Plug

Member of The Crypto Crew:
http://www.thecryptocrew.com/

Please Also Visit our Sister Blog, Frontiers of Anthropology:

http://frontiers-of-anthropology.blogspot.com/

And the new group for trying out fictional projects (Includes Cryptofiction Projects):

http://cedar-and-willow.blogspot.com/

And Kyle Germann's Blog

http://www.demonhunterscompendium.blogspot.com/

And Jay's Blog, Bizarre Zoology

http://bizarrezoology.blogspot.com/

Monday, 26 March 2012

Was a Mokele-mbembe killed at Lake Tele?

Was a Mokele-mbembe killed at Lake Tele?
http://www.anomalist.com/reports/mokele.html


by William Gibbons*
I can confirm that at least two of the pygmies who were directly involved in the killing of a Mokele-mbembe at Lake Tele about three decades ago were acquainted on a personal level with missionary pastor Eugene P. Thomas. I have discussed this incident with Pastor Thomas, and he was able to confirm most of the details of the story which follows.

Around 1960, the forest dwelling pygmies of the Lake Tele region (the Bangombe tribe), fished daily in the lake near the Molibos, or water channels situated at the north end of the lake. These channels merge with the swamps, and were used by Mokele-mbembes to enter the lake where they would browse on the vegetation. This daily excursion into the lake by the animals disrupted the pygmies fishing activities. Eventually, the pygmies decided to erect a stake barrier across the molibo in order to prevent the animals from entering the lake.

When two of the animals were observed attempting to break through the barrier, the pygmies speared one of the animals to death and later cut it into pieces. This task apparently took several days due to the size of the animal, which was described as being bigger than a forest elephant with a long neck, a small snake-like or lizard-like head, which was decorated with a comb-like frill. The pygmy spearmen also described a long, flexible tail, a smooth, reddish-brown skin and four stubby, but powerful legs with clawed toes. Pastor Thomas also mentioned that the two pygmies mimicked the cry of the animal as it was being attacked and speared.

Later, a victory feast was held, during which parts of the animal were cooked and eaten. However, those who participated in the feast eventually died, either from food poisoning or from natural causes. It should be noted that pygmies rarely live beyond 35, and pygmy women give birth from aged 12. I also believe that the mythification (magical powers, etc) surrounding Mokele-mbembes began with this incident.

During my first expedition in 1985, we met with several eyewitnesses who have observed Mokele-mbembes in the Sangha and Likouala aux Herbes Rivers. Our pygmy informants also mentioned that there was at least two Mokele-mbembes still living in the Lake Tele vicinity, but they were simply too afraid to take us to a precise location where we could actually film and observe a specimen of Mokele-mbembe, due to their superstitious beliefs surrounding the animals and fear of reprisals from the Boha villagers who are regarded as the owners of the lake. The Boha villagers are also familiar with areas in the river and swamps where we can observe these animals for ourselves. However, the general belief that speaking of Mokele-membes to white outsiders will result in great misfortune or death is fairly prevalent throughout the Likouala region. This presents huge problems in obtaining accurate and up-to-date information on Mokele-mbembes and other cryptids.

I should add that I am not convinced that Marcellin Agnagna, Rory Nugent, or Herman Regusters have observed Mokele-mbembes. During our two visits to the Congo, my colleagues and I were unable to locate a single one of the "dozens" of witnesses that allegedly observed Mokele-mbembes with the aforementioned explorers. Marcellin Agagna changed his story several times, and is now thought (by Roy Mackal) to have observed the giant African freshwater turtle, Trionyx triunguis. Herman Regusters and his wife Kia are the only individuals on his expedition to have observed a "long-necked member" travelling across Lake Tele, in spite of the fact that 28 other people were with them from the village of Boha. Rory Nugent's alleged Mokele-mbembe photos could be anything, although he may have seen "something" in the distance.


Trionyx triunguis
But Jose Bourges, the Congolese wildlife official who accompanied the 1988 Japanese expedition to the lake, reported that the entire expedition observed a large humped back of an animal, slowly moving along, as if foraging on the bottom of the lake, which is three meters deep at most. So the animals are still there, and I still want to find one!


