Deer Skin Wearing Yowie

[Dean Harrison]

An interesting Report just in.

This is the synopsis:

http://www.yowiehunters.com.au/index.ph ... Itemid=132


Listening to the full report gives the story more justice of course. When we have time to edited it down, we will add it to our Audio section along with a few more.

Speaking of unusual, yet not, is a new Report from W.A. concerning an apparent Yowie Sighting where the creature disappeared into thin air. Report ----> http://www.yowiehunters.com.au/index.ph ... Itemid=136

Wandering rings a bell. I am sure there has been mention within the past few months of a sighting there before. I can't seem to located it in my last 6 months files. Perhaps it was mentioned on the Forum or is in my post 6 month file.

Another Report from the Snowy Mountains (Providence Portal) that occurred a couple of months ago, has also been added. This is more of a stereotypical sighting ----> http://www.yowiehunters.com.au/index.ph ... Itemid=132




DMH

[Ray Doherty]

Fascinating, makes sense. Is this the first witness report of the yowie using skins for warmth / clothing?

Ray

[Dean Harrison]

Hi Ray,

In 1998, I recall Neil Frost describing a similar story from the Penrith area 100 years or so earlier.

Certainly not common.




DMH

[josh]

so does this mean they are able to use simple tools to skin a carcass.. or would it just rip the skin off with its hands...

[Ray Doherty]

Possibly Josh but I think the answer would lay in primative skining techniques, from memory I think they (early humans) used to use rocks or river rocks and just rubbed it over them to clear it of meat and tissue, I am not an expert on that put obviously plausable

Ray

[DILLIGAF]

You''ll know when we are trouble when you see a Yowie in the power tools section of Bunning's....lmao

[Dean Harrison]

You know you're in trouble when confronted by one wearing a human skin....

Interestingly, the head/skin of the Deer still had its antlers attached. Which was the main reason, at a distance, they initially believed it was a Deer.



DMH

[DILLIGAF]

A two-legged Deer, I could imagine the doe see's and him thinks....he ain't mounting me...lmao

[Ants77]

[quote="Dean Harrison"]You know you're in trouble when confronted by one wearing a human skin....
You nearly made the Yowie wardrobe yourself glad your not a jacket.

Interestingly, the head/skin of the Deer still had its antlers attached. Which was the main reason, at a distance, they initially believed it was a Deer.

I wonder if besides the warmth factor whether it served and purpose for hunting at all.

Cheers


A.

[DILLIGAF]

The question that no1 seems to be asking how can the antlers be attached to the skin when they originate from the skull and the other question to that is did it not remove the head from the rest of the body when it skinned it...I'm thinking Stephen King couldn't think up a more scarier costume than that.....

[Ray Doherty]

very common for early man to leave heads on as the skill wasnt high enuf to remove it properly and nor did occur to them probably

Ray

[GlennO87]

Hi Dean.

Any chance of me getting in contact with this guy in W.A. Would be great to speak to him on email or something as there is pretty much no sightings in W.A

Glenn

[mlj1mlj1]

Cool, I have never gotten a report here of that. Awesome...Evolving...

[andrew]

An interesting Report just in.

This is the synopsis:

http://www.yowiehunters.com.au/index.ph ... Itemid=132

Interested in all reports down here. We would appreciate a referral to us if possible as we would like to follow up these Alpine region reports in detail and do some site interviews if we can arrange that.

[DILLIGAF]

The only proof we have is some1 who "supposedly" saw a Yowie wearing a deer skin...I've seen no evidence of Yowie's using stone edged tools... and don't assume we are related, I'm sure I read article from the USA they had what believed to Sasquatch DNA done in the lab and it came back as unknown primate not a a relation us...

[forestguy]

... and don't assume we are related...

OK, but don't assume we're not.

That 'unknown primate DNA' always gets mentioned, but I've never actually seen anyone who said they are the one who got the result from the lab.

Also, don't forget that WE are primates. I've also seen you're not happy with people using terms like hominid - the fact is, everything from the lesser apes through to us is a member of various "homin-" prefixed superfamilies (hominoid/hominid/hominin)

[Ants77]

Hello,


I was under the impression that nothing was definitive regarding Yowies. Every report is "supposed" as well unless your personally involved I guess. If not from primates, what did we evolve from.
Curious is all.

Cheers


A.

[DILLIGAF]

Pls... lets not go down the theory of evolution path... its a battle evolutionists will never win....

[GlennO87]

We did not come from apes. Learn that pretty quick.

[mlj1mlj1]

In North America, the native americans, all tribes have a name for bigfoot. 100%... They knew bigfoot long before white folks arrived. I am sure the aboriginals the same. In America, most names are either like this. Chiyi Tanka is Lakota Sioux(Dances with Wolves fame)(General Custer fame) called Bigfoot their Big Elder brother. Speaks volumes to me...The south west tribes cannibal type names, but life was hard in the desert here so they ate what was available. Same I am sure in Australia. Here Bigfoot was most worshiped mostly by the native peoples, in Australia due to aggressive nature of your isolated yowie, a more tense and aggressive relationship occurred. In nature, the truth should make sense and its does...

