There's Something Weird Going On by ego_bot

Author:ego_bot [ego_bot]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: ego_bot
Published: 2024-05-16T00:00:00+00:00

Does Bigfoot have breasts?

Lee went on to have a sleepless night—not because of the argument with her professor, but because of that simple question.

For any dedicated enthusiast (and she had found there were many very dedicated enthusiasts online), it was given that the original Bigfoot seen in the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin footage was a female, affectionately named “Patty,” mostly based on the observation that Patty did, indeed, have breasts.

Though the Patterson-Gimlin clip was infamously brief and blurry—impossible to prove, impossible to disprove, non-scientific by its very nature—Lee was able to find some edits where the shakiness had been removed through digital stabilization techniques. Through the graininess, she could see it herself: the pair of furry, swollen breasts hanging from the creature’s chest as it performed its iconic over-the-shoulder camera glance.

This observation was consistent with reports by one of the men present for the original filming, Bob Gimlin, who dubbed the subject a female based on the claim that he saw “mammary glands” as the animal walked away. In Lee’s mind, this added to the footage’s credibility. Why would two former rodeo cowboys in the sixties with no knowledge of primatology go to the trouble of adding boobs to their gorilla costume?

Some members of the research community even went to such lengths of comparing the beast’s movements to real human models, concluding that the movement of Patty’s breasts were consistent with those of a human. Either way, those breasts were the only noticeable physical difference between the subject in the 1967 footage and Lee’s specimen from camera three. This suggested Lee’s Bigfoot might have been a male. Head shape, facial structure, and limb thickness appeared nearly identical between subjects, as well as fur color, coverage, and density.

The breasts did, however, raise new questions. First off, if her breastless subject was a male, then why didn’t it have a visible penis? Non-human primates possessed phalluses of all shapes and sizes (many notably small in proportion to body mass, especially compared to humans), often concealed by fur, but Lee had studied every pixel of the front-facing subject from camera three and noted nothing. It was worth noting that Homo sapiens was the only mammal whose breasts were permanently enlarged outside of lactation. This brought up the next big question, which was on the subject of taxonomy: Was Bigfoot a species of great ape, or it was a species of human?

Some non-scientists on the internet posited this bipedal primate as a relative of extant human species, a descendant of Homo neanderthalensis or Homo heidelbergensis, perhaps, hardened and enlightened by fifty-thousand years of natural selection allowing it to persist in the Anthropocene. They dubbed it many names, including Homo sylvestris, or the common “Wood Ape.” Alternatively, the Bigfoot could have been a North American migrant variant of Gigantopithecus blacki, the ten-foot-tall ancestor of the orangutan that went extinct one hundred thousand years ago. If this was true, and Bigfoot was a closer relative to the orangutan than Homo sapiens, the implication was a rather exceptional instance

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.