From the Wooly Mammoth to Bigfoot:  Is There a Connection?

Written by: Christine Bruun/Director- Sasquatch Watch

Deep in the remote regions of Nepal, (home of the legendary Yeti), a report of giant elephants has taken 10 scientists on a journey into our ancient past: "The Search for the Lost Mammoth".

Divided from China, (home to the legendary Yeren--cousin to the Yeti), by the Himalayan Mountains, lies Nepal.  A group of 10 scientists from the Scientific Exploration Society begin their expedition into Nepal's interior upon Asian elephants. One member of this elite group is familiar to us.  He is the renowned explorer and researcher, Peter Byrne.  

This expedition documentary was broadcast March 10, 2002 on the Discovery Science channel.  I didn't realize when I first sat down to watch this program, just how exciting it would become.  The implications that I drew from this program, and another unrelated report on the discovery of ancient humanoid skeletons in Africa, which followed directly after the story on the mammoth, had me hopping.

The group set up their base camp at the site of a recently re-discovered ancient temple that was said to have been built using giant elephants.  Reports of giant elephants had been making ripples in the scientific community for years.  However, no one really knew if there were such creatures, and if there were, were these prehistoric survivors from an extinct period in our planet's history?  The legends held that the giant stones that were brought to the spot to build the temple had been carried on the backs of these giant elephants.

It is well known that the elephant originated in Africa.  The African, Asian, and mammoth all began there.  The mammoth and the Asian elephants migrated into Asia over time.  Then, the mammoth began a migration northward, growing hair as a result of the frigid climate it now found itself in.  These mammoths are said to have migrated across the land bridge from Russia to Alaska and have been found as far south as Arizona.

In order to create the structure in which to prove their individual theories, the scientists set out not just hunting the giants, but building and documenting profiles of all the elephants in the region.  They used their own beasts of burden as the control group.  They collected footprints, dung, hairs, and even ear shapes.  One of the members of the group was a fingerprint expert whose job it was to draw and record the ear shapes of all the elephants they came across.  Evidently elephant ears are much like fingerprints in that no two are alike.  They measured the elephants and gathered as much information as they could so that when they found the giants, they could compare the giants with the other elephants. They estimated that there were only about 50 elephants still remaining in the region.

Among the group was Peter Byrne,( a well known researcher and explorer),  a snake and bird expert, a medical doctor, and the fingerprint expert.  The group was chosen carefully to fully take advantage of their skills and talents.  Of course they retained a photographer whose sole job was to document the expedition.

They found their elephants...unfortunately, one of the two giants was killed accidentally when it stepped into a explosive trap the natives use to hunt down smaller animals.  The elephant remains were so badly ravaged when they finally dug it up that they could not extract any DNA from it.  This meant that they couldn't prove genetically exactly where these giants came from.  However, it soon became clear when they finally came upon the remaining giant that it was not a mammoth, (which had become extinct approximately two million years before), but an even older specimen from an earlier period.  The discovery was exciting.

Their theory was as follows: due to the isolated region, the inbreeding finally created a genetic throwback from the past since these elephants were decedents of their prehistoric ancestor, .  They are not sure exactly what caused this prehistoric recovery, however, it certainly leads one to wonder if, under the right conditions, any species might eventually be able to re-create itself as these elephants had.

Now, comes the second story...

We've all heard of "Lucy", the famous skeletal fossil discovery in South Africa.  Scientists have searched for centuries to discover the answer to a perplexing question: When did the apes first make that initial step toward becoming human?

In Stirk Fontaine, (The spelling may be wrong here so bear with me until I find the correct spelling),  South Africa, in 1925, a skeleton was discovered of a child whose face and teeth were almost human.  They called these prehistoric ancestors Australopithecus--half man, half ape.  Then there was the Taung Skull .

An almost complete skeleton was discovered in 1974 and it was a remarkable discovery.  It was the skeleton of a female in Ethiopia known as LUCY.  Lucy was older than the Taung Skull.  She was about 3 1/2 ft. tall and about 65 lbs.  The leg bones told a lot about how she moved. Lucy had a human style angle of thigh bone so that it was obvious, that compared to that of our simian cousins, this female had walked upright.