[DILLIGAF]

In North America, the native americans, all tribes have a name for bigfoot. 100%... They knew bigfoot long before white folks arrived. I am sure the aboriginals the same. In America, most names are either like this. Chiyi Tanka is Lakota Sioux(Dances with Wolves fame)(General Custer fame) called Bigfoot their Big Elder brother. Speaks volumes to me...The south west tribes cannibal type names, but life was hard in the desert here so they ate what was available. Same I am sure in Australia. Here Bigfoot was most worshiped mostly by the native peoples, in Australia due to aggressive nature of your isolated yowie, a more tense and aggressive relationship occurred. In nature, the truth should make sense and its does...

And what are you saying, because you didn't finish your last comment......

[Ants77]

Still dodged the question. My belief in evolutionism has nothing to do with it, whether someone would lose that argument is irrelevant. That's opinionated at best. I asked you your version bud. That's all. Did God click his fingers ? I suppose I'm a bit lost as to where you hypothesize we've come from is all. You dismissed one theroy and never backed the other ? I don't wish to argue or offend just where do you think we came from is all.


Cheers

A.

[David Brenton]

Pls... lets not go down the theory of evolution path... its a battle evolutionists will never win....

I assume that if evolutionary theory (look up the definition of a scientific theory) isn't what you favour, what is?

I often see creationists use similar language. Lets just consider a couple of points.
1) The evidence that evolution by natural selection is what has shaped life is vast. Fossils, DNA, comparative anatomy, actual observation and measurement (bacteria), embryology etc, etc.
2) The evidence of creation, or intelligent design (creation in a cheap suit) Nil.

If it was a battle, it would be like a blind crippled puppy versus the entire US military complex. Needless to say, the puppy would have do do something quite special to win. Thus far, it hasn't, nor does it have the capacity to do so.

We did not come from apes. Learn that pretty quick.

This is correct. We did not. We are apes.
Hominidae to be precise, The great apes. Which consists of chimpanzees, bonobos ,orangutans, gorillas, and humans, which all share common ancestry.

[mlj1mlj1]

I am very much a Christian man. Its just not that simple...

[David]

God theory vs evolution... I can see this thread turning into a train wreck. I thought the topic was a Deer skin wearing Yowie. Which is fascinating...

[mlj1mlj1]

Agreed.... Enough of that. Not so long ago in America some of my relatives wore deer skins....

[Ants77]

Hey,

Fair call.

Cheers

A.

[forestguy]

I go to church most Sunday's. I'm also at the moment up to my elbows in evolutionary and gentic theory, which I'm studying. I leave other people's beliefs to themselves, but I personally have no trouble reconciling the two.

It's not the purpose of this thread, so I don't mind if someonme wants to start a new one, but for GlenO and Dilli, I'm actually interested on what you think about where big hairy critters curently unknown to science have come from (let alone us).

Are you suggesting that on the 8th day God created Yowies, or were they knocked up with the rest of the animals? Do you reject that humans are related to - let alone are - apes?

I'm not trying to take the piss, I'm actually interested in your answers.

[Wayne888]

Here's a video I found of early man wearing Caribou disguises with head and antlers attached:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgaATWSi ... ure=g-vrec

[andrew]

I agree that this area is a train wreck waiting to happen, but that will only occur if people take extreme views and believe they have all the answers. However, there is nothing wrong in a debate provided you take the position that we simply do not know enough to take a dogmatic view. I remind everyone that Evolution is a theory, not a fact. If you think it is a fact then answer Darwins concerns about where Angiosperms sprang from as that riddle has never been answered. As for Natural Selection? I have no problems at all, as I think there enough evidence to support that. I think we all struggle with the notions of creation versus evolution.

For those that dismiss creation, don't forget that even evolution suggests that living organisms sprang from a spontaneous creation of life molecules. A complicated and little understood process but even today scientist look for those molecules as evidence for life elsewhere in the universe. We spend huge amounts of money on spacecraft and instruments to look for those signs of life.

Always we see debates on the issues hijacked by endless unprovable theories and assumptions. I have read much in a lifetime of study and the one inescapable conclusion I have arrived at is that we simply do not know enough to have all the answers. The philosophers and sage of ancient and modern times could not provide the answer. Science keeps on finding out more and more and along the way we see theories evolve and then get proven to have major flaws as we discover yet more.

To me there are brickwalls on both sides of the debate, which leaves me with just one proposition. Why waste time trying to create theories when we know absolutely that future discoveries will unravel what we have created - again and again.

To me it is simple. Lets look for the facts we can find, like the DNA of yowies, so we can find out WHAT they are and leave the esoteric debate about WHERE they came from to the future.

Sure, we all have views and theories. That is part of what makes us the inquisitive species. But at the end of the day we can only find answers one tiny step at a time. Let's us not demand of someone else that they prove their theory or belief when we cannot do the same with our own notions. Nearly all the arguments that crop up in this forum arise when we see people taking unprovable and indefensible positions and, being human, spending most of their energies trying to defend their position when clearly they are on a hiding to nothing.

There is so much to learn. Let's just get on with it.