BIGFOOT'S ORIGINS

Australopithecus sediba MAY BE AN ANCESTOR OF THE BIGFOOT SPECIES

Written by Emily Fleur & edited by Connor Anderson

---

​Bigfoot is perhaps the most widely debated mystery. Many experienced researchers and scientists believe this creature to be an undiscovered great ape. However, new theories rooting Bigfoot’s origin in humanity need to be researched. In order to determine if Bigfoot is closer to the Homo branch of the evolutionary tree, we must dive into what it means to be human. Nine species of Homo have been identified in our fossil record. This includes H. habilis, H. heidelbergensis, H. naledi, H. neanderthalensis, H. rudolfensis, H. erectus, and H. sapiens, which is what we call modern humans today. Alongside Homo on the tree, we have Australopithecus and Paranthropus, non-human species with morphology resembling both ape and human. All species on our evolutionary tree are defined as hominins, the group consisting of modern humans, extinct human species and all our immediate ancestors (including members of the genera Homo, Australopithecus, Paranthropus and Ardipithecus.) 

Pictured below: A.sediba skull layered over the Patterson Gimlin film creature

Bigfoot is described as a large, bipedal creature with physical characteristics that seem to unite both man and ape. When it comes to this creature’s behavior, it seems that when undisturbed, it is performing tasks very similar to ape. However, when faced with human interaction, the creature behaves in a way that indicates symbolic thought. For example, in John Green’s The Best of Sasquatch Bigfoot, he references a story he names, “The Logger’s Story,” about two female Bigfoots observed for a few hours by a logger. The man described both creatures as six-foot-tall females with large breasts. He watched them sleep in a peculiar way, tucking their limbs into their chest as they faced the ground, perhaps to preserve heat. After waking, the creatures began pulling and eating water plants. He then goes on to say that one of the creatures bent down and defecated into the creek, wiping itself once and briefly licking its hand. After lounging for quite some time, one of the individuals climbed into a tree and let out a call before heading into the brush above the road. The behavior described in this story gives the impression of very primitive, and even animalistic thinking. These undisturbed Bigfoots revealed a very ape-like lifestyle to the observer, who did not have any contact with the two creatures he studied. However, other stories, such as the “Ape Canyon” incident, reveal creatures that seem to have premeditated, complex thought when faced with human interaction. The story begins with a group of minors camped out in a remote canyon in Oregon. After finding tremendous footprints scattered across camp, they kept a watchful eye for the culprit. About two years after the first print was found, the minors encountered a creature peeking out from behind a tree, which they shot at. After loading its body with rounds of bullets, the creature seemed unaffected as it attempted to make an escape before a final bullet caused it to fall down into the canyon. That night, several creatures attempted to break into the minors’ cabin, torturing them with intimidation for hours until the sun rose. An important detail to note is one of the creatures reaching through a crack in the shelter and grabbing an axe by its handle, trying to pull it through. When recalling the story, one of the minors described the creatures as man-like and only challenged their human origin when questioning why the one they encountered early that day was so hard to kill. The creatures observed during the Ape Canyon incident demonstrated premeditated, complex thought. The attack on the minors the night of the shooting of a creature was no coincidence and leads us to believe that the beings encountered were far more intelligent than a great ape. Another Bigfoot story that demonstrates creative and abstract thought is the Albert Ostman account. In this story, a prospector is kidnapped by a large creature and held hostage by its family. He observed a form of verbal language, family relationships, and curiosity regarding his modern weapons and apparatus. They quickly learned how to open and close his snuff box, and most importantly, conversed with one another about it. Ostman took note of woven blankets and bedding made from cedar bark. The most interesting element to the story is how Ostman began constructing utensils for the creatures. The youngest family member attempted to communicate with Ostman by pointing to different objects he possessed, and then to his sister, as if to ask if she may have one too. This story is just one of many that points to an intelligent thought process and premeditation in this unknown species. Perhaps the most exciting element to the search for Bigfoot is the pondering of its origins. Whether it turns out that this unknown species is ape or man, its discovery will completely rewrite our evolutionary history and challenge our intelligence as human. Let us take a look at how our own species evolved into what we are today. Then, we will explore what it truly means to be human, as we discover a species on our tree that just may be the missing Bigfoot ancestor we are so desperately searching for.
 
