Yowie creation vs evolution

[Skeet]

Hi Folks

I have watched this board for a number of years and thought I should join and become a part of the community.

Like most newbies I have stacks of questions and the odd personal experience and was wondering what you thought about the following (sorry if this has been brought up before!!)

Should an actual yeti, bigfoot, yowie etc be found for scientific examination what would this do to the whole creation vs evolution debate. While im not suggesting that a yowie is some sort of missing link I am just curious about your thoughts.

Would those in a position of power who have strong religious convictions suppress any information because of the potential ramifications of such a discovery?
Have there been geniune discoveries ie: an actual body which may have been swept under the carpet due to the creation vs evolution debate and the potential response from a number of different faiths?

I dont want to start with a conspiracy theory or anything along those lines but it does make me wonder.

Personally I feel that for so many ancient cultures who had no previous contact with each other, to have what is basically the same creature in their folk lore, suggests to me that at least at some point in time such a creature did exist.

Sorry about getting a bit heavy in my first post

[mikka]

Skeet

First and foremost welcome to the board and a good topic. (I hope it can stay on topic)

My opinion is it wouldn't change the debate at all. It would just slot in as another Hominid on the Evolution side and a God made it on the other End of the day we are back to the same.


As for your paragraph about religion, the Vatican has endorsed Evolution as being true amongst other things. America is another story, in the "Bible Belt" I can picture what you say.


I agree it seems that a lot of cultures have a hairy man in them, one is the Island of Flores with a recent fossil record (enter debate here)

[lil foot]

gday skeet
being a christian, my point of veiw is that if it is found to be a close relative to humans like apes already have been, then it really isnt a proressive evolutionary link.
to me the theory of evolution is that living things keep evolving cos the dna doesnt have a stop sign to say whoa! enough changes!
but as we know that isnt the case now days, other wise animals like frogs, etc would have no problem with climate change.
but as mikka said either way the argument will go on, if the yowie/bigfoot/yeti/sas is proved or otherwise.

[Dean Harrison]

I am not a huge fan of evolution myself. Perhaps in some quarters it may be the case, however as for the Yowie, it’s quite simply “here”.

Nobody can answer that question definitively, as it is all pure hypothesis no matter how pig headed the person is who claims they have all the answers.

Hominids didn’t simply evolve from one to the other in a natural progression (i.e. One in – one out).

Many of them were here at the same time as each other. If you obtain one book on palaeontology from each decade for the last 100 years, you will clearly see that what we once “KNEW” as fact, changed every decade – as it will continue to do far into the future. A lot we KNOW now, will be irrelevant in time to come.

Sorry Skeet – nobody REALLY knows. Opinions are fine and hypothesis is ok, however I just have a problem with people who claim to know it all about such things, because we only have bits and pieces of the World’s largest jigsaw puzzle.

I guess the other thing to keep in mind is the aggressive conjecture and debate within the Palaeontology World itself. It’s a cut throat business and always has been depending on who is putting in what claims at what time and who your undermining whilst doing so. If you upset the wrong people and turn someone else’s findings on its head, people can become ostracized from certain Scientific communities.

Rather than become tangled up in Gospel that may change in the next 10 or so years and be forced to re-learn what you once thought you knew (which I have had to do and now given up), I would much prefer to concentrate on the here and now. Its far more productive.

In regard to my “opinion”, I believe they are some form of Neanderthal Robustus. Who is to say Neanderthal’s were not covered in hair? I believe they are far more Human than Animal - clearly. That is all that matters to me.

DMH

[Night Walker]

Evolution and archaeology are regularly trashed in this field in favour of gene seeding or instantaneous creation or some other novel idea. Exactly why this is so is currently beyond my understanding considering that archaeological evidence is rigorously collected, catalogued, described in detail, and studied and interpreted with great diligence.

Theories about human evolution are diverse and regularly change as new evidence is found. Sometimes change comes slow as some ideas are well entrenched. Further finds and improvements in technology and techniques (like mapping human DNA and mDNA) have assisted in enhancing our understanding of our distant past.

Admittedly, when I joined the forum I, too, was skeptical about the value of archaeology. However, I reasoned that if the crypto-hominids are indeed REAL (rather than spirits/aliens/interdimensional/imaginary) then they must have survived alongside us (Homo sapiens) since before we even emerged. So, I began reading outside standard Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Yowie books - it is well worth it.

Dean is correct is stating that the chain model of evolution (one in - one out) is incorrect - it is more like a bushy shrub! - with several hominid species co-existing side by side since we diverged from chimpanzees. But you need to understand HOW evolution works in order to make sense of it and the implications of crypto-hominology. "Researchers" are often quick to jump on the backs of traditional indigenous knowledge yet fail to embrace the acquired knowledge of our society - science. This has to change.

Much can be gained from evolution/archaeology/biology that even a basic understanding of the various processes rapidly dispels the myths and need to impose supernatural interpretations upon crypto-hominids. I plan to write a brief synopsis (brief for me may mean several thousand words, unfortunately) of how evolution works and what the archaeological record means for us (i.e. those interested in Yowies) in, hopefully, easy to understand terms.

In the mean time I can recommend the following books from my collection for those wanting more:

Kingdon, J. (2003) "Lowly Origin: Where, When, and Why Our Ancestors First Stood Up"

Dunbar, R. (2004) "The Human Story: A New History of Mankind's Evolution"

Palmer, D. (2005) "Seven Million Years: The Story of Human Evolution"

Flood, J. (2004 revised edition) "Archaeology of the Dreamtime: The Story of Prehistory in Australia and it's People"

Interesting and informative. For instance, Gigantopithecus has been claimed as a possibility for Bigfoot but where does it fit amid human evolution? Answer: It doesn't. Oooooooh... More on that and what it possibly means for crypto-hominology soon.