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

By Christine Bruun / Director-Sasquatch Watch

ｩChristine Bruun/2002-2009

Deep in the remote regions of Nepal, (home to the legendary Yeti), a report of giant elephants has taken ten scientists on a journey into our ancient past. “The search for the Lost mammoth”. Divided from China, (home of the legendary Yeren—cousin to the Yeti), by the Himalayan Mountains, lies nepal. A group of ten 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 such animals, 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 tht 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, and hair samples while documenting even the ear shapes. Evidently elephant ears are much like fingerprints in that no two are alike. They measured the elehants 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 fifty elephants still remaining in the region.

Among the group was Peter Byrne, a well known research and explorer. He is also a snake and bird expert, a medical doctor, and a 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 an explosisve trap that the natives used 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 decendents of their prehistoric ancester. The scientists 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 the initial step toward becoming human? In Stirk Fontaine, 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. There was also the discovery of the Taung Skull that very same year by an anthropologist named Raymond Dart. It was the skull of a very young child found in limestone in Taung, South Africa.

An almost complete skeleton was disscovered in 1974 at the Stirk Fountaine site and it was a remarkable discovery. It was the skeleton of a female in ethiopia known as “Lucy” that would excite the scientific community. Lucy was older than the Taung Skull find. She was about three and a half feet tall and was estimated to weigh about sixty-five pounds when alive. The leg bones told a lot about how she moved. Lucy had a human style angle of thigh bone so that it was obvious when they compared it to that of our simian cousins, that 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, yet the foot turned out like that of an ape. It wasn't until the footprints discovered in Tanzania, of two hominids were announced, the immplications of what he had found 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 and 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 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 those who crossed the land bridge into the North American continent. Along with them could have been members of that second species, (whichever we are not), who then took a different evolutionary path. And, because of their isolation, in-breeding, and the frigid climate they stayed in, 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 Asian people, Yeti, Alma, and the Yeren. (remnants of that secondary species).

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, and 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 #STW431, this theory becomes weakened and holds less credibility than previously thought.

Finally: 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 of #STW431.

It 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.

Final Note: Since writing this article in 2002, the scientific world is beginning to jump on board and give the existence of Bigfoot credible plausability. More and more scientists are helping in the research and lending their skills, knowledge, and expertise to the search for Bigfoot.