2013 was a good year for new species being discovered so Bigfoot investigators don't give up!
Here are a few links: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/01/140124-river-dolphin-new-species-brazil-araguaian-boto-science/
http://mentalfloss.com/article/54341/10-awesome-new-species-discovered-2013
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/15/world/americas/new-mammal-smithsonian/index.html
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=new+species+discovered+2013&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=EAEF21E66E1CBD0CADA1EAEF21E66E1CBD0CADA1
And then there is this new dude! lol hmmmmm
What do you think it is? (looks like a Hobbit) :o Really looks like a puppet and the video is very blurry, probably on purpose. lol
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Creepy+New+Species+Discovered&Form=VQFRVP#view=detail&mid=77975DA9233E7BF6AC6377975DA9233E7BF6AC63
These are some great new types of creatures. Hopefully not hoaxed.
Just this guy, you Know! WhatTheHey
People forget that IF Evolution is TRUTH...
then Evoultion is still going so new species would appear as old species vanish :D
So it seems they have been declared a new species.
Hobbits Were a Separate Species, Ancient Chompers Show
http://www.livescience.com/52839-hobbits-were-separate-species.html
Could pedro be an American Hobbit?
http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Pedro.html ???
I wonder if Pedro was any good at whittling..?
Pygmy flints ?
http://venturegalleries.com/blog/mysteries-of-the-pygmy-flints/
funbox
Quote from: funbox on November 20, 2015, 02:07:53 PM
I wonder if Pedro was any good at whittling..?
Pygmy flints ?
http://venturegalleries.com/blog/mysteries-of-the-pygmy-flints/
funbox
Wonderful! I had never heard of these, I wonder why not!
Quotewhen you get down to minute sizes, to little well-formed flints less than a quarter of an inch (six millimeters), you need a magnifying glass to discover the workmanship.
I do believe the little ones have learned to stay hidden from us brutes! :)
QuoteFrance[edit]
Two skeletons in the Tomb of Téviec
In France, one unusual find stands out: in the Mesolithic cemetery of Téviec, in Morbihan, one of the skeletons that has been found has a geometric microlith lodged in one of its vertebra. All indications suggest that the person died because of this projectile; whether by intention or by accident is unknown.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microlith
Quote from: Dyna on November 20, 2015, 06:04:24 PM
Wonderful! I had never heard of these, I wonder why not!
I do believe the little ones have learned to stay hidden from us brutes! :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microlith
a quick excerpt from The book of the damned , from chapter twelve, http://www.resologist.net/damn12.htm (http://www.resologist.net/damn12.htm)
Quote"Pigmy flints" are tiny, prehistoric implements. Some of them are a quarter of an inch in size. England, India, France, South Africa -- they've been found in many parts of the world -- whether showered there or not. They belong high up in the froth of the accursed: they are not denied, and they have not been disregarded; there is an abundant literature upon this subject. One attempt to rationalize them, or assimilate them, or take them into the scientific fold, has been the notion that they were toys of prehistoric children. It sounds reasonable. But, of course, by the reasonable we mean that for which the equally reasonable, but opposing, has not been found out -- except that we modify that by saying that, though nothing's finally reasonable, some phenomena have higher approximations to Reasonableness than have others. Against the notion of toys, the higher approximation is that where "pigmy flints" are found, all flints are pigmies -- at least so in India, where, when larger implements have been found in the same place, there are separations by strata. (Wilson.)
The datum that, just at present, leads me to accept that these flints were made by beings about the size of pickles, is a point brought out by Prof. Wilson (Rept. National Museum, 1892-455):(8)
Not only that the flints are tiny but that the chipping upon them is "minute."
Struggle for expression, in the mind of a 19th-century-ite, of an idea that did not belong to his era:
In Science Gossip, 1896-36, R. A. Gatty says:(9)
"So fine is the chipping that to see the workmanship a magnifying glass is necessary."