*Bill Gibbons has conducted two major expeditions to the Congo, in 1985-6, and 1992, in search of the Mokele-mbembe. He conducted two other field investigations on the island of Mauritius in the southern Indian Ocean in 1990 and 1997, after two European visitors claimed Dodo sightings. Operation Congo III, and Project Dodo III are currently under development. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology with Warnborough College, Oxford. [He got that degree-but Warnsborough college is in no way connected to Oxford University: it has unkindly been referred to as a diploma mill]


After considering the evidence on this, the most straightforeward and absolutely cold-blooded solution would be that the Pygmies killed a Water Monster that has been identified as a giant turtle, and the most of the description fits a giant turtle.It has the long neck, snakelike or lizardlike head, big round body and four short stumpy legs with clawed freet.  It is the short stumpy legs with clawed feet that are the clincher in the identification: that fits a turtle and not a Sauropod or any of the other candidates.The long tail and comb-like deciration on the head are confusions of the description which arise from the descriptions of other traditional water-monsters not distinguished the Mokele-mbembe. Going by the statement made by True Authority:

Mokele-mbembe is Lingala, and can mean a variety of things. The word is commonly defined as "One that stops the flow of rivers," but can also mean "one who eats the tops of palm trees," "monstrous animal," or even "half-God, half-beast." Mokele-mbembe is also used as a generic term to refer to other animals like Emela-ntouka [a rhinoceros], Mbielu-mbielu-mbielu [a sort of crocodile], and Nguma-monene.[an elongated lizard, big snake or an unusual cobra]http://www.trueauthority.com/cryptozoology/mokele.htm
And so it seems there is a confusion to a very large degree inherant in the name used to cover these reports: it would not be very unusual for Pygmies' questions or answers confused in such a situation.
And although the flesh of these turtles is commonly eaten, some people have strong taboos against eating it (the Ancient Egyptians are included) and in some cases, turtles have been eating things that actually make their flesh poisonous to eat...a gourmet delight that can sometimes make you very sick if you eat it.
The shells of these turtles are supposed to be as much as 12 to 18 feet in diameter, and that would be a larger profile area than an elephant, and it is pretty certain these measurements are surely exaggerations.  But it is a belief that such turtles grow so large that gave rise to the story that these Pygmies actually killed and ate a gigantic softshelled turtle larger than an elephant, and the description reminded missionaries of a Sauropod dinosaur.


softshell-wikipedia-tinymen-to scale

--Best Wishes, Dale D.
Trionyx triunguis
Please see the older posting on this blog:
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2011/04/titanic-turtles-of-tele.html

Sunday, 25 March 2012

Homo Sapiens Heidelbergensis: Big Daddy Is Still Around


Since Tyler Stone has divided the Wildmen category up into a larger Homo (sapiens) heidelbergensis morph and a more normal-sized  Homo (sapiens) neanderthalensis morph, and I basically was endorsing him on that I should add some further comments about that larger fossil type in connection to the possible identity for the EASTERN Bigfoot (Reconstruction of Heidelberg or Mauer man is on the left, probable inspiration for religious tract shown at top)


Above is a comparison of "Rhodey" an East Coast Bigfoot, artwork by Thomas Finley. I recognised a resemblance to a certain H. heidelbergensis reconstruction, pasted them together as a comparison and sent back a copy to him. There are probably dozens of such comparisons that could be made. This is in reference to the Eastern Bigfoot and not the West Coast Sasquatch.

I have an elaborate and thorough discussion on the over-arching category of Marked Hominids pos and then reposted here, and that category would include the Eastern Bigfoot types under discussion:
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2011/08/cfz-repostdissection-of-and-discussion.html
As it says in that article (and as Tyler Stone has specified more  recently) there seems no good reason to make separate species for both the large-morph and small-morph Wildmen, although they both go back to well-known fossil fossil forerunners.

Below is a Geographic chart I made up combining two different reference pieces on Heidelbergensis. The area was first colonised by Homo ergaster=Homo erectus and then Heidelbergers replaced erectus. In Europe, it is not demonstrated if erectus was ever present in any quantities to speak of, most of the remains of the period are Heidelbergers. Late examples of "Peking Man" also show striking similarities to Heidelbergers and it seems the population was in the process of a changeover from one to the other. First H erectus and then H heidelbergensis persisted longest in the Orient.

The Eastern Bigfoot is most like the fossil human Homo (sapiens) heidelbergensis, also known as "Archaic Homo sapiens" The reconstruction on the left is much like the Iceman and similar to some of Ivan Sanderson's reconstructions of this type. The skeletons at the right show how heidelbergensis was unusually large among the human ancestors, as also shown in the hominid "Lineups" such as the series of skeletons shown below. Homo (sapiens) heidelbergensis individuals were often six feet six at full height. Sis foot six would be about the Russian common estimate in height for the Boreal Bigfoot, two meters in height: because the Americans are not used to the metric system they will more usually say seven fet tal on average, which is also probably not as precisely correct for that reason . Their pelvises were also enormous, much larger than in modern humans


Australopithecus,Paranthropus,Homo erectus,Homo heidelbergensis,Homo neanderthalensis,H sapiens
http://cuadernosdealfonsosalazar.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.html


Homo heidelbergensis, the Ceprano Skull various views. See the longer article at bottom of this posting.
Type Specimens for Homo heidelbergensis: below, the reconstructions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_heidelbergensis

