Could Bigfoot be the missing link?

Question

In evolution, if he/she/it existed? Bigfoot's supposedly big and hairy like an ape, but bipedal like a human. Sounds like the missing link to me.

Answer 1

Nah, its George W.

Answer 2

The concept of missing link is outdated. It was based on the wrongful assumption that there should be something that would be halfway between apes and humans. The reason this cannot be is that today's apes do not look like apes from 10 millions years ago. Apes and humans have a common ancestor at some point, which would have to look like a primitive ape. We could call this some sort of missing link, but there were so many species of apes and primitive humanoids, and so many diverging branches, with so many dead ends, it is not even sure (and actually it is almost certain NOT) that australopithecus are really ancestors of humans. So which one of all of those is the one? I mean, it is now pretty sure that neanderthals are not modern human ancestors, they were cousins and their line died off 30000 years ago

But as there was a common ancestor to paes and humans, the basic idea is this common ancestor disappeared as a spiece, and was replaced by at least two sets of offsprings, one that looked more like modern apes, and one more like humans. Why would the missing link survive since it was, by definition, less evolved and adapted than its offsprings?

Now, about the big foot... How many bigfoot should there be to maintain a survivable population? A few hundred, maybe? ANd how far apart should they saty from one another so that they would have a chance to meet a member of the opposite sex, for "dating" purposes? How could there population remain stable? How would it be that that their population does not expand over time? They get eaten by predators at a rate that is comparable to their birth rate? And all that time, without leaving corpses behind that would eventually get found? And all we have are occasional very grainy pictures of something distant in the wood that could could be a guy in a suit posing for his buddy so they can sell the pictures to check-out counters "newspapers"?

Just too many improbables there. Bigfoot most likely do not exist.

Answer 3

There could could be hundreds of those bigfoots for the species to nonetheless be around immediately. it extremely is maximum probable a hoax. as nicely, each time a 'lacking link' is got here upon, creationists flow the goalposts. Say you have fossil species A and contemporary species C, and you come across a fossil species B with constructive factors of the two A and C. as a replace of exclaiming you have got here upon a link between A and C, they're going to ask for the 'transitional' fossils between A & B, and between B & C. ZOMG, 2 greater lacking links!

Answer 4

"Missing" is the key word, here. The original people who perpterated the Bigfoot hoax finally admitted it, a few years ago, just before one of them passed away. It seems to have taken on a life of it's own, like Elvis and aliens, helped out by the Weekly World News.

Answer 5

interesting suggestion but
(1) there is no tangible evidence to support the belief in bigfoot (no captured specimens etc).
(2) to make a link between protohumans and homo sapiens would need several thousand "missing links" for even a tenuous connection to be believable.

Answer 6

Nah, Emo Phillips is the missing link.

Bigfoot is an unproven theory. Separate fact from fantasy here, eh?

Answer 7

yeah, but he didnt exist, look up a fossil named lucy and you're getting close, there is no one "missing link" cause evolution takes time, but im sure websites can show you theoretical processes with real species and their names

Answer 8

Doubtful. He seems far too large to be any sensible/logical version of missing link.

Answer 9

Sure, so could an extremely hirsute person. I personally don't believe in the 'missing link'.

Answer 10

I don't think Big Foot is a scientific link to anything.