Hypothetical Question, Regarding True Ancestor Of Bigfoot Options

[moregon]

Some of you may remember the picture I posted in the not too distant past regarding a forensic scientists recreation of what a Neandertal may have looked like based on their skull and techniques used to identify what remains of people may have looked like in life. The thread was Here.

Here is the picture the thread was based upon once again.


This recreation was based on known measurements of flesh thickness of modern man, so by basing those measurements on the Neandertal Skull there is room for error since we don't have the actual measurements of those areas on a Neandertal. Although our own skulls are very similarly shaped, unless we know the race of the modern man we are trying to recreate we can't accurately estimate things like width and size of nose, thickness of the lips, fullness of cheeks etc. We also can't look at a skull and say this person weighed 120 pounds or 450 pounds, and at both extremes their actual physical appearance will be considerably different.

Another point to consider is hair growth and hair patterns, this is another thing we can't tell simply by the skull. To the best of my knowlege there is no surviving pieces of soft flesh from a Neandertal that would define what their hair pattern was nor the type of hair they actually had. Was it long, fine and straight like a caucasian, or more wirey and curly like other races. We can't tell if when they were living if they were clean shaven, had a beard or were a specimen of a person with hisutism. What IF the picture is wrong, what if they didn't have defined eyebrows like modern man, nor a hairless forehead?

One thing that struck me was the shape of the nose in the recreation above. I realized it was very similar in appearance to the nose in the blow-up of Patti in the Patterson-Gimlin footage, albeit a little bit longer than Patti's. Here is a blow-up of I'm referring to.




There's been a lot of discussion in regards to what appears to be a sagittal crest on Patti, but for one moment let's consider that what we are seeing is not actually a sagittal crest, but nothing more than her natural hair growth and pattern. If the hair was very wirey could it not stand up and create a similar appearance on top of someone's head if left uncut/untrimmed?

Using the picture of Patti above, and my Windows Paint program I found what the dimensions of her eye appears to be. Top to bottom in the center as well as dimensions from corner to corner. Using those dimension I found what the dimensions, percentage wise would be in the fleshy unhaired sections that appear in her photo. I also found the dimension from the top of the eye to the top of the alleged crest. Then taking the picture of the recreated Neandertal, I found the dimension of his eye and used the same percentage differences to map out where the hairline would be as well as the top of the crest based on the dimensions of Patti. I realize this is all highly speculative, and very possible if I used the same dimensions on a modern human I'd get similar results, as it's similar to simply putting a disguise or make-up on someone to make them appear as someone else. Would the end result show this is even a possibility, or rule it out completely? I apologize I don't have any really good computer drawing programs nor am I a computer artist. What do you think?

Could THIS:



Be THIS?


Or is this not even a possibility?

(Edited to add)
If the hair is curly/kinky/wirey and of sufficient depth it would explain why there are no ears apparent, they would be hidden under the hair if the length was sufficient to cover them.

If this is nothing more than hair growth, this is approximately what Patti would look like with a haircut based on the same measuring technique I used only using the dimensions of the Neandertal transferred to Patti.



This post has been edited by moregon: May 19 2007, 08:24 AM