Homo heidelbergensis ("Heidelberg Man", named after the University of Heidelberg) is an extinct species of the genus Homo which may be[1] the direct ancestor of both Homo neanderthalensis in Europe and Homo sapiens.[2] The best evidence found for these hominins date between 600,000 and 400,000 years ago. H. heidelbergensis stone tool technology was very close to that of the Acheulean tools used by Homo erectus


Morphology and interpretations
Both H. antecessor and H. heidelbergensis are likely to be descended from the morphologically very similar Homo ergaster from Africa. But because H. heidelbergensis had a larger brain-case — with a typical cranial volume of 1100–1400 cm³ overlapping the 1350 cm³ average of modern humans — and had more advanced tools and behavior, it has been given a separate species classification. The species was tall, 1.8 m (6.0 ft) on average, and more muscular than modern humans. Males may have weighed 100 kg (220 lb). According to Professor Lee R. Berger of the University of Witwatersrand, numerous fossil bones indicate some populations of H. heidelbergensis were "giants" routinely over 2.13 m (7 ft) tall and inhabited South Africa between 0.5 million and 300,000 years ago.[3][Including the Kabwe population/former "Rhodesian Man", but some European populations are thought to have been on a par with them. Emphasis added-DD]

Social behavior

Recent findings in a pit in Atapuerca (Spain) of 28 human skeletons suggest that H. heidelbergensis may have been the first species of the Homo genus to bury their dead.[4]
Some experts[5] believe that H. heidelbergensis, like its descendant H. neanderthalensis, acquired a primitive form of language. No forms of art or sophisticated artifacts other than stone tools have been uncovered, although red ochre, a mineral that can be used to create a red pigment which is useful as a paint, has been found at Terra Amata excavations in the south of France.

Language The morphology of the outer and middle ear suggests they had an auditory sensitivity similar to modern humans and very different from chimpanzees. They were probably able to differentiate between many different sounds.[6] Dental wear analysis suggests they were as likely to be right-handed as modern people.[7]
H. heidelbergensis was a close relative (most probably a migratory descendant) of Homo ergaster. H. ergaster is thought to be the first hominin to vocalize[5] and that as H. heidelbergensis developed more sophisticated culture proceeded from this point.

Evidence of hunting

A number of 400,000-year-old wooden projectile spears were found at Schöningen in northern Germany. These are thought to have been made by H. erectus or H. heidelbergensis. Generally, projectile weapons are more commonly associated with H. sapiens. The lack of projectile weaponry is an indication of different sustenance methods, rather than inferior technology or abilities. The situation is identical to that of native New Zealand Māori, modern H. sapiens, who also rarely threw objects, but used spears and clubs instead.[8]

Divergent evolution


Homo heidelbergensis: Steinheim skull replica
Because of the radiation of H. heidelbergensis out of Africa and into Europe, the two populations were mostly isolated during the Wolstonian Stage and Ipswichian Stage, the last of the prolonged Quaternary glacial periods. Neanderthals diverged from H. heidelbergensis probably some 300,000 years ago in Europe, during the Wolstonian Stage; H. sapiens probably diverged between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago in Africa. Such fossils as the Atapuerca skull and the Kabwe skull bear witness to the two branches of the H. heidelbergensis tree.
Homo neanderthalensis retained most of the features of H. heidelbergensis after its divergent evolution. Though shorter, Neanderthals were more robust, had large brow-ridges, a slightly protruding face and lack of prominent chin. With the possible exception of Cro-Magnon Man, they also had a larger brain than all other hominins. Homo sapiens, on the other hand, have the smallest brows of any known hominin, are tall and lanky, and have a flat face with a protruding chin. H. sapiens have a larger brain than H. heidelbergensis, and a smaller brain than H. neanderthalensis, on average. To date, H. sapiens is the only known hominin with a high forehead, flat face, and thin, flat brows.[and the characteristic drastic reduction of body hair-DD]
Some believe that H. heidelbergensis is a distinct species, Some believe it is only the earlier form of Homo sapiens,  and some that it is a cladistic ancestor to other Homo forms sometimes improperly linked to distinct species in terms of populational genetics.
Some scenarios of survival and descent include Those supporting a multiregional origin of modern humans envision fertile reproduction between many evolutionary stages and homo walking,[9] or gene transfer between adjacent populations due to gene passage and spreading in successive generations.

Discovery


Replica of the type specimen from Mauer
The first fossil discovery of this species was made on October 21, 1907, and came from Mauer where the workman Daniel Hartmann spotted a jaw in a sandpit. The jaw (Mauer 1) was in good condition except for the missing premolar teeth, which were eventually found near the jaw. The workman gave it to Professor Otto Schoetensack from the University of Heidelberg, who identified and named the fossil.
The next H. heidelbergensis remains were found in Steinheim an der Murr, Germany (the Steinheim Skull, 350kya); Arago, France (Arago 21); Petralona, Greece; and Ciampate del Diavolo, Italy.

