It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible reason why there are no good photos of Bigfoot.

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pitou
a reply to: qmantoo

I don't really know much yet of the Bigfoot phenomenon, but you said they found and analysed hairs of it. What did they see? Did it have DNA, could they trace or see a link with any existing known species such as apes, bears, etc?


Yeah, human.

“Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry,” reads a statement released last weekend by former veterinarian Melba T. Ketchum, the lead researcher of the study. “Researchers’ extensive DNA sequencing suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago.”

Source

"4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them"




posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: qmantoo
Everyone is going around assuming that Bigfoot can see in the same visible spectrum as we can and their eyes have the same biology. What if they can see into the infrared and maybe into the ultraviolet. What that means is that our IR game cameras are like searchlights in the night - floodlighting the area in which we want to capture them on camera. A being which is possibly not of the same makeup as we are may not have the same physiology. Their ancestors may have taken an evolutionary different path to ours or they may even come from a different place.

If you wanted to remain undetected, would you go into such a floodlit area and have your picture taken?

Nowadays there are camera modules which can take images in very low light - down to 1/10th of a lux or below I believe so why not use this kind of camera to capture bigfoot. That amount of light is probably moonlight or less. Even though the image would be grainy it would provide more proof that he is out there without having to kill one.


In order to be invisible to cameras Big Foot would have quite a lot of problem. You see, if the Bifgoot coudl refract light that much, he would be by nature, highly dispersive, hence light passing around a "cloaked" object would be strongly refracted. Basically he would be a walking beacon.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Frocharocha

Not saying that they are invisible to cameras but that they may be able to see into IR wavelengths and maybe also into UV wavelengths. The point about most electronic stuff having an oscillator in them giving off a high pitched whistle is a good one I had not thought about.

Maybe the answer is to dispense with electronics altogether and just go for some kind of wind-up time-lapse photography set-up? That way, no electronics to oscillate, but difficult to create a wind-up time-lapse rig. :-)

I get the feeling that many of these investigators are in too much of a hurry with having a TV program to produce and having to get back to civilisation. I suspect that if a real woodsman or someone who was a survivalist like Les Stroud really wanted to find Bigfoot, then he could go out into the forests and stay out there until he/she got some good footage.

Possibly even track them to their den/home perhaps. However, I think that when you had done that, you would find out that you did not want to expose these Bigfoot to modern day scrutiny after all, so you would keep the data to yourself after all. I feel they are not generally a threat and the abductions or children snatching may be done by other creatures or aliens.

So, for some reason, I just dont see Bigfoot as being any kind of threat to us and so maybe we should just leave them alone. Aliens or other stuff on the other hand could possibly be doing all the 411 missing persons stuff reported in the National Parks and forests. I could be wrong though.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 08:03 PM
link   
i believe he's a member of the spirit world, something that of a ghost or spirit creature...kinda like trolls or the puckwudgies etc.

i'm an anthropology major...focuses in folklore and native American studies...actually writing a paper on mr.foot right now .
edit on CSTpmv80911 by Tavg0911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 04:39 AM
link   
i never thought it was a stretch of the imagination to believe bigfoot exists....

the pacific northwest is pretty damn big...

when i read things like this it makes it easier for me to believe

www.huffingtonpost.com...

The WCS survey team noted that the deer were “discrete” and “difficult to spot,” and they were unable to get them on camera.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Tavg0911

Native Americans in the PNW thought THEM to be guardians who watched over the passage between this world amd the spirit world....



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 04:58 AM
link   
I am pretty sure they exist, there is a large percentage of North America that has never been set foot on by humans. And this is thick dense forest!! And bigfoot would see, smell or hear you ALONG time before you would even have an incling that something was different!!! Also your in their habitat they are so much better in their than us bald ignorant apes!



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Tavg0911



i believe he's a member of the spirit world, something that of a ghost or spirit creature...kinda like trolls or the puckwudgies etc.


Whatever bigfoot is, it'll be a lot closer to the 'spirit world' than the physical world. It might even be an hallucination which would make it just as interesting imo.

