Bigfoot: Myth or Legend? Examining the Biological Evidence of a Cross-Cultural Phenomenon (Part 1)

Sasquatch.  Yeti.  Abominable Snowman.  Boqs.  Sisimite.  Dwendi.  Shiru.  Didi.  Agogwe.  Mahula.  Pedek.  Mapinguari. 

Or simply put, Bigfoot. 

All of these names are used to describe a creature that has captured the imaginations of people from around the globe.  Bigfoot creatures are described in many cultures around the globe, ranging from North American to Australian Indigenous cultures, and evidence of their existence has been collected from the American and Canadian Northwest to the Himalayan Mountains of Nepal.  While cultural and geographical descriptions do vary, similar characteristics of these creatures have been identified.  Bigfoot creatures are described as being anywhere from four to eight feet tall, extremely hairy, and exhibiting human and ape-like characteristics.  Despite large quantities of cultural evidence on the topic, there remains a debate regarding the very existence of these creatures.  Today’s blog post is dedicated to a physical anthropological discussion on the topic of Bigfoot creatures and the biological evidence that exists.  These pieces of evidence fall into three broad categories: fossil evidence, natural evidence, and modern evidence, and each of these will be thoroughly discussed as a means of determining if Bigfoot creatures can viably exist in today’s world.  This blog post focuses on the fossil evidence.

Fossil Evidence

Due to Bigfoot’s human and ape-like characteristics, many individuals, including some scholars, believe that Bigfoot creatures are hybrids that evolved from Hominid ancestors but missed an evolutionary step in becoming fully human as we know and understand Homo sapiens to be both culturally and biologically today.  As such, several Hominid ancestors have been identified as potential candidates as the founding species of modern Bigfoot creatures.  These Hominid ancestor candidates include Gigantopithecus, Paranthropus/Australopithecus robustus, Homo erectus, and Homo neanderthalensis. 

Artistic rendition of Gigantopithecus (Google Images)

 Gigantopithecus is a Hominid species that was discovered by Professor von Koenigswald, who discovered two abnormally shaped molars in China.  He later attributed them to what he coined as the Gigantopithecus species.  Other diagnostic specimens have since been discovered to support the existence of the species, including several thousand molar teeth and four mandibles (lower jaws).  From these specimens, scholars have inferred that Gigantopithecus is a large bodied Hominid, ranging in size from five to ten feet tall.  Scholars have further inferred that Gigantopithecus is the ancestor to Bigfoot, although some have gone so far to say that Bigfoot represents a living Gigantopithecus.

There are, however, serious problems with this hypothesis.  The first of which is that Gigantopithecus as a species is problematic based on the types of fossil remains found thus far.  As mentioned above, Gigantopithecus is represented only by teeth and mandibles, but no other cranial or postcranial remains have been discovered or associated with this species.  Current descriptions of Gigantopithecus are therefore suspect as they are based on minimal skeletal evidence, and it is unclear if postcranial descriptions of Gigantopithecus are very accurate.  This would be akin to looking at the paw size of certain breeds of dogs to determine their overall body size.  This is considered a “standard” of determining adult size in puppies as the idea is that big paws translates to large sized dogs, which makes sense as the feet need to be able to hold up the weight of the dog’s body and therefore a correlation between large body size and large paws is reasonable, but this is problematic as several species of dogs have disproportionately large or small feet for their overall adult body size.  Collies are large breed dogs who have very small feet as compared to their overall body size, and bull dogs are small breed dogs who have very large feet as compared to their overall body size.  While the evidence of large teeth and large mandibles would insinuate large body size (as the body has to support the weight of large heads) this may not necessarily be the case, particularly when we realize that human children have larger heads relative to their body sizes due to Homo sapiens having large brains.  Without further skeletal evidence, the current descriptions of Gigantopithecus are suspect.  

Artistic depiction of Paranthropus/Australopithecus robustus (Google Images)

Paranthropus/Australopithecus robustus is an established Hominid species that existed 2.2 to 1.5 million years ago and has been found across Africa and potentially in the Middle East.   Paranthropus/Australopithecus robustus  is characterized by exaggerated cranial features, including jaws, molar teeth, and defined sagittal crest, and robustus also demonstrates rudimentary bipedal walking skills.  It is these morphological and locomotive features that scholars cite as evidence of robustus being an ancestor of the modern Bigfoot creature as the characteristics between the two species are extremely similar. 

The issue with the claim that Paranthropus/Australopithecus robustus is an ancestor to modern Bigfoot creatures is that we have evidence that demonstrates that robustus gave rise to other evolutionary advanced Hominid species.  It makes little sense that an evolutionarily stunted descendent of robustus would have survived among these far more evolutionarily advanced descendents.  Also, there is no evidence to suggest such a stunted descendent existed, further complicating the support of this hypothesis of robustus as a viable ancestor to Bigfoot.