Boxgrove Man

In 1994 British scientists unearthed a lower hominin tibia bone just a few miles away from the English Channel, along with hundreds of ancient hand axes, at the Boxgrove Quarry site. A partial leg bone is dated to between 478,000 and 524,000 years old. H. heidelbergensis was the early proto-human species that occupied both France and Great Britain at that time; both locales were connected by a landmass during that epoch. Prior to Gran Dolina, Boxgrove offered the earliest hominid occupants in Europe.
The tibia had been gnawed by a large carnivore, suggesting that he had been killed by a lion or wolf or that his unburied corpse had been scavenged after death.[10]

Sima de los Huesos


One of hundreds of handaxes found at Boxgrove
Beginning in 1992, a Spanish team has located more than 5,500 human bones dated to an age of at least 350,000 years in the Sima de los Huesos site in the Sierra de Atapuerca in northern Spain. The pit contains fossils of perhaps 28 individuals together with remains of Ursus deningeri and other carnivores and a biface called Excalibur. It is hypothesized that this Acheulean axe made of red quartzite was some kind of ritual offering for a funeral. Ninety percent of the known H. heidelbergensis remains have been obtained from this site. The fossil pit bones include:
  • A complete cranium (skull 5), nicknamed Miguelón, and fragments of other crania, such as skull 4, nicknamed Agamenón and skull 6, nicknamed Rui (from El Cid, a local hero).
  • A complete pelvis (pelvis 1), nicknamed Elvis, in remembrance of Elvis Presley.
  • Mandibles, teeth, and many postcranial bones (femurs, hand and foot bones, vertebrae, ribs, etc.)
Indeed, nearby sites contain the only known and controversial Homo antecessor fossils.
There is current debate among scholars whether Sima de los Huesos is H. heidelbergensis, or another hominin that doesn't fit in the direct line from H. antecessor to H. neanderthalensis.

Suffolk, England

In 2005 flint tools and teeth from the water vole Mimomys savini, a key dating species, were found in the cliffs at Pakefield near Lowestoft in Suffolk. This suggests that hominins can be dated in England to 700,000 years ago, potentially a cross between Homo antecessor and Homo heidelbergensis.[11][12][13][14][15]

See also

References

  1. ^ Mounier,Aurélien; François Marchal and Silvana Condemi "Is Homo heidelbergensis a distinct species? New insight on the Mauer mandible" Journal of Human Evolution Volume 56, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 219-246 [1]
  2. ^ Rightmire, G. P. (1998). "Human Evolution in the Middle Pleistocene: The Role of Homo heidelbergensis". Evolutionary Anthropology 6 (6): 218–227. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1998)6:6<218::AID-EVAN4>3.0.CO;2-6. http://www.archeo.uw.edu.pl/zalaczniki/upload23.pdf.
  3. ^ The Naked Scientists: Science Radio & Science Podcasts, Our Story: Human Ancestor Fossils. November 2007
  4. ^ The Mystery of the Pit of Bones, Atapuerca, Spain: Species Homo heidelbergensis. Smithsonian Institution. Retrieved December 15, 2011.
  5. ^ a b Mithen, Steven (2006). The Singing Neanderthals, ISBN 978-0-674-02559-8
  6. ^ Martinez, I., L. Rosa, J.-L. Arsuaga, P. Jarabo, R. Quam, C. Lorenzo, A. Gracia, J.-M. Carretero, J.M. Bermúdez de Castro, E. Carbonell (July 2004). "Auditory capacities in Middle Pleistocene humans from the Sierra de Atapuerca in Spain". PNAS 101 (27): 9976–9981. doi:10.1073/pnas.0403595101. PMC 454200. PMID 15213327. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=454200.
  7. ^ Lozano M, Mosquera M, de Castro J, Arsuaga J, Carbonell E. (2009). Right handedness of Homo heidelbergensis from Sima de los Huesos (Atapuerca, Spain) 500,000 years ago. Evolution and Human Behavior 30:369–376. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.03.001
  8. ^ Schwimmer, E.G. "Warfare of the Maori." Te Ao Hou: The New World, #36, Sept 1961, pp. 51-53. [2]
  9. ^ Was Homo heidelbergensis in South Asia? A test using the Narmada fossil from central India Book Series Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology Series Book The Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia Publisher Springer Netherlands DOI 10.1007/1-4020-5562-5 Copyright 2007 ISBN 978-1-4020-5561-4 (Print) 978-1-4020-5562-1 (Online) Part Part I DOI 10.1007/1-4020-5562-5_7 Pages 137-170 Subject Collection Humanities, Social Sciences and Law SpringerLink Date Tuesday, May 22, 2007 [3]
  10. ^ A History of Britain, Richard Dargie (2007), p. 8-9
  11. ^ Parfitt.S et al (2005) 'The earliest record of human activity in northern Europe', Nature 438 pp.1008-1012, 2005-12-15. Retrieved 2011-04-16.
  12. ^ Roebroeks.W (2005) 'Archaeology: Life on the Costa del Cromer', Nature 438 pp.921-922, 2005-12-15. Retrieved 2011-04-16.
  13. ^ Parfitt.S et al (2006) '700,000 years old: found in Pakefield', British Archaeology, January/February 2006. Retrieved 2008-12-24.
  14. ^ Good. C & Plouviez. J (2007) The Archaeology of the Suffolk Coast Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service [online]. Retrieved 2009-11-28.
  15. ^ Tools unlock secrets of early man, BBC news website, 2005-12-14. Retrieved 2011-04-15.

