Man-apes, Bigfoot, sasquatch

Not all sightings of strange man-like creatures are lies or bears standing on their back legs. The evidences seem to varify the existence of a "bigfoot" creature. The Roger-Patterson film seems real, indeed, it can't even be faked now, and its from the late 1960s. A little known fact about the creature in the film, dubbed Patty, is that it left a number of good prints, and some of these show toes repositioned. The toes and feet changed in each step. The feet and toes were not wooden fakes!!! Other things about the film prove its not a man in a fur costume. In regards to large prints-Several researchers have examined some of the large prints, at various sightings, and discovered some important facts. The most important fact being that skin prints or dermal ridges can be seen!!! To say that these prints are all fakes is plainly silly.

Its my opinion that most of these are surviving Homo Erectus types, perhaps enlarged and more muscular. The morphology of the Roger-Patterson creature fits HE. in several respects, although not perfectly. Compare a close up still image of its face with WT 15000, or the Homo Erectus skull and its a reasonable fit. Homo Erectus in the eyes of some was human and an ancestor of Homo Sapiens but several facts show that they were not humans or people. They exhibit no human behavior and simply made the same stone tools for nearly millions of years. This shows a static behavior, akin to animals, and no human advancement. They probably had the mentality of a smart Cocker-Spaniel. Theres no good evidence of them cooking food or wearing clothes, nothing. Most Creationists and Evolutionists say they were people but the facts don't fit this. Just because they are man-like in certain ways does not mean they were people. When Eugene Duboise found his Java-man skull top back in 1891 he first used the term, Anthropopoithecus, meaning "Manape", but after several months he switched the name around to Pithecanthropus, or "Apeman", merely because the brain of the skull cap was in the lower human range. I think he was correct to begin with and these are "manapes". Patty(above) is a species that should be named, Anthropithecus Americanis. Nearly all the so-called human ancestors and Neanderthals were pelt covered animals!!! And each was distinct. Homo Erectus can't be descended from Australopithecus because these creatures were getting more ape-like, with the more human looking ones being oldest. See my next video, part 5, of Human Evolution. Recent finds also suggest a great deal of sexual dimorphism of Homo Erectus and this is a gorilla-like pattern.