Research suggests that the Bigfoot population remains in the thousands, which many assume will lead to extinction. However, the early H. sapiens population is speculated to have been extremely small, being that bones are rarely found.  Perhaps their small population survived because of their growing intelligence. Humans had to be extremely organized while hunting to avoid large cats and other predators. A need for organization eventually evolved the intelligence of the H. sapiens brain, and this type of social culture would evolve into what we are today. ​Aside from eating, the human brain developed when migration kicked in. When land became bone dry, humans were forced to regroup and migrate. Evidence discovered of a 100,000 year old artifact suggests that the San people of South Africa stored water in empty Ostrich eggs while traveling, and during migration they hunted and cooked over fire. Experts believe early H. sapiens may have used similar methods. Our brains were growing, and our species was evolving. During this time, a form of verbal language became present. Many experts argue that language and tool use are what allowed us to out-compete other hominin species. However, our survival advantage goes deeper than that. Scientists still have inconclusive results on why we outcompeted Neanderthals. It was first believed to have been due to the placement of the hyoid bone in the throat, therefore restricting language, however after a recent discovery of a Neanderthal hyoid bone found in Israel in 1989, scientists speculated that they may have had similar placement in the throat to H. sapiens, suggesting that they were likely capable of complex language. The study took the theory a step further, hinting that complex language is likely much older than we imagine, and may have been present in our shared ancestor, H. heidelbergensis. If language existed so long before our modern species, can it really be the defining requirement for classifying as human? Perhaps it is not language itself that defines this, but rather, the reason language came to be. Chris Stringer, a paleoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London explains that although Neanderthals are now speculated to have been capable of complex speech, fossilized skulls indicate that humans had slightly larger frontal lobes. This brain region controls decision-making, social behavior, and creativity, or abstract thought. Neanderthals may have had a physical advantage such as their robustness, however they lacked the anatomy to produce complex thought, even if they could communicate it. Interestingly, Australopithecus africanus had frontal lobes similar in shape to humans. Could this suggest that a species that lived 3.3 to 2.1 million years ago could also be capable of complex thought? At the least, they would have had the predisposition to do so. Many scientists consider either A. africanus or A. afarensis of East Africa to represent a viable candidate for the ancestor of the genus Homo. If this is the case, the facts are all lining up. A. africanus was bipedal, shared similar frontal lobes to our own species, and seems to have been the last Australopithecus species before the Homo chain began.
 
Bigfoot has exhibited anatomy similar to ape, such as the morphology of their feet, or their unique gait. Not to mention, they are covered in hair. However, perhaps physical attributes do not define this species’ origins, but rather, their intelligent behavior. Ron Morehead is a Sasquatch researcher that was able to record vocalizations of an unknown species deep in the Sierra mountains. He has acquired hours of audio, some of which has been analyzed by expert linguists. Nancy Logan, a court certified interpreter in California, Oregon and Washington, analyzed the sounds recorded by Morehead. Important to note: Logan is certified in Spanish and Japanese, is a registered French interpreter, and also speaks Italian and Russian. She has extensive experience translating languages in courts, which as one may know, is a difficult task. Logan is well-versed in fast and complex languages. Her analysis of the Sierra recordings led her to observe repeated phoneme patterns and a certain organization to the chattering. She added that the fluidity and speed of the language stands out to her, and certain vocalizations seem to be coming from different parts of the throat. R. Scott Nelson, a retired U.S. Navy Crypto-Linguist, has over 30 years’ experience in Foreign Language and Linguistics (including the collection, transcription, analysis and reporting of voice communications.) He currently teaches Russian, Spanish, Persian, Philosophy and Comparative Religions at Wentworth College in Missouri. He has made four different transcriptions of the recordings, but stresses that human limitations prohibit him from reproducing frequencies he says cannot be duplicated by known human vocalizing. ThinkerThunker, a computer science expert and YouTuber, analyzed the Sierra Sounds in great detail using audio software. His findings were shocking: the creatures produced 5 octaves within one single sound. After comparing this anomaly to other known animals, and even H. sapiens, ThinkerThunker determined that no other known species can produce that many octaves within a single sound. The only way to analyze these octaves is by breaking down and slowing the audio to be able to view the wavelengths in detail. In other words, whatever made those vocalizations recorded by Morehead is producing sounds inaudible to the H. sapiens ear.
 