I think that would be absolutely convincing, if there were anything -- absolutely anything -- either that tiny beings, from pickle to cucumber stature made these things, or that ordinary savages made them under magnifying glasses.
The idea that we are now going to develop, or perpetrate, is rather intensely of the accursed, or the advanced. It's a lost soul, I admit -- or boast -- but it fits in. Or, as conventional as ever, our own [160/161] method is the scientific method of assimilating. It assimilates, if we think of the inhabitants of Elvera --
By the way, I forgot to tell the name of the giant's world:
Monstrator.
Spindle-shaped world -- about 100,000 miles along its major axis -- more details to be published later.
But our coming inspiration fits in, if we think of the inhabitants of Elvera as having only visited here: having, in hordes as dense as clouds of bats, come here, upon hunting excursions -- for mice, I should say: for bees, very likely -- or most likely of all, or inevitably, to convert the heathen -- horrified with any one who would gorge himself with more than a bean at a time; fearful for the souls of beings who would guzzle more than a dew drop at a time -- hordes to tiny missionaries, determined that right should prevail, determining right by their own minutenesses.
They must have been missionaries.
Only to be is motion to convert or assimilate something else.
The idea now is that tiny creatures coming here from their own little world, which may be Eros, though I call it Elvera, would flit from the exquisite to the enormous -- gulp of a fair-sized terrestrial animal -- half a dozen of them gone and soon digested. One falls into a brook -- torn away in a mighty torrent --
Or never anything but conventional, we adopt from Darwin:
"The geological records are incomplete."(10)
Their flints would survive, but, as to their fragile bodies -- one might as well search for prehistoric frost-traceries. A little whirlwind -- Elverean carried away a hundred yards -- body never found by his companions. They'd mourn for the departed. Conventional emotion to have: they'd mourn. There'd have to be a funeral: there's no getting away from funerals. So I adopt an explanation that I take from the anthropologists: burial in effigy. Perhaps the Elvereans would not come to this earth again until many years later -- another distressing occurrence -- one little mausoleum for all burials in effigy.
London Times, July 20, 1836:(11)
That, early in July, 1836, some boys were searching for rabbits' burrows in the rocky formation, near Edinburgh, known as Arthur's Seat. In the side of a cliff, they came upon some thin sheets of slate, which they pulled out.
Little cave.
Seventeen tiny coffins. [161/162]
Three or four inches long.
In the coffins were miniature wooden figures. They were dressed differently both in style and material. There were two tiers of eight coffins each, and a third tier begun, with one coffin.
The extraordinary datum, which has especially made mystery here:
That the coffins had been deposited singly, in the little cave, and at intervals of many years. In the first tier, the coffins were quite decayed, and the wrappings had moldered away. In the second tier, the effects of age had not advanced so far. And the top coffin was quite recent-looking.
In the Proceedings of the Society of Antiquarians of Scotland, 3-12-460, there is a full account of this find.(12) Three of the coffins and three of the figures are pictured.
So Elvera with its downy forests and its microscopic oyster shells -- and if the Elvereans be not very far-advanced, they take baths -- with sponges the size of pin-heads --
Or that catastrophes have occurred: that fragments of Elvera have fallen to this earth:
In Popular Science, 20-83, Francis Bingham, writing of the corals and sponges and shells and crinoids that Dr. Hahn had asserted that he had found in meteorites, says, judging by the photographs of them, that their "notable peculiarity" is their "extreme smallness."(13) The corals, for instance, are about one-twentieth the size of terrestrial corals. "They represent a veritable pigmy animal kingdom," says Bingham.