Further reading

  • Sauer, A. (1985). Erläuterungen zur Geol. Karte 1 : 25 000 Baden-Württ.. Stuttgart.
  • Schoetensack, O. (1908). Der Unterkiefer des Homo heidelbergensis aus den Sanden von Mauer bei Heidelberg. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.
  • Weinert, H. (1937). "Dem Unterkiefer von Mauer zur 30-jährigen Wiederkehr seiner Entdeckung". Z. F. Morphol. U. Anthropol XXXVII (1): 102–113.
  • Rice, Stanley (2006). Encyclopedia of Evolution. Facts on File, Inc..
  • Homo heidelbergensis - The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program




Geneology chart for hominids. The Neanderthals in Europe are part of what has been called "The Neanderthal stage" or "Neanderthals (sensuo lato)", including the Heidelbergers, a rather more old-fashioned classification. At the same time as Neanderthals were in Europe, the different populations in Africa and the Orient were parallels but differentiated from them. They are now called persisting H. heidelbergensis, lighter orange on the chart, and Neanderthals are only  one variety, nested within the larger general species.) since the prior name of that species or subspecies was by priority neanderthalensis (with the 'h' included), that species or subspecies is quite properly referred to as the Neanderthals. You may make the distinction between that and Neandertals, proper, if you prefer , The Neandertals or Classic Neandertals are a form isolated Ice-Age Western Europe and really one extended family, Only a couple tens of thousands of years old at the time the more modern types of  Hns appeared on the scene in Europe and replaced them. It is therefore not surprising that they were more diverged and unique than their contemporaries in other parts of the world.



Heidelberg Man 'Ceprano' Demonstrates That 'Peoples is Peoples'

from the May 17, 2011 eNews issue
http://www.khouse.org (visit our website for a FREE subscription)


An older member of the Heidelberg Man family may have related to both Neanderthals and modern Homo sapiens, according to a recent study in the journal for the Public Library of Science. The skull cap of a man known as "Ceprano", found near Rome in1994, has been determined to be a member of Homo heidelbergensis rather than a separate species. According to popular evolutionary theory, various human fossils represent separate groups that evolved from ape ancestors millions of years ago. According to the Bible, all human beings descended from the first man Adam, but most were wiped out during the time of Noah save for the strains that survived through Noah's three sons and their wives. The recent research on Ceprano offers evidence that ancient human groups were not as distinct as once thought, and that there are links between the humans who lived in Africa and those who lived in Europe.

Silvana Condemi , Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research (CNRS) in the laboratory of anthropology at the University of Marseille, has conducted extensive research on the Ceprano skullcap. Condemi and her colleagues compared Ceprano to 42 African and Eurasian fossils, as well as to 68 modern humans, and found characteristics that convinced them that Ceprano was an older form of H. heidelbergensis, and that H. heidelbergensis was a well-traveled human group. Ceprano's skull bore similarities to a wide range of other human skulls – skulls from early humans in both Africa and Europe.

"Considering other fossils that can be lumped together with Ceprano in H. heidelbergensis, we can hypothesize that the 'Ceprano-morphotype' was very tall, with a strong mandible (jaw) and small teeth," Condemi told Discovery News.

Ceprano's identity has proved controversial since the skullcap's discovery in 1994. It has been considered a late Homo erectus, an ancestor of H. heidelbergensis, or even a completely new species called Homo cepranensis. Condemi and company argue that Ceprano, while bearing some archaic characteristics, may actually be an ancestor of both the Neanderthals in Europe and modern humans in Africa.

According to current evolutionary theory, the first members of the Homo genus, H. habilis first showed up between 1.4-2.5 million years ago, followed by H. erectus about 1.8 million years ago. After that came H. heidelbergensis approximately 350,000 years ago and finally modern humans just 150,000 years in the past.

