American bigfoot and russian GOMINID - in than differences between them?

[TOT]

 than exists the difference between two types of the forest united states people and russia GOMINIDS?
- Your opinions, Ladies and Gentlemen.

On how much me known - exists the big difference in behavioural manner and lifestyle these essence.
In their relations to contact with person in particular.
in method and receiving the influence at protection from invasion on territory of their residence.
We Ask you to voice on given cause. Your opinions.

****************

PS - Thank you , Tom S, for correction at accomodation.

http://i015.radikal.ru/0801/48/77124c77ec70.jpg

[steve a]

well tot, after studing Igor and Dmitri's , links page located in our links page, and asking around and doing research on the subject, pictures, archives, and so on, we know the almasty, are smaller then the american bigfoot, and wilder then the bigfoot, the almasty does not have any relationship with humans at all, thats my under standing, we have to assume a lot on this, and science is not built on assumptions, and also with distance in miles apart they are, we have the russain science on this, and here in america, we our scientist, they must come together and work all this out, in order to come to a good conclusion,

[Jan]

 than exists the difference between two types of the forest united states people and russia GOMINIDS?
- Your opinions, Ladies and Gentlemen.

On how much me known - exists the big difference in behavioural manner and lifestyle these essence.
In their relations to contact with person in particular.
in method and receiving the influence at protection from invasion on territory of their residence.
We Ask you to voice on given cause. Your opinions.

****************

PS - Thank you , Tom S, for correction at accomodation.

http://i015.radikal.ru/0801/48/77124c77ec70.jpg

Tot these are very good questions you ask. I'll try to do my best to answer them all. I am not any given expert on this.

This is what I find on the internet to compare the differences. Not exactly what I am looking for but one exclamation I suppose.

Article
The morphology of European and Southwest Asian Neandertal pubic bones
Erik Trinkaus
Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Keywords
Neandertals • Os coxae • Pubic bones

Abstract
Descriptions of Southwest Asian Neandertal os coxae have stressed the supero-inferior flattening and acetabulo-symphyseal elongation of the superior pubic rami. Further analysis of Neandertal pubes, including two European specimens. La Ferrassie I and Krapina 208, indicates that Neandertal pubes are distinguished primarily by a relative elongation of the superior rami. The supero-inferior flattening of the pubic rami with the formation of a distinct ventral border, present among the Southwest Asian Neandertals, is less pronounced among the European Neandertals. Neither sexual dimorphism nor biomechanical hypertrophy appears adequate to explain this morphological pattern of Neandertal pubic bones.

This will not tell the difference between the American BF and the Russian Gominids I fear. We as of yet do not have any American Bigfoot pubic bones to compare against the Asian Neanderthal.

I'm going to play this by ear so to speak. My understanding of the Russian hominid be they the Almast, Almasty, Brownie, Yeti or other is that they are lesser statue, height than most of what we Americans dub the Bigfoot/Sasquatch. However, they all do have their own strengths and are capable of ripping someone's head off at a swipe of their hand if they feel the need to do so on either continent.

The Yeti seems to be the most vicious of the bunch as there is rumor of their attacking and killing people, even partially consuming a person. Don't think I wish to be caught off guard and alone with one of these Yeti. They are also rumored to be most aggressive toward people.

The Almast is rumored to be the most elusive from my understanding as they dwell in more secluded areas of the woodlands seldom coming into contact with people. Yet when they are seen they have a tendency to run away and hide from our viewing of them. Seems they are really shy hominids for the most part. I don't know that they live in family groups even as most are reported to be alone when viewed.

The Almasty seem to be rumored to interact with people more and even take up with people and live as close as they can to them if they take a liking to someone. They seem to be of a gentler nature than any of the other hominids. Zana was reported to be wild but yet subordinate in nature to her keepers. Maybe a little to much for her own good. With the Almasty I think they show signs of a more human look and facial features than the others. There are reports of both sexes approaching both men and women in a friendly manner trying to gain their trust and friendship. Also reported is that when one has been captured on several occasions they tend to go quietly with their captives not offering much resistance.

The Brownie is what we call the Hobbit here in America. These little guys seem to like to play practical jokes on people, by entering their homes when they sleep and getting into much mischief. Yet we do not wish to try to capture or entrap one of these little fellows because they put up a tremendous fight to get free for their size.

The American Bigfoot for the most part has more of a mixed facial features between that of an ape and man. They are larger. Some are aggressive and some are not so aggressive. For the most part they have lived for centuries here in this country pretty secluded lifestyles. However in the last fifty years or so we have invaded upon their territory and they are getting seen more often than not.