The inhabitants of Monstrator and Elvera were primitives, I think, at the time of their occasional visits to this earth -- though, of course, in a quasi-existence, anything that we semi-phantoms call evidence of anything may be just as good evidence of anything else. Logicians and detectives and jurymen and suspicious wives and members of the Royal Astronomical Society recognize this indeterminateness, but have the delusion that in the method of agreement there is final, or real evidence. The method is good enough for an "existence" that is only semi-real, but also it is the method of reasoning by which witches were burned, and by which ghosts have been feared. I'd not like to be so unadvanced as to deny witches and ghosts, but I do think that there never have been witches and ghosts like those of popular supposition. But stories of them have been supported by astonishing fabrications of details and of different accounts in agreement. [162/163]
So, if a giant left impressions of his bare feet in the ground, that is not to say that he was a primitive -- bulk of culture out taking the Kneipp cure. So, if Stonehenge is a large, but only roughly geometric construction, the inattention to details by its builders -- signifies anything you please -- ambitious dwarfs or giants -- if giants, that they were little more than cave men, or that they were post-impressionist architects from a very far-advanced civilization.
If there are other worlds, there are tutelary worlds -- or that Kepler, for instance, could not have been absolutely wrong: that his notion of an angel assigned to push along and guide each planet may not be very acceptable, but that, abstractedly, or in the notion of a tutelary relation, we may find acceptance.
Only to be is to be tutelary
funbox
The Case for Hobbits
I have been on the trail of the Hobbits for some time... Nice to get some new data
These Hobbit Homes in Russia have never been explained yet There are literally hundreds scattered around the Caucasian Mountains
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/06.jpg)
I am pretty certain this is where Tolken got the round door theme for his Hobbit homes
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/09.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/16.jpg)
For scale...
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/17.jpg)
Known locations
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/map.jpg)
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/02files/The_Case_for_Hobbits_Caucasian_Dolmens.html
funbox you have taken me off on another enjoyable reading spree for which I don't have the time yet do anyway :)
Just rewatched all of the Hobbit and Lord of The rings, my favorite book certainly gets the thoughts going in me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DHecFcDhbw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DHecFcDhbw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8ymgFyzbDo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8ymgFyzbDo
Quote from: Dyna on November 21, 2015, 08:26:12 PM
funbox you have taken me off on another enjoyable reading spree for which I don't have the time yet do anyway :)
Just rewatched all of the Hobbit and Lord of The rings, my favorite book certainly gets the thoughts going in me!
a question for you then :D , why was Tom Bombadil removed from the film ? was it because the Ring didn't work on Him? why is that , and who was this mysteriously cheerful fellow anyway >?
funbox
Quote from: zorgon on November 21, 2015, 07:47:09 PM
I am pretty certain this is where Tolken got the round door theme for his Hobbit homes
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/09.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Dolmen/16.jpg)
For scale...
they look like homes for oversized bird .. are their any pictures of an oversized birdbath and feeder ?>
funbox
Quote from: Dyna on November 21, 2015, 08:26:12 PM
funbox you have taken me off on another enjoyable reading spree for which I don't have the time yet do anyway :)
Just rewatched all of the Hobbit and Lord of The rings, my favorite book certainly gets the thoughts going in me!
but yeah very, strange looking effigy's
(http://i.imgur.com/w0mlASn.jpg)
http://www.nms.ac.uk/explore/collections-stories/scottish-history-and-archaeology/mystery-of-the-miniature-coffins/
odd how two of them appear to be wearing one piece suits, albeit one of them of a tartan nature :D
funbox
Yes odd indeed, what did you think of the murders idea that killed 17, seemed far fetched that they buried these, sad there is no one dating the little cave and whatever may be left of it. Almost feels as though some of the story was buried too.