The most popular view of human origins – Out of Africa II "Replacement" theory - is that Homo sapiens came out of Africa between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago and replaced other humans, like the Neanderthals, largely without intermingling.
[Successive waves acing multiregional populations, such as Milford Wolpoff hypothesizes. Wikipedia image.]
[Note that Neanderthals are only one local specialization out of the more widespread H. heidelburgensis horizon]


An alternate hypothesis popularized by Milford H. Wolpoff rejects the idea that different human groups are genetically separate. Wolpoff's multiregional origin of humans hypothesis posits that there is only one human species, from archaic forms like H. erectus and H. neanderthalensis to modern humans. Wolpoff and other proponents of multiregional origin argue that the evidence from fossils and genetics points to the human race as a single species that developed different characteristics as its individual populations spread throughout the globe, adapting to different environments. Even though the populations were separated by geography, they all maintained some of the same genes.

Wolpoff's position has some good evidence to back it up. Studies have shown that H. neanderthalensis and H. erectus were not as separate from modern humans as previously thought. In 2006, researchers analyzed the DNA of a Neanderthal from a cave in Croatia, and determined that it was 99.5 percent identical to modern human DNA. In 2008, researchers at the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology were able to identify 60 percent of the Neanderthal genome and demonstrated that 1-4 percent of non-African human DNA came from Neanderthals.

Studies on mitochondrial DNA have claimed to show that Neanderthals were not direct descendants of modern humans. However, the Lake Mungo 3 skeleton found in Australia, an anatomically modern human, also has different mtDNA than humans today. While ancient humans like the Neanderthals and their smaller cousin H. erectus [see the May 10, 2011 eNews] may have (mostly) died out, they were just as human as any of us.

Ceprano, while previously thought to have been a separate species, now appears to be a cross between ancient Europeans and Africans, supporting Wolpoff's position that all human gene pools are linked.

"We can hypothesize that particular environmental conditions during the Middle Pleistocene may have favored the expansion of H. heidelbergensis and contacts between populations," explained Condemi. "The gene flow was never completely stopped between Old World populations."

Paleontologist Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum, London, agreed with a number of Condemi's conclusions. He told Discovery News, "I have long argued that Homo heidelbergensis represented our common ancestor with the Neanderthals about 400,000 years ago, and the Ceprano fossil, with its newly-determined late date, is well-situated chronologically to be part of this common ancestral group."

While these scientists look at these issues through evolutionary eyes, their views correspond to the Biblical position that all human beings are ultimately related. If all of humanity but Noah and his family were wiped out, we should expect to see a variety of human groups in the fossil record, but only a relatively thin strain surviving to the present day.
Related Links:
Walk Tall, Ginger Ninjas - Your Neanderthal Blood Is Worth Bottling - The Sydney Morning Herald
Multiregional, Not Multiple Origins - American Journal Of Physical Anthropology
Heidelberg Man Links Humans, Neanderthals - Discovery News
Neanderthal: 99.5 Percent Human - Live Science
The Continuing Story of Neandert(h)al Man - Centrum voor Recht and ICT
Human Origins: Apes or Adam? - May 10, 2011 - Koinonia House eNews

Re: Giant Bat Photo

The giant bat photo in this case was posted on this blog recently:
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2012/03/el-chupacabras-del-sur-america.html
I have found two or three denials that the bat in the photo posted on a recent blog was genuine. This is the most recent one, from one of the standard news services:

Expert dismisses 'giant bat' photo as fake

A leading Australian bat expert says an image circulating on the internet of what appears to be an enormous bat found in the Philippines is a deceptive fake.

Director of the Australian Bat Clinic, Trish Wimberley, said that while some species of bats can have wingspans that stretch up to 1.7m, no bat could grow to the size shown in the picture.

She said the image was likely doctored or taken from a perspective to make the bat appear larger than it actually is. "You only need to look at the knife above the picture to see the proportion of the bat to the proportion of the knife," Ms Wimberley said.

"It’s like when you catch a fish, if you hold it in front of you it looks gigantic." A species of bat known as the giant golden-crowned flying fox or golden-capped fruit bat is found in the Philippines and can grow a wingspan as large as 1.7m, but the animal that appears in the photo does not have golden coloured fur on its head.

Ms Wemberley suggested the animal pictured could be a Malaysian flying fox, also known as the vampire bat, which can grow a wingspan of up to 1.5m.

"If you’re lucky they can get to 1.1kg," Ms Wemberley said.