Complex language is something that pushed H. sapiens ahead and enabled us to outcompete other species, however, we are learning now that the complex language we developed was directly caused by the complex thought produced by the placement of our frontal lobes. If we analyze Bigfoot evidence like the Sierra Sounds, we can determine that this species has a complex language, even more intricate and evolved than our own. There are frequencies in their sounds that we cannot hear, there are vocalizations being made in different parts of the throat, and there are complex articulations that are rapidly communicated. The characteristics of their language clearly points to a complex thought process, which we can infer based on our own species’ success, corresponds to the shape and placement of the frontal lobes in the brain. Studies have shown that although Paranthropus existed alongside A. africanus, they did not share this frontal lobe anatomy with them. Many scientists and researchers make the argument of Paranthropus being Bigfoot’s predecessor. However, if Paranthropus did not have the ability for complex thought like we did, it would not match up to the behavior observed in the Sierra Sounds. In order to make any conclusions, we have to dig deeper into what defines human. It is important to note that Bigfoot is not often reported using tools other than rocks or sticks, which will need to be kept in mind when formulating theories about their origin. Many will argue that tool use is a major requirement for an intelligent species, however, some research proves otherwise. The earliest H. sapiens in Africa (dated 200–350 thousand years ago) had brains similar in size to modern humans and their fossil remains are often linked to Middle Stone Age stone-tool technology. However, contrary to the seemingly technological innovation, there is little archaeological evidence that complex behaviors took place during this period. In other words, symbolic thought, creativity, planning, and social networks was not present in our species at this time, proving that tool-use has very little to do with intelligence. A paper by Richard Potts, of the Smithsonian Institute, National Natural History Museum, and colleagues, indicates that stone-tool technology actually developed due to unpredictable climate and landscape, suggesting that the reason H. sapiens made stone tools correlates more with environmental shifts and less with complex thought. 
 
Based on scientific studies of human evolution, we can determine that H. sapiens (our own species) thrived because of the placement of the frontal lobes, which control decision-making, social behavior, and creativity. This predisposition is found in A. africanus, the species thought to begin the Homo lineage. It is time to introduce a new species, to connect what we know about Bigfoot with our fossil record. If we look at our evolutionary tree, we see that A. africanus is the predecessor for A. sediba. After that, the fossil record stops for this branch. Sediba was a species with long upper limbs, a man-like face, and a developed bipedal locomotion. This group shares many characteristics with our own species, for example, the uneven shapes of the right and left side of the brain, as well as the structure of the brain. In a study done by The European Synchrotron, the prefrontal cortex of A. sediba was analyzed against that of modern humans and apes. Again, this anatomical characteristic is responsible for multitasking, reasoning, planning, and innovation. The study revealed advancements in the development of the prefrontal cortex that foreshadow the proportional changes that evolved modern humans. In other words, this particular branch of Australopithecines begins with the same species that evolved into modern human (A. africanus) and ends with a species equipped with the predisposition of complex thought (A. sediba.) Although this tendency is a great indicator that sediba might be a possible ancestor for an unknown intelligent human species, it is not yet enough to suggest it. We have analyzed Bigfoot’s evolved intelligence through recordings of its complex language, but now we must assess its anatomy to see if this lines up with A. sediba. Unlike the anatomy of other known hominins, A. sediba had midfoot flexibility, and would produce a midtarsal break with each step. Additionally, while A. sediba’s ankle was human-like in certain ways, it had an enlarged medial malleolus, and an extremely mobile subtalar joint. This anatomy is found in the inverted foot of a climbing ape. Although the foot of A. sediba appears primitive, the distal femur possesses a human-like bicondylar angle, therefore positioning A sediba’s knees directly over the feet during a bipedal stride. The anatomy found in sediba fossils is exactly what we observe in the Patterson Gimlin footage, as well as credible Bigfoot footprints. In the film, the creature lifts its back leg at an almost right angle, positioning its knee directly over its stepping foot. Through analysis of the footprints gathered from the PG film site by Bob Titmus, leading scientists concluded that a midtarsal break was present, indicating midfoot flexibility. In conclusion, we can prove that both A. sediba and Bigfoot share midfoot flexibility, a compliant gait, and nearly identical physical features. They also share similar behavior. There is no evidence to suggest that Sediba used tools the same way we did. Scientists believe it is likely that they used sticks, animal bones and rocks to perform complex tasks. Interestingly, Bigfoot has been consistently reported to use rocks as tools or intimidation strategies. Because of their similarities in morphology and behavior, we can infer that both A. sediba and Bigfoot share similarities in frontal lobe size and placement, which directly correlates to intelligence and complex thought.
 