All the above mentioned display similar characteristics in that they nearly all make structures that are very much alike. They all make markers. They all eat vegetation and meat if they can capture and kill it. All will defend their self or their family and put up a fight to evade capture except the Almasty which seems to give up rather easily and go along with the captive party. None fair thee well in hotter climates or controlled environment. They all prefer the out of doors to a home style dwelling of ours. None seem to recognize nor understand our property boundaries.

I think all are capable of vocal communication but that it takes someone that actually can understand their fast rapid fired speech to understand what they are saying. All seem to revert to different degrees of telepathy if the need arises to ward us off, or get us to leave them alone, or ask for something they wish to have from us.

All seem to be evasive when it comes to actually taking photographs of them or getting film footage of them. They simply fear our cameras or other equipment that doesn't fit into their environments. This is much like other primates, even the gorilla doesn't like his picture taken without your slow introduction of a camera. All seem to be aware of our other noisy equipment and can hear a lot better than we can. All also read our body language and know if we come in a peaceful type way or in a stalking way. All see better in the dark then we do. All display a curiosity toward young children. All males seem to have a fascination with women or our species even to the extent of carrying some of us off to be potential mates. However, only the female Almasty is rumored to be attracted to men and flirtatious toward our male species.

I don't know if all have the same eye pupil as what I have seen in the American Bigfoot. That being that the pupil dilates much the same as that of the pupil of the cats eye when in direct sunlight. Neither do I know if all can see into the inferred spectrum. I don't know if all have that, what I call lactating membrane in the eye that closes across the eye and waters it so that they don't have to blink unless they wish to do so or not. This membrane has been witnessed by me, Pat and Violet. I don't know if they are all capable of actually crying tears or not. Neither do I know if they all have the same DNA characteristics or make up. Maybe some are further down the homo genealogy branch then others.

They differ in foot sizes and toes on the feet and curve of the feet. Yet all seem to display the metatarsal break in the foot prints we find of theirs.

There is much, much more here to tell, right now I am getting really tired and can not think when I'm tired and sleepy. I'll continue at another date.

For now,
Jan

[MtnSquatch]

I have a question that is a little off topic, but may be helpful in this discussion.

Is there a Russian version(s) of the sighting reports databases that we have for America? I assume "yes". If that's true, then it would be interesting to know what kinds of reports are being put on such databases. Are the encounters similar as those reported here? Is similar behavior being described? Similar descriptions of the creature seen?

I've often considered because of geographic separation, they have at least developed into subspecies. I believe they have developed into different species. (sorry, this is just my belief, others probably feel differently about this)

One may know the general look of a bear, but not know the different species of bear. That person can still identify an animal as a bear or not a bear. I wonder if that is what we have here. We can identify it as a bipedal, unknown primate, but don't have enough knowledge to identify the specific species.

[Jan]

I have a question that is a little off topic, but may be helpful in this discussion.

Is there a Russian version(s) of the sighting reports databases that we have for America? I assume "yes". If that's true, then it would be interesting to know what kinds of reports are being put on such databases. Are the encounters similar as those reported here? Is similar behavior being described? Similar descriptions of the creature seen?

I've often considered because of geographic separation, they have at least developed into subspecies. I believe they have developed into different species. (sorry, this is just my belief, others probably feel differently about this)

One may know the general look of a bear, but not know the different species of bear. That person can still identify an animal as a bear or not a bear. I wonder if that is what we have here. We can identify it as a bipedal, unknown primate, but don't have enough knowledge to identify the specific species.

Don't quote me here MtnSquatch because I could be wrong, but I think our member Tot either has a reporting site or he subscribes to one. I know that Igor was a member of one that posted reports. I'll ask him for the URL to it. I don't know if it is in English or not but you may be able to use Google Translator in order to read the reports.

You may be correct on the geographic separation, causing them to develop into subspecies. I take this as an for instance here: PhD Wilson Wheatcroft wrote a very well composed article on the Orang Pendek for us, Dmitri Bayanov wrote more on this little Hominid for us also providing us with a well written article by Colin Groves on the Hobbit. Then we have our members her of which you are one that have knowledge of the American Sasquatch/Skunk Ape/ Bigfoot/a ton of other names. All these are hominid and in general look about the same, but are all the same species of Hominid? I also tend to think they are not. From what I have learned of the above mentioned I'd tend to think the Orang Pendek was more closely related to human, Homo sapien than the others, being as they sort of fit the bill for that of Homo erectus which was supposable/factual common ancestor with other Homo species.

I invite others here to voice your opinions or observations please on this topic.
Yours,
Jan