AzurePhoenix

I personally don't believe the sasquatch exists, but I do think the possibility is there no matter how slight. More likely I believe that large primates species living unitl quite recently spurned old-world legends, and I also believe that the Orang Pendek could likely be real. An alleged smallish ape could certainly survive undiscivered, I mean look at that new giant chimp that may have been found in Africa, and the ungulate Saola was only found in 1992.

Good point. I was imagining the single complete download of sorts favored by fiction

then would it even be you? Simply a copy, no matter how complete.

Depends on three things; how he's prepared, how much I liked him, and the quality of the side dishes.

Yes, such a group exists, or at least existed. I'm not sure where or who, but I'm thinking Africa.

Our spines would sure as hell go out alot sooner.

sure. The rainforest themselves offer many delightful ways to get rid of those doing the actual harm; crocodilians, big cats, bigger snakes, venomous thingies. It's not murder if they do it for us! It's natural selection!

Aye, and those you mentioned are only among the most commonly known laymen species. Far over seven hundred known and counting, and those are likely no more than one percent of all the dino species that ever lived! Not to mention birds!

Oh wow, this just hurts. Seriously, deep down. Ow.

Common mistake. Lots of people look at chimps and their rather short stature, and even worse, they look at the babyish ones that tv shows favor. Both are very deceptive.

Yes, we're here; very perceptive. What of it?

Not to mention that the very idea of evolution renders prediction useless. Can we make models outlining forms that might be effective? Sure. But that's not how it always works. Lucky-shot mutations accumulate, and this random process guiudes it, and more likely than not, the adapted form will have a few surprises. Human ancestors could easily have taken a myriad of unrecognizable forms beside our own.

The actual role of "junk DNA" isn't really understood, and shouldn't so flippantly be deemed "useless" quite yet. It may be, but there's still alot we don't know http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA

I doubt they'd be be quite that high, considering their relative nearness to more primitive reptilian ancestry, and mostly due to the fact that as far as we can tell, they were most similar in habits to seabirds, and in my eyes at least, would likely show a similar brainpower; certainly less than that of a hunting bird of prey.

Chimps are quite powerful, it wouldn't matter if you were seven feet tall. A chimp doesn't weigh much less than a man (in the 150 range) and is several times stronger. Their arboreal nature and brutally violent nature in part requires a particularly well developed musculature, something that we haven't needed in over a million years. ---edit--- Of course, we're talking a true wild chimp with a more natural temperment. I have no idea how one of the baby-like movie chimps would fare. Very true, but our ancestors specifically weren't suited for such a habitat, they had been adapted to a thick, forest environment.

Wow... just... wow.

Even though I live in the blistering desert of Phoenix Arizona, it usually gets blustery and cold enough for heavy frost and frozen puddles on a normal winter morning, but this winter, we maybe had two or so days of frost, have only needed to wear light jackets or sweaters for a few short weeks, and a week back we broke our old record of 103 days without precipitation (which is invariably rain here). It's already getting warm in teh afternoons, with no rain in sight.

I agree on having a well-rounded knowledge, i myself have interests in everything from a bunch of natural and bio sciences to writing, ancient history, mythology and more, BUT i do full well understand the strain and agony that classes you simply don't want can have, especailly when these classes aren't really necessary for what you're going into. Take math for instance in regards to my particular focus; is it necessary for a zoology major? Certainly, but what's needed for me could easily be learned in a single semester of certain specifics, and yet, I'm doomed to toiling with many smesters of classes I inevitably do poorly in just to glean the rare bit here or there that helps me, when I could instead be focusing on more classes that at least have something to do with me, that I can enjoy at teh same time.

I agree, but I look at it this way; many small dogs can be quite cute, that's undeniable, but simply breeding them into what they are was a cruel affront to nature that should never have happened. Still, cute. Same with the goats

That doesn't change the matter that frogs are more highly predatory than any terrestrial mammal in the end. No matter how good they are or aren't at doing it Here is a pic of a fainted goat. Adorable

it's the funniest thing to watch, they're moving one sec, then suddenly they freeze stiff, and just tip over onto their side or back. Definately cheesy. What could possibly be more predatory than a frog?

in the most simplest terms possible, it's just like looking back at you're direct ancestors. Your parents will have more in common with you than your grandparents, your grandparents are closer to you than your great grandparents and so on and so forth. This is a similar concept. The farther back a species split from the group being compared to (people in this case) the farther away it will be. In mammals, the mouse will be closer to us than the more distant deer, likewise, any mammal will be closer to us than birds, reptiles closer than fish, fish closer than starfish, because the longer we've been apart, teh longer we've had to pick up and discard genes over the eons. So yes, it's clear evidence of the "chain of evolution" --Edit-- Regarding to that second part; G'luck buddy, you might need it. Hope for a miracle

your own article says this

I don't know the reason, other than that perhaps being the biggest predators in relatively murky waters, they don't need to block as much sunlight or blend in as effectively. Sheer speculation of course. I've seen them much pinker than that one (in river dolphins at least). They really are quite neat.