I am opening a new phase of field work, which actually began last week. I just spoke with a witness in Oregon who had a sighting less than half hour ago. I will share more information as the situation evolves.
I traveled to an area approximately 60 miles north of me last week to look over an area a witness who contacted me had a series of encounters with several Sasquatch's. I promised to keep him anonymous so I won't mention his name but during our survey of the locations he took me to, we found two tree's snapped, this is one of them. While not looking very impressive, this is a solid indicator of activity in this location. This was not a fresh marking so we found no other physical evidence at this particular location, but it is worth making a more in depth search of the surrounding areas. I also found next to a very small stream at another location which was remote, what appear to be Sasquatch finger drag marks, I will share those photographs at a later date, but they were less than six hours old and impressive.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
By John Noble Wilford January 27, 2004
Ever since their discovery in the 19th century, Neanderthals have been
like the uncomfortably odd relatives who show up at a family reunion.
Should they be seated with the closest kin, sent to the back of the room
with the distant cousins or tossed out as rank interlopers, despite a family
In short, were the now-extinct Neanderthals of Europe full members of the
modern human species, a subspecies or an entirely different species?
The answer has implications for the ancestry of modern Europeans:
whether some Neanderthal blood could flow in their veins.
Although many scientists think Neanderthals were a subspecies, which
could have interbred
with Homo sapiens, new research appears to confirm the more widely
held view that
Neanderthals and modern humans were significantly different, enough
to qualify as separate
The findings were based on detailed measurements of variations in the
skulls of modern humans and Neanderthals as well as 12 existing species
of nonhuman primates. The research team, led by Dr. Katerina Harvati,
a paleoanthropologist at New York University, reported its results yesterday
in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
"What we are really saying is that Neanderthals did not co ntribute to the a
ncestry of modern Europeans," Dr. Harvati said in an interview. The research
lends strong support for the
single-origin theory of modern human evolution, one of two models that have
split anthropology into warring camps. This theory holds that modern Homo
sapiens is a new species that arose relatively recently in Africa - more than
100,000 years ago - and spread out to replace indigenous archaic populations
around the world. Neanderthals were one such group, a separate species that
did not breed with the newcomers before it vanished.
The opposing regional-continuity theory holds that the new migrants from
Africa bred at least to some extent with the archaic populations they encountered,
perhaps accounting for some superficial differences among people today in different
regions. In this view, Neanderthals were a subspecies and at least partly ancestral
to modern Europeans.
Dr. Eric Delson, a paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History
and Lehman College, both in New York City, said the new research was a
mathematically rigorous approach to the question of Neanderthal-human
relationships. "It's a very convincing piece of work," Dr. Delson said. But
not convincing enough, it seems, to put the controversy to rest.
"This research will not change many minds," said Dr. Erik Trinkaus, a specialist
in Neanderthal studies at Washington University in St. Louis. His research has
suggested that there was some interbreeding.
"We have known for a long time what these fossils look like," Dr. Trinkaus continued.
"We know that Neanderthals are distinctive, but this research doesn't address their
underlying biology." In the new research, Dr. Harvati and her colleagues,
Dr. Stephen R. Frost of the New York Institute of Technology in Old Westbury
and Dr. Kieran P. McNulty of Baylor University in Waco, Tex., used a technique
known as geometric morphometrics to measure the degree of variation between
and among living primate species, including chimpanzees, gorillas, baboons,
monkeys and humans.
The researchers focused their analysis on the same 15 "landmarks" on the cranium
of each specimen. They were examined in 3-D to determine even the finest variations
The purpose, Dr. Harvati said, "was to devise a quantitative method to determine what
degree of difference justified classifying specimens as different species." The differences measured between modern humans and Neanderthals were found to be significantly
greater than those found between subspecies or populations of the other species studied. The two living species of chimpanzees, for example, appear to be more closely related to each other than Neanderthals are to humans, the scientists concluded.
In a statement about the findings, Dr. Harvati said the research provided "the most concrete evidence to date that Neanderthals are indeed a separate species within the genus Homo."