny stuff leeroy, there's plenty of that all around the world!

    Maybe they need to test the water in these areas, could be something in it? Lol

    That may be true fid, but there is real evidence of a giant ape that walked among us, no on is exactly sure when they went extinct, or if they did ? We are discovering new species all the time on this planet, I am just saying it's a possibility.???

    So what do you think?

    In the space of six months, one alleged Canadian Bigfoot was videotaped and another left its hair. Nothing new has been learned from the Manitoba video -- it's still an unidentified dark blob, possibly one of any number of large animals in the area -- and the Yukon hair has been identified as bison. The mystery remains, and the search goes on.

    Benjamin Radford wrote "Bigfoot at 50: Evaluating a Half-Century of Bigfoot Evidence" for the March/April 2002 issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine. He is co-author of Hoaxes, Myths, and Manias: Why We Need Critical Thinking.


    Umbriel, I am laughing so hard. David Icke, yes perhaps you're right, he needs stuff for his next volume.

    This is why evidence such as the Yukon hair is so crucial to proving Bigfoot's existence. At a press conference, Coltman revealed the results of his DNA analysis. The Bigfoot hair matched that of a bison 100 percent. Bison are common in the region, and it seems likely that the locals' expectations and perceptions were influenced by the Manitoba sighting three months earlier.

    The DNA result will not, of course, deter the Bigfoot believers and eyewitnesses. But it does provide an excellent example of what happens when hard evidence of a mystery is subjected to the rigors of science. This high-profile Bigfoot hair analysis by a reputable scientist also addresses a criticism often heard by monster enthusiasts: That mainstream scientists ignore Bigfoot evidence for fear of damaging their reputations in pursuit of what some would call a myth. Yet if Bigfoot or other mystery creatures do exist, they are certainly worthy of serious scientific scrutiny. At the same time, since all previous samples were found to be hoaxes, inconclusive, or from known animals, scientists' lack of enthusiasm for spending time and resources on yet more such evidence is understandable.

    The Yukon sample is not the first Bigfoot hair to be analyzed. Over the past few decades, dozens of hair and blood samples have been recovered from alleged Bigfoot encounters. (One example: in 2000, a group of Bigfoot researchers found what they interpreted as a Bigfoot body print in mud near Mount Adams in Washington state. Despite five years of study and the promise of alleged hair, saliva, and dung samples, no conclusive evidence has yet emerged from the find.) When a definite conclusion has been reached, the samples have invariably turned out to have prosaic sources -- "Bigfoot hair" turns out to be elk or bear or cow hair, for example, or "Bigfoot blood" is revealed to be transmission fluid. In his book Big Footprints, noted researcher Grover Krantz discusses such evidence: "The usual fate of these items is that they either receive no scientific study, or else the documentation of that study is either lost or unobtainable. In most cases where competent analyses have been made, the material turned out to be bogus or else no determination could be made."

    It is important to understand the science behind hair analyses: An outcome of "unknown" or "inconclusive" does not necessarily mean the sample came from a Bigfoot. All it means is that the sample did not match whichever other samples it was compared to. For that reason, a wig or carpet fiber or even hair from an animal foreign to the region (such as a kangaroo or camel) claimed to be from a Bigfoot will likely be reported as "unknown." It also highlights a basic methodological problem that plagues all Bigfoot research: The lack of a standard measure. We know what a bear track looks like; if we find a track that we suspect was left by a bear, we can compare it to one we know was left by a bear. But there are no undisputed Bigfoot specimens by which to compare new evidence.

    On July 28, after a week of testing, the results were announced. More on that later, but first some background on the search for Bigfoot evidence. Bigfoot burst into the public's mind in 1959, with the publication of a magazine article describing the discovery of large, mysterious footprints the year earlier in Bluff Creek, California. A half century later, the question of Bigfoot's existence remains open. Bigfoot is still sought, the pursuit kept alive by a steady stream of sightings, occasional photos or footprint finds, and sporadic media coverage. By far the majority of support for Bigfoot comes from eyewitness reports and anecdotes, yet this is the least reliable kind of evidence -- and virtually worthless from a scientific perspective. What science needs to validate the existence of Bigfoot is hard evidence: a live or dead specimen, bones, teeth, blood, or hair. Because hard evidence is lacking -- no bones or bodies have been found -- Coltman's analysis was much anticipated.

    Bigfoot's been a busy beastie recently, especially in Canada. In April a Manitoba ferry operator videotaped a large, dark, indistinct creature moving along a riverbank. Whatever it was -- Bigfoot, bear, bison, or otherwise -- it caused quite a stir and made international news.

    Three months later, in nearby Yukon province, Teslin resident Trent Smarch found a tuft of coarse, dark hair in a forest where he and other locals heard a large, mysterious animal in the brush. They believe the creature was a Sasquatch, the Canadian version of the huge, hairy, humanoid mystery creature known as Bigfoot. The find was reported across North America and around the world, and many wondered if this hair find might finally prove Bigfoot's long-disputed existence. The hair sample was sent to University of Alberta wildlife geneticist David Coltman for analysis. Coltman was asked to extract any available DNA from the hair, sequence the mitochondrial genes, and compare them to a database of known regional creatures.

    A fresh analysis of two previously found skulls determined they're 200,000 old, making them the oldest known examples of our species. Yet fossil records indicate musical instruments, drawings, needles and other sophisticated tools didn't appear until about 50,000 years ago, suggesting Homo sapiens had a pretty lowbrow culture for 150,000 years.

    Well, evolution takes time. Another team found the fossilized remains of what they think is humankind's first walking ancestor, from 4 million years ago. Other research confirmed that the oldest human ancestor, from the time when we split with the apes, lived around 6 million years ago. Oh, and you have to respect our relatively recent ancestors (the lowbrow folks) who we now know lived among 10-foot-tall gorillas that have since gone extinct. Maybe they were so busy running they had no time to paint or create alphabets.

    A gigantic ape standing 10 feet tall and weighing up to 1,200 pounds lived alongside humans for over a million years, according to a new study.

    Fortunately for the early humans, the huge primate's diet consisted mainly of bamboo.

    Scientists have known about Gigantopithecus blackii since the accidental discovery of some of its teeth on sale in a Hong Kong pharmacy about 80 years ago. While the idea of a giant ape piqued the interest of scientists – and bigfoot hunters – around the world, it was unclear how long ago this beast went extinct, or possibly it hasn't.?

    i think no animal is acually extinct they have just been changed over time because science does not have much evidence

    What are you talki'n about I am bigfoot

    Top contributors in Uncategorized category

    Answers: 18064 / Questions: 153
    Karma: 1101K
    Answers: 47272 / Questions: 115
    Karma: 953K
    country bumpkin
    Answers: 11323 / Questions: 160
    Karma: 838K
    Answers: 2393 / Questions: 30
    Karma: 760K
    > Top contributors chart

    Unanswered Questions