Bigfoot is described as a bipedal creature, with a complex language, ape-like gait and an intelligence so great, their species has managed to stay elusive to an unimaginable degree. The anatomical features that this creature possesses contradict one another in ways that are difficult to decipher. How can a species exist with anatomy that mixes the primitive gait of a bipedal ape with the intelligence of a modern man? The answer lies in A. sediba. This known species exhibits the physical characteristics and purported behavior seen in Bigfoot with the neurological tendencies for complex thought, the very advantage that drove our species to the top of the food chain…or so we thought. Is it possible that this species began evolving before our own, turning itself into an evolved Homo before we even did? Perhaps they migrated from South Africa to North America, gaining a tremendous skill set along their journey, and developing adaptations for colder climates. Bergmann’s rule states that within a broadly distributed taxonomic clade, populations and species of larger size are found in colder environments, while populations and species of smaller size are found in warmer regions. This would explain how a four foot species of hominin would be able to adapt and grow into the eight foot creature we know today as Bigfoot. The anatomy lines up, the intelligence lines up, and the adaptations line up. Bigfoot is a real species of hominin, whose evidence hundreds of people continue to search for. But perhaps we are looking too far ahead, and instead we should be looking up, into the very tree that paints our own existence.

Bibliography:
Arensburg B;Schepartz LA;Tillier AM;Vandermeersch B;Rak Y; “A Reappraisal of the Anatomical Basis for Speech in Middle Palaeolithic Hominids.” American Journal of Physical Anthropology, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2248373/.

Arensburg B;Schepartz LA;Tillier AM;Vandermeersch B;Rak Y; “A Reappraisal of the Anatomical Basis for Speech in Middle Palaeolithic Hominids.” American Journal of Physical Anthropology, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2248373/.

Blaxland, Author(s) Beth. “Hominid and Hominin – What's the Difference?” The Australian Museum, australian.museum/learn/science/human-evolution/hominid-and-hominin-whats-the-difference/.

Carson, John. “Middle Stone Age Thinking.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 3 May 2018, www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0348-x#rightslink.

Dorey, Author(s) Fran. “Australopithecus Sediba.” The Australian Museum, australian.museum/learn/science/human-evolution/australopithecus-sediba/. 

​Falk, Dean, et al. “Early Hominid Brain Evolution: a New Look at Old Endocasts.” Journal of Human Evolution, Academic Press, 25 May 2002, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047248499903780.

Green, John. The Best of Sasquatch Bigfoot: the Latest Scientific Developments plus All of On the Track of the Sasquatch and Encounters with Bigfoot. Hancock House, 2004. 

Hogenboom, Melissa. “Neanderthals Could Speak like Modern Humans, Study Suggests.” BBC News, BBC, 20 Dec. 2013, www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-25465102.
Green, John. The Best of Sasquatch Bigfoot: the Latest Scientific Developments plus All of On the Track of the Sasquatch and Encounters with Bigfoot. Hancock House, 2004. 

Huthmacher, John. “Retired Navy Man Studies Bigfoot Sounds.” Hastings Tribune, 18 Feb. 2019, www.hastingstribune.com/news/retired-navy-man-studies-bigfoot-sounds/article_a6a22674-31a5-11e9-8ca6-4376c78ccfbc.html.

Huthmacher, John. “Retired Navy Man Studies Bigfoot Sounds.” Hastings Tribune, 18 Feb. 2019, www.hastingstribune.com/news/retired-navy-man-studies-bigfoot-sounds/article_a6a22674-31a5-11e9-8ca6-4376c78ccfbc.html.

"Origin of Humans - National Geographic Documentary 2016." YouTube. N.p., 02 Dec. 2016. Web. 23 Mar. 2017.

R;, Capasso L;Michetti E;D'Anastasio. “A Homo Erectus Hyoid Bone: Possible Implications for the Origin of the Human Capability for Speech.” Collegium Antropologicum, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19149203/.

“Ron Morehead: Professional Opinions.” Ron Morehead Professional Opinions Category, ronmorehead.com/cat/professional_opinions/.

S;, Steele J;Clegg M;Martelli. “Comparative Morphology of the Hominin and African Ape Hyoid Bone, a Possible Marker of the Evolution of Speech.” Human Biology, U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25078953/.

“The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program.” Australopithecus Sediba | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program, humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/australopithecus-sediba.

“The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program.” Australopithecus Sediba | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program, humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/australopithecus-sediba.

“Visualising and Interpreting the Brain of Australopithecus Sediba.” European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), 9 Jan. 2017, www.esrf.eu/UsersAndScience/Publications/Highlights/2011/imaging/ima7.

Wolchover, Natalie. “Why Did Humans Prevail?” LiveScience, Purch, 6 June 2012, www.livescience.com/20798-humans-prevailed-neanderthals.html.

ZHANG, AMEY Y, and JEREMY M DESILVA. “Special Issue: Australopithecus Sediba Computer Animation of the Walking Mechanics of Australopithecus Sediba.” Paleoanthro.org.
 ​