--OK, so Ms Wemberly is not really adding anything new to the matter. She has not offered any positive identification as to the species of bat illustrated and in fact she pulls a couple of blunders. The bat usually called the "Vampire Bat" in this area is the Old world false vampire bat and it is not a flying fox. She simply makes the negative assertion that "no bat could get that big" (there is no intrinsic reason why you could not have any bats as large as the largest Pterosaurs) There is also the comment that the bat in the picture is NOT the common golden-crowned flying fox known in the Philippines (I have seen that bat given as the culprit more than once elsewhere. Good to know that has been ruled out) and she once again says "You need only look at the dagger to know the scale is off". Well, no, there are knives and there are daggers and there are swords, and unless you have a positive ID on the design of this one in particular, using that statement as an indicator as to scale is pretty much useless. Besides, there is the possibility that the object is a painted wood sign and not a knife at all (The bat is supposed to be a vampire and a wooden stake is what you need to kill a vampire: I assume that is why the object is placed above the bat's head, as a threat to the vampire spirit) So despite the fact there has been an official denunciation of the photo, nothing is really established yet except that the bat is NOT of the common flying fox species to be expected in that area. The photo probably does employ an ambiguous perspective, but we pretty much know that it does not go with the more recessed background people and objects but is instead more in the foreground. OK, even allowing that part, it is STILL an enormous bat of unidentified species.

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Saturday, 24 March 2012

Donde estaba el Duende

http://entreelpueblomagico.blogspot.com/2010/10/mientras-un-grupo-de-reikistas-hacian.html

Monday October 11, 2010

Here is a short report on a photograph of a "Duende" from Argentina which may document the presence of an unknown primate-Dale D.

Donde estaba el Duende?

While a group of reikistas made ​​their trek Meditation and Reiki 2, October 9, 2010, in the province of La Rioja, Argentina, observed a small Goblin participating, perhaps, of the same energy.


El Duende


--Although this is very dark I think I can make out an apelike muzzle of something on a face looking out of cover. Or is it just a known type of  monkey or a small bear?

Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly-Hopkinsville_encounter
http://www.10mfh.com/random-news/kelly%E2%80%93hopkinsville-encounter/

Kelly–Hopkinsville Encounter


Some investigators such as Joe Nickell say that the witnesses were seeing nothing more exotic than a pair of nesting great horned owls that had taken up residence in their attic. The great round eyes and large ears are cited as evidence for this identification. Against this we have the statements that the creatures could travel on two legs or four, having a monkeylike body build and limb proportions, and a monkeylike gait when traveling on all fours, and had obvious large claws on the hands but not so obviously on their feet (one gains the impression the feet were never observed very clearly). Furthermore I would emphasize that the owl's head is not very distinct from its body and does not present the appearance of being outsized (whereas a large mane or ruff around the face of the Freshwater Monkey certainly would) and (most tellingly from my point of view) the owl is most obviously marked in bands of lighter and darker colour and certainly neither one uniform overall colour nor yet anything which might be interpreted as "Silvery"
Furthermore, the colour being distinctively shiny at night ("You could even say it glows")as well as the general description is a very good match for the traditional description given for the Pukwudgies.

There are some very peculiar details, some of which are easily dealt with. The owl theorists say that the shots that were fired had probably tended to go wild and hit metallic objects, such as could be parts of the house. That I think is faior enough. There is also the fact that one person was shooting a shotgun while the other one was shooting a .22. This is a very small calibur and it can be demonstrated that in some cases, the small-caliber was being directed at the creatures but not doing any visable damage. when one creature was shot at through the window at very close range, we know it was the.22 that had opened fire first because investigators found the hole. The bullet could have had much of its damage potential wasted in going through the window and thus did not hurt the creature much upon arriving at its destination. The creatures odd "Floating" behaviour could be explained by their JUMPING ability, which seems to have beem well-developed. It sould also be noted that there are several points of resemblance between these creatures and some of the Ohio "Frogmen" cases, including the part about raising the arms above the head. The feet are also solid and flipperlike and when the creatures are walking, they do so with a "Wading" effect, suggesting an amphibious adaptation.

A recent case in Kentucky once again reported a monkeylike creature which seemed to glow at night, but in this case a car's headlights were turned on it. It was estimated to  be seven feet tall and to move off at fifty miles per hour- both reasons to suspect the witness misjudged the range in the very brief encounter and hence he thought the creature was both larger and faster than it actually was. If the numbers are halved, it was 3 1/2 feet tall and moving off at over 20 mph-that would all be much more believable and much more consistent with other reports (I had also heard an alternative version which did estimate the speed as more likely 25 mph, on a message board in one of the chatrooms) This happened at the end of last year:
http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2011/12/kentucky-bigfoot-sighting-reported-on.html

Friday, December 30, 2011 Kentucky Bigfoot Sighting Reported on MUFON
Posted by Guy Edwards