Quote from: Dyna on November 22, 2015, 11:30:31 PM
Yes odd indeed, what did you think of the murders idea that killed 17, seemed far fetched that they buried these, sad there is no one dating the little cave and whatever may be left of it. Almost feels as though some of the story was buried too.
did you note that too , no mention of the varying degrees of decomposition between the layers of coffins, ... possibly enough time between murders for aging to show, possibly ..
funbox
most countries and/ or ethnic groups have stories and legends about the 'little people'
so really what's the big deal ?
ever heard of MU..you know the one before atlantis........
wow maybe both of them really did exist.. ;) 8) :-*
bwhahahahahahahahah
Quote from: space otter on November 23, 2015, 09:43:13 PM
most countries and/ or ethnic groups have stories and legends about the 'little people'
so really what's the big deal ?
ever heard of MU..you know the one before atlantis........
wow maybe both of them really did exist.. ;) 8) :-*
bwhahahahahahahahah
The big deal is that despite the world wide representation of these small people in myth and folklore, not many believe they are real. Even the "Hobbits" with all of the proof of their existing from their remains has taken years to become accepted.
wahbabababababababababbab ;D
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/bone-discovery-suggests-a-mysterious-ancient-species-of-human-lived-alongside-our-ancestors/ar-BBo6PFl?li=BBnb7Kz
Quartz
Olivia Goldhill
9 hrs ago
Bone discovery suggests a mysterious ancient species of human lived alongside our ancestors
(http://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BBo6P2d.img?)
© Provided by Quartz Neanderthals weren't the only ancient human.
An ancient femur found in a Chinese cave is unlike any bone formerly discovered, suggesting it belonged to a previously unknown human species that lived alongside modern man just 14,000 years ago.
The distinctive shape of the bone indicates that the species would have walked differently from humans species that lived alongside modern man just 14,000 years ago.
The distinctive shape of the bone indicates that the species would have walked differently from humans today, according to the New Scientist. And based on the size of the bone, the scientists behind the analysis report in their paper, published in PLOS One in December 2015, that an adult would have weighed 50kg, which is far smaller than other humans who lived at the time.
"When you put all the evidence together the femur comes out quite clearly resembling the early members of Homo," Darren Curnoe, from the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, who led the research team, told the New Scientist.
But while the earliest homo species lived around 2 million years ago and more recent humans, such as Neanderthals, became extinct some 40,000 years ago, researchers believe the newly discovered species would have lived far more recently, and alongside modern humans.
The 14,000-year-old bone fragment, which was found in the Muladong Cave in southwestern China in 1989 but was not studied for 25 years, has been painted with red clay, which is indicative of burial rituals. It seems to have been broken in a way that allows access to the bone marrow, and shows evidence of being butchered and being burned in a fire alongside other meat, according to the New Scientist.
Curnoe believes that homo sapiens mated with this newfound species, and possibly also ate them and used their bones as tools.
The theory is supported by bones discovered in Longlin cave in Guangxi Province in 1979, which Curnoe examined in 2012. These fossils were dated to 11,500 years ago and are thought to show a combination of homo sapiens traits and those of an archaic human.
Our understanding of mankind's evolutionary roots is far from clear-cut, and this finding could indicate a new branch in human development. "If true, this would be rather spectacular and it would make the finds of truly global importance," Michael Petraglia, co-director of the Centre for Asian Archeology at the University of Oxford, who wasn't involved in the work, told the New Scientist.
But other paleoanthropologists believe the bone's distinctive features come from variations within the species, rather than a distinct species. Chris Stringer, head of research into human origins at the Natural History Museum in London, told the Guardian that he is "cautious" about the discovery. "It is an isolated bone. It is not even half a femur," he said.
Curnoe is hoping to extract DNA from the bones, to build evidence about the fossil's evolutionary origins. For now, he told the Guardian, the discovery raises many more questions to be answered.
"The riddle of the Red Deer Cave people gets even more challenging now: Just who were these mysterious stone age people? Why did they survive so late? And why only in tropical southwest China?," said Curnoe.
But the discovery wouldn't be the first time scientists discovered the complexities of humans' evolutionary roots. Earlier this year, researchers discovered 15 skeletons belonging to a new species of ancient human in South Africa. The homo sapiens evolutionary tree is starting to get crowded.