Artistic depiction of Homo erectus (Google Images)

Homo erectus is another established Hominid species with a far wider geographical distribution than that of Paranthropus/Australopithecus robustus with Homo erectus specimens having been found throughout the African and Asian continents.  Homo erectus is morphologically characterized by have a large skull and brain, heavy brow ridges, prognathous face, sloping forehead, elongated profile, sagittal keel, and occipital torus (a bony ridge at the back of the skull).  Homo erectus is also associated with having various cultural developments, including the use and manipulation of fire, the ability to create uniform stone tools, and cooperation in hunting endeavors.  There is also a debate amongst scholars regarding whether or not erectus had a spoken language.  Morphologically, erectus had the capabilities to speak but it is unclear if any formal language was developed by the species.

The morphological and geographical distribution evidence supports the hypothesis of erectus being an ancestor of Bigfoot, but the cultural evidence negates this possibility.  Because Homo erectus had such advanced cultural developments it makes little sense that subsequent descendants would abandon these cultural developments as they were meant and did assist in survivability of the species.  Among all of the reports on Bigfoot none indicate Bigfoot is involved in cultural developments of any sort, particularly the ones present among ancient Homo erectus species.

Artistic depiction of Homo neanderthalensis (Google Images)

The final ancestral candidate is Homo neanderthalensis, also commonly known as the Neanderthal.  Neanderthals existed across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East and are morphologically characterized by very large craniums and brains, sloping foreheads, occipital buns (bulging projection at the back of the skull), pronounced but slightly smaller brow ridges, prognathic faces, broad noses, receding chins, and wide set eyes, as well as being short and broad chested, allowing them to be very well adapted to cold environments.  Neanderthals are also associated with several cultural innovations,including intentional burial of the dead and care of the ill and injured. 

Again, while the geographical distribution and morphological evidence support the hypothesis that this species was an ancestor of Bigfoot, there is plenty of evidence to refute this hypothesis.  Again, the cultural innovations associated with Neanderthals run counter to what is culturally known (or lack thereof) of Bigfoot creatures.  Also, comparisons of Neanderthal and Bigfoot prints demonstrate that these two species are morphologically different, further refuting the idea that Neanderthal could give rise to Bigfoot as a possible descendent as it makes little sense that morphological changes in descendents would relapse to being less efficient.

While supporters of the existence of Bigfoot have suggested potential ancestors of Bigfoot, these ancestors are problematic candidates, and the evidence does not conclusively support any one candidate as the Bigfoot ancestor.  Furthermore, the most accepted candidate, Gigantopithecus, is very problematic due to the lack of fossil evidence to demonstrate its large size, which is the key piece of evidence that it used to support its place as the ancestor, or post-cranial remains.  As such, the current evidence to support an ancestor of Bigfoot is weak, and if there is no viable ancestor then the presence of a descendent is extremely questionable.

Works Cited

Bryne, Peter.  1975.  The Search for Big Foot: Monster, Myth, or Man?  Acropolis Books, Washington.

DeSilva, Jeremy.  2010.  "Revisiting the 'Midtarsal Break'."  American Journal of Physical Anthropology 141: 245-258.

Green, John W.  1968.  On the Track of the Sasquatch.  Cheam Publications, Agassiz, B.C.

Green, John W.  1978.  Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us.  Hancock House, Seattle.

Harrison, Guy P.  2012.  50 Popular Beliefs that People Think Are True.  Prometheus Books, Amherst.

Highpine, Gayle.  2000.  “Traditional Attitudes Toward Bigfoot in Many North American Cultures.” Bigfoot Encounters.

Hunter, Don and Rene Dahinden.  1975.  Sasquatch.  New American Library, New York.

Landau, Joel.  2014.  ”Man Who Claims He Killed Bigfoot Releases More Pictures of the Mythical Creature.”  Daily News.

Napier, John R.  1973.  Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality.  Dutton, New York.

No Author.  2014.  “10 Reasons Why Bigfoot’s a Bust.”  Discovery News.

No Author.  “Yeti.”  New World Encyclopedia.

No Author.  “Yeti History.”  TheYetiFest.com

Olson, Grant.  2014. “Hunter Confesses that Bigfoot Body is a Fake…Again.”  Daily American.com

Prigg, Mark.  2014.  “Moo-ve along, Bigfoot, nothing to see here: Genetic test of 30 different hairs claimed to be from sasquatch finds they are from bears, wolves and even a COW.”  Daily Mail. 

Viegas, Jennifer.  2014.  “’Bigfoot’ Cases Solved, But  A New Mystery Surfaces.”  Discovery News.