Case Number: 34374
Log Number: US-12292011-0010
Submitted Date: 2011-12-29 16:51 GMT
Event Date: 2011-12-28 18:15 GMT
City: Burlington
Region: Kentucky
Country: US
Longitude: -84.7241133
Latitude: 39.02756
Shape: Other
Duration: 00:00:02
Distance: 100 feet or less
I was driving down a residential street in the dark when suddenly, my headlights landed on a ~7 ft. tall man like creature. It almost looked like a very tall standing monkey, but it also resembled a man. It looked as if it had fur all over it's body that was a medium red color. What really looked odd to me was that it seemed to have a translucent aura around it. I had to focus very hard to see these details because it seemed like the creature was moving at a pace of nearly 50 mph. I was afraid, of course, but I didn't feel as if it were here to harm me or anyone else. It seemed scared more than anything else. I feel it was trying to hide or find a way home because it was running right toward a large wooded area. I lost sight of the object within 2-4 seconds of first seeing it because it was moving so fast. - MUFON CMS
In this case, the Monkeylike creature has several features that are strikingly like the Kelly-Hopkinsville entities: the head is large and the large ears at the sides are pointed-but not nearly so exaggerated! and the long arms, hands, and claws are very similar. The eyes are relatively huge and pointed out to the sides, but interestingly enough there is no eyeglow unless the witness simply failed to mention the fact. It is also possible the head was turned at the wrong angle and the eyeglow was not noticed.
Also on the Bigfoot Lunch Club site and pertaining to recent Kentucky mystery primates is a discussion on a recording of some mysterious creature's whoops and screeches. But almost more arresting than that is the outline of a Kentucky "Frogfoot" print with all the toes present. ot an exact reproduction of whatever the original must've been-but I am looking into the matter. This came up just as I was about to post this blog report and I had not expected to find such a thing.
I did happen to have an informant who went down to the Sutton farmhouse about five years ago to look the place over. He said the place was way back in the boondocks and the witnesses really were "A Bunch of Hicks" to use his exact words. He did not think they were sophisticated enough to have invented such a story at the time. He did give me some interesting other details such as concerning the water drainage of the area. I also found out that the creatures were not so invulnerable as stated-most of the time they were only struck by the small-caliber fire while the shotgun shots tended to go wild (these things were actually to be expected) Also it seems the explanation of the UFO as a meteor in the sky seems to be a sound one, and there was no good connection of the creatures to any genuine UFO reports. It does seem that the creatures also left patces of algae or bacterial slime on places they had rubbed up against, and it is possible that they were actually covered in bioluminescent organic detritus, like foxfire. And actually the creatures appeared to be naked and basically of an animal nature (although it seems they were acting "Playfully" by some accounts) and so it seems to me that it is entirely possible that the Suttons had run afoul of a family group of the Freshwater Monkeys (Hydromacaca), perhaps flooded out of one home base and headed overland to a better habitat.  It should be noted that the illustrations that show any nose at all specify that the creature is a Cattarhine, Old World Monkey because of the pinched-looking nose and the nostrils lying close together.

A miniature Monster-model "Frogman" creature probably actually representing the Freshwater Monkey category and as a variation on the New England Pukwudgies. (Dover Demon is probably geographically in the same part of the country) The creature is actually similar to the Kelly-Hopkinsville creatures in several respects, including the "Walleyed" effect of its goggling eyes. This also has the pinched-together nostrils of a Cattarhine, although that might not be so obvious: and it still has some wet straggly locks from its "Mane" showing around its face. The answer seems to be that such creatures present a very different appearance whether their hair is wet and clinging to the skin or dry and "Fluffed-Out" and the top of the head might well even actuially have a sagittal crest in the males (But look like a "Depression" in the forehead from the way the hair grows) At least one "Lake Monster-Frogman" has been regularly reported in the New England area also. In the Sutton Family report, one individual reported "Antennae", which were probably locks such as this
 In the Kelly-Hopkinsville report, the "Silvery" appearance is more likely due to reflected moonlight than the actual colour of the creatures: what people are describing is actually the colour of the moon  as reflected off of shiny body hair, whight, in all probability.
Amphibious FW Monkey-Composite Reconstruction
A modified version of a "Frogman" from a UFO Aliens site (Loveland Frog Category), adding the hair showing about half-dry instead of completely slicked-down. The hair pattern is derived from information on Japanese Kappas and it seems slicked-down in the Kelly-Hopkinsville case. "Slicked Down" does not only mean still wet because it seems these creatures also acquire a coating of green algae or duckweed, wet mud or swamp bottom ooze, which continues to present the "Slicked-Down" effect for a long time out of water. The ears show when the mane or ruff of hair around the head is  or otherwise not dried-out and fluffy. nd depictions can also show the large ears. This would be a typical creature at the common size, 3-4 feet tall and about the size of the Kelly-Hopkinsville entities, in which case the footprint would be about the size of an average human footprint, 9 or 10 inches long.
The body hair is generally short and close overall but when the longer hair is half-dried it can look "Spiky"
The legs look a good deal shorter when the foot is flat on the ground
 Mexican "Dwendis" compared to Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblins from a Spanish-Language site. "Dwendi" is also a composite category used to name more than one thing, but if the range of FW monkeys slops over into parts of Mexico, I would not be too surprised.

Kittelsen_TheWaterSprite_Scandinavia


British-version Water-Brownie/Bogie