Gorillas suffered from ebola outbreaks and were found dead. Chimps have died from tooth decay. People get hit by cars. All of us (animals, bugs, people, fish) get killed by natural disasters. Yet our secretive friends are immune to all of these things!

Nothing that's physically real is immune to death, illness and accidents.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 05:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Tavg0911



i believe he's a member of the spirit world, something that of a ghost or spirit creature...kinda like trolls or the puckwudgies etc.


Whatever bigfoot is, it'll be a lot closer to the 'spirit world' than the physical world. It might even be an hallucination which would make it just as interesting imo.

Gorillas suffered from ebola outbreaks and were found dead. Chimps have died from tooth decay. People get hit by cars. All of us (animals, bugs, people, fish) get killed by natural disasters. Yet our secretive friends are immune to all of these things!

Nothing that's physically real is immune to death, illness and accidents.

How do you know??? Its still an "unknown" species that's never been studied! Immune from death? Let's deal with the basics first!!! There seems to be a very large bi pedal primate living in the woods of America and several other spots around the world! Now these accounts have one from fleeting glimpses to encounters of a third kind (if you like) no until we can catch one and study it then keep away from fairy tales it just give sceptics ammunition!



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   
a reply to: damo1583

You're saying there's a flesh and blood bipedal critter in N America. I'm saying there isn't.

It doesn't # in the woods, die in the woods or get hit by cars.

And yet, I do accept that individuals have seen them.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 06:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

If your referring to lack of bone evidence then maybe they bury their dead? Or better still go out in the woods and try and find a mountain lion skeleton! You won't but they absolutly exist!



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: damo1583

If they bury their dead, why don't scavengers dig them up? Why don't floods displace their bones?

Do none of the questions I've asked make you wonder?

Is there a single living thing that doesn't get ill, injured or die?



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: damo1583

If they bury their dead, why don't scavengers dig them up? Why don't floods displace their bones?

Do none of the questions I've asked make you wonder?

Is there a single living thing that doesn't get ill, injured or die?
its a huge wild country that hasn't been fully explored! And yes why not look what we do with our dead and we are still apes!!! If they are closer to humans than other primates then they would be both intelligent and perfectly adapted to THEIR environment!!! I think that the evidence thought time from native people to modern day vids clips (noted that most are hoaxs ) but some suggest that there is a a living breathing intelligent being living out there somewhere! Of course this is my opinion and it has not been proven either way but I think there is enough evidence to warrent proper research



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: damo1583

It doesn't # in the woods, die in the woods or get hit by cars.


There are many cases of scat being found, as well as several reports of them being hit by vehicles.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: damo1583

If they bury their dead, why don't scavengers dig them up? Why don't floods displace their bones?

Do none of the questions I've asked make you wonder?

Is there a single living thing that doesn't get ill, injured or die?


When I lived in Pennsylvania, there was a spot out in the woods about 10 minutes from my house that I liked to often go to to relax. To get there, you have to park on the side of the road and walk down a trail through the woods. One day I went, I saw a deer laying on the trail that had just recently died... Apparently less than 24 hours. I went back to the same spot about every other day, and it only took about 10 days for everything, including the bones, to be completely gone. Over these 10 days of walking past the deer remains, I could see the gradual decomposition into nothingness. After those 10 days, there was no evidence a dead deer had even been there.
The idea that you'll find plentiful bones from things that die in the wild is just completely incorrect.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: trollz



The idea that you'll find plentiful bones from things that die in the wild is just completely incorrect.


This is your idea, not mine. You're successfully beating a straw man of your own creation: )

I'll repeat what I've written.

Bigfoot is apparently immune to disease, accidents, natural disasters and hunters. It also has impeccable traffic awareness that gives it a 100% success rate for avoiding accidents. A figure, I'm sure you'll agree, that is higher than ours and we're raised with traffic awareness.

It's my view that a flesh and blood critter can't be squared with these issues. It isn't simply about describing how big the wilderness is, is it? Or that deer carcasses vanish unto nature. It's asking why decades of rumour and percipients haven't yielded any confirming evidence? Where's it at? What are people really seeing?



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky

