"Why the real King Kong became extinct" Topic
11 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Pulp Media Message Board Back to the Prehistoric Message Board
Areas of InterestFantasy Ancients 19th Century World War One World War Two on the Land Science Fiction
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Showcase ArticleA walk down memory lane - do you remember the Tank Trap?
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 05 Jan 2016 12:59 p.m. PST |
"The largest ape to roam Earth died out 100,000 years ago because it failed to tuck into savannah grass after climate change hit its preferred diet of forest fruit, scientists suggest. Gigantopithecus -- the closest Nature ever came to producing a real King Kong -- weighed five times as much as an adult man and probably stood three metres (nine feet) tall, according to sketchy estimates. In its heyday a million years ago, it inhabited semi-tropical forests in southern China and mainland Southeast Asia. Until now, though, almost nothing was known about the giant's anatomical shape or habits…"
Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
Tgerritsen | 05 Jan 2016 1:44 p.m. PST |
These folks claim they never went away…
|
Legion 4 | 05 Jan 2016 2:32 p.m. PST |
Gigantopithecus may be an ancestor of the "legendary" Big Foot … But we just can't find one to ask … Those guys & gal keep yelling and beating on trees and scares them away !!!! |
doug redshirt | 05 Jan 2016 6:07 p.m. PST |
I guess everyone needs a hobby to get out of mom's basement. |
The Shadow | 05 Jan 2016 10:31 p.m. PST |
"wait…shhhhh, I think I see one. Ummm… nope, but look here, a broken branch. I think that a BigFoot passed through here. |
Legion 4 | 06 Jan 2016 8:06 a.m. PST |
Sure laugh at those geeks … but they are laughing all the way to the bank ! I'm sure Animal Planet is paying them very well … Whether they find Big Foot or not … Regardless, if these huge hominids exist, and they may based on other finds of species that were unknown. But I'm not putting any $$$ on it. However, these primates would be masters of their environment and probably would be hard to find. As we see. However, if they have the intelligence that they are said to have. They would have figured out long ago. The biggest predator on the planet are these short hairless bipeds with things that go "Boom" that can and will kill you … |
boy wundyr x | 06 Jan 2016 8:26 a.m. PST |
I would have given a remote chance for Bigfoot/Sasquatch up until the late 1990s, but since then, between trail cameras, phones w/cameras, human population pressure in western North America, wildfires, advances in remote sensing, and who knows what other surveillance the military and drug enforcement does, I just can't see any way a viable population of large hominids can be out there undetected. |
Legion 4 | 06 Jan 2016 8:37 a.m. PST |
A healthy breeding population according to the experts is about 40. So take that for what it is worth. Now it's not so much as being able to detect a group of this size, even though they will/may be dispersed … You have to know where to really look. In very large regions or areas. And in this case, very few with real high tech are really looking … |
boy wundyr x | 06 Jan 2016 10:46 a.m. PST |
I'm not sure I buy 40 as a viable population estimate; human space colony estimates were about 160, down to 80 if you deliberately managed reproduction. Locally, minimum fish hatchery requirements for starting a restoration stocking program is 30 pairs collected each year for at least three years – 180 fish – and that's to enter a controlled breeding program where lines are backcrossed (older females bred to younger males) to avoid inbreeding. Forty may work to start a population, but you'd have to be on top of managing the genetics (unlikely part of Bigfoot's culture) or inbreeding would crop up quickly, particularly if that population is also still wildly dispersed. And a dispersed population anywhere in North America short of the far north is eventually going to need to cross highways and rail tracks to find mates. Between mining and forestry operations, tourism, and whatever drug surveillance goes on along the border with BC, somebody should be seeing something. So my opinion is that even in doubtfully viable low numbers, they'd either have to be living densely and relatively easy to spot or dispersed such that their movements would eventually cross paths with humans at a far greater rate than even their hunters can demonstrate. We know cougars are out there, and I don't see them being much different than Bigfoot in terms of elusiveness. |
Legion 4 | 06 Jan 2016 2:00 p.m. PST |
We'll just have to wait and see until some one actually catches one … |
Tango01 | 06 Jan 2016 10:46 p.m. PST |
|
|