sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
Post by sebastian on Feb 15, 2013 20:47:59 GMT -5
I graduated from UCL and your use of Professor Watson is out of context. Evolution is a fact, not theory. God is created because our brains evolved.
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Feb 15, 2013 23:09:29 GMT -5
I believe what the bible says God created the heavens and the earth and all things on the earth in 6 days not over millions of years. It is our given right to believe anything we wish. We can then agree to disagree, some are creationists, others evolutionists.it is an age long debate which cannot be settled on this little forum. So for sake of conversation, let's not try to convince others of our beliefs. With that said the field of study of Bigfoot certainly leans towards the evolutionary standpoint, thus it will be assumed to be correct as a matter of fact for the purposes of hominid classification and the like. Let me leave you with a few pearls of wisdom: You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice. If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill; I will choose a path that's clear - I will choose Free Will. Richard
|
|
shawn
No life here!
Posts: 17
|
Post by shawn on Feb 16, 2013 0:22:47 GMT -5
Wasn't looking to (convince) anyone of my beliefs I was merely expressing them. Can you elaborate on how the existence of bigfoot leans towards evolution? If they do in fact exist that doesn't prove evolution anymore than the existence of any other animal.
Here is a quote from Dr. Watson word for word.
Evolution (is) a theory universally accepted not because it can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible.
I don't read anywhere in his comment where he says evolution is (fact). I don't just throw random comments on this forum without having the truth to support what I comment on.
Richard if you don't think we should argue this point on the forum then why do you continue to press the point of evolution with regards to the existence of bigfoot.
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 16, 2013 2:39:34 GMT -5
John Green writes:
It is usually a good idea to read a book before getting involved in controversy about it. The book is “The Upright Ape”, by Dr. Aaron Filler.
My interest in pre Homo sapiens fossils goes back to university days fully 70 years ago, when I could name and describe every one then known, and throughout that time I often read that there is no fossil leading to the existing great apes, so it did not surprise me to learn from Dr. Filler that no fossil evidence for a quadrupedal higher primate has ever been found.
What did surprise me was the evidence that chimpanzees and gorillas have backbones designed for bipedalism, and about the chimpanzee I was able to check immediately in my copy of Dr. Daris Swindler’s ”Atlas of Primate Gross Anatomy.” Sure enough, the chimpanzee lumbar vertebrae, just like the human, is a close match for a corresponding fossil found in Africa and dated at 21 million years—all of them differing fundamentally from the vertebrae of a quadrupedal baboon.
Most paleontologists are not also spine surgeons, so it is no surprise that they have missed what was obvious to Dr. Filler and continue to believe and teach that human ancestors walked on four legs until they became upright as tree dwellers, and then invented true bipedalism after returning to the ground. It is a deep-seated belief, but that is all it is. There is no evidence for it whatever.
John Green
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Feb 17, 2013 22:08:08 GMT -5
Given:
If Bigfoot exist, then it is by far the closest animal to humans in terms of intelligence, size and locomotion.
Then, if it isn't an evolutionary offshoot of the greater primate line - then it was created by God in a creationist mindset.
Therefore the troubling question that arises is rather simple: Why did God create something that is almost as intelligent as man, with very human characteristics and behavior, yet force them to remain subservient to man, have no soul, cannot be saved etc..
So, does it make more sense that they are genetically related to us via evolution? And not a "ready made creature"?
As I said, evolution does not for a second nullify creationism.