Ron Clark was sorting through a box of mixed bone fragments in his office when he realized that he was seeing an ankle bone.  He realized that it was human-like, but yet the foot turned out like that of an ape.  It wasn't until the footprints discovered in Tanzania, of two hominids, that the implications were astonishing.  

Another scientist is sure that it is the inner ear that allows us to have balance and that it adapts to the way we move.  Since humans are the only hominids who walk upright, our inner ear has to be different than that of the ape.

When the fossil, named Mrs. Ples, was discovered, the skull was put through the CAT scan to check the organ of balance.  It was theorized that our ancient ancestors lived primarily in the trees and only occasionally walked.  This changed as climates changed and adaptation was necessary.

It was after this discovery, that another skeleton was discovered and gave the scientists a reason to pause and reflect on their theories.  This new skeleton was, unlike Lucy, who was human-like from the neck down and ape-like from the neck up.  This new skeleton is so new that it doesn't even have a name.  It just has a number: STW431.  It has the body of an ape and the head of a human.  

The scientists suddenly realized that their thinking had to change.  Instead of a ladder that led from our prehistoric ancestors directly to us, they were now seeing a tree that branched.  They now had two distinct species who were evolving separately, but at the same time.  

What are the implications of this discovery?  Well, of the two distinct and separate species, we now do not know which of them we came from.  And this is where I draw you back to the mammoth and ultimately Bigfoot.

Both our prehistoric ancestors and the mammoth originated in Africa.  Since the mammoth and the Asian elephant migrated east into Asia, I would theorize that it is possible that our ancestors also migrated with them, following their food source across the Asian region.  

When the mammoth split off from the Asian elephant, which stayed in the Asian region, some of our ancestors followed them across the land bridge into the North American continent.  Along with them could have been members of that second species, (which ever one we are not),  who then took a different, but parallel evolutionary path.  And, because of their isolation and in-breeding,  and because of the frigid climate they stayed in, they grew hair on their bodies like the mammoth and stayed relatively primitive, unlike the other species who flourished and dominated their environment.  

Those humanoids who stayed in the Asian region adapted to their specific environments and isolation in much the same way as the Bigfoot.  The same species that shared that Asian region also split and developed much as those in the North American continent, becoming the Yeti, Alma, and the Yeren, (remnants of that secondary species), while the other species flourished and became the peoples of those areas.  

So, we have several scientific paths that one can take to our ancestors.  First is the theory that, as the Giant elephants of Nepal who seem to be a genetic throwback to their prehistoric ancestors, Bigfoot and its cousins may very well have experienced a similar genetic mutation--in a sense, recreating itself into a likeness of early man.  This takes me to the genetic disorder which causes hair to grow all over a person's body and once mistaken for werewolfism by ancient cultures.  Perhaps this was a gene that has receded in humans over the millenniums. 

 Secondly, the theory that Bigfoot is somehow the missing link between our ancient ancestors and ourselves--the bottom rung on a long ladder of evolution leading from prehistoric times to present day.  Since the discovery of fossil skeleton #STW431, this theory becomes weakened and holds less credibility than previously thought.

 Finally that Bigfoot is its own species descendant from either LUCY or # STW431. 

Because of these new discoveries, the scientific community now has to rethink its entire thought process about evolution and the implications it has for us in tracing our ancestry back to our prehistoric roots. Perhaps now the scientific community will recognize the importance of investing time and money into credible scientific research into the existence of Bigfoot, if only as a means to verify and validate the new theories as a result of the discovery #STW431.  

If is obvious to me that finding and studying Bigfoot will ultimately lead us to discoveries about our ancestry.  Perhaps #STW431 will become the catalyst that will bring the scientific community to understanding that they can no longer ignore the possibility of Bigfoot's existence if they are to solve the puzzle to our ancestral beginnings.  Perhaps Peter Byrne and the Scientific Exploration Society can lead the way and bring science on board.