Richard
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Feb 17, 2013 22:10:09 GMT -5
First best find one, then have the philosophical questions of where they (and we) came from. Just don't tell me they are somehow associated with UFOs and trans dimensional harmonic beings
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 18, 2013 0:24:03 GMT -5
Given: If Bigfoot exist, then it is by far the closest animal to humans in terms of intelligence, size and locomotion. Richard What makes the Sasquatch 'intelligent' As far as I know, they have never evolved any more than a bear has. They build no shelters, wear no clothes, or use tools other than being said to throw rocks .... if the later is even true. They have never been known to create fire. Is it just their being said to be elusive, which really isn't an accurate statement as they are said to be seen quite often, is why they are being called intelligent? I really do not mean to sound critical of anyone who thinks othertwise, but I must smile when I sometimes hear people try and justify their lack of success in encountering one of these creatures as teraine, superior strength, and adaptation seems to be enough to out distance themselves from man. Chimps have been seen using sticks to fish insects out of holes. Some chimps have been witnessed making weapons out of sticks by sharpening them so to stab at bush babies while in their dens. I don't recall any evidence that the Sasquatch has accoplished such task. The 'Finding Bigfoot' people like to make unfounded claims like Sasquatch likes to travel the path of least resistance, but I know of no proof of this. A handful of times that tracks have been found walking along a dirt road, the subject didn't stay on it long before leaving it altogether. So I am curious as to how these creatures can be deemed to be any more intelligent than any other animal.
|
|
shawn
No life here!
Posts: 17
|
Post by shawn on Feb 18, 2013 13:27:19 GMT -5
I agree anything discussed about Bigfoot is nothing more than opinions or theories since we have no hard evidence to go by. I do think they are an illusive animal seen no more often than a bobcat or mtn lion. I've heard the suggestion they hide their tracks which I find doubtful they have that level of intelligence.
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Feb 18, 2013 16:39:12 GMT -5
There have been reported cases of tool use by many First Nations of Bigfoot. Granted, they are to be taken with a grain of salt. Intelligence is proportional to curiosity, and here I think we can agree that they appear to be quite curious. From a biological viewpoint, given the obvious simian lineage, their size would certainly lead to a large brain, and thus increased intelligence. After all, one cannot forget that many tribes at first contact were no more "advanced" that what we see Bigfoot doing today. Do note, that I am having to assume that they exist, else all this is pure rubbish. Richard
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 19, 2013 0:32:28 GMT -5
That is an understatement. ;D
As are chimps, racoons, and many other animals.
I have not seen Bigfoot building shelters, using blowguns to kill animals for food, and so forth. I know of no advancement that the Sasquatch has been said to have made any more than let us say - a bear who has a smaller brain than our own.
I am just one of those who does not feel comfortable with thinking that elusivness goes hand in hand with intelligence.
|
|
shawn
No life here!
Posts: 17
|
Post by shawn on Feb 19, 2013 23:18:44 GMT -5
Wolverines are considered to be one of the most elusive animals on the planet they are not seen as a particularly intelligent animal so I have to agree that elusiveness doesn't go hand and hand with intelligence.
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Feb 20, 2013 1:46:48 GMT -5
Don't misunderstand me - I am not saying BF is comparable to human intelligence but it certainly would be second in my opinion vs other creatures given the various observations over the last 30+ years R
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 20, 2013 7:46:15 GMT -5
Don't misunderstand me - I am not saying BF is comparable to human intelligence but it certainly would be second in my opinion vs other creatures given the various observations over the last 30+ years R I recommend watching National Geographic's 'Ape Genius' to see if you still feel that way. I downloaded it off of Vuze. It may possibly be found on Youtube.
|
|
Sean V.
Has opinions now!
Alberta Sasquatch Researcher
Posts: 256
|
Post by Sean V. on Feb 24, 2013 16:01:45 GMT -5
There have been reported cases of tool use by many First Nations of Bigfoot. Granted, they are to be taken with a grain of salt. Actually there have been many reports across the board of tool use by Sasquatch. The most well known report of tool use is rock throwing, its crude but its still a tool.
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 27, 2013 16:55:50 GMT -5
Actually there have been many reports across the board of tool use by Sasquatch. The most well known report of tool use is rock throwing, its crude but its still a tool. I think Mary Green reported them doing everything from talking to her to running to the store for her to get some more garlic. On the other hand - Apes have been filmed in the act of using tools and making weapons with a purpose in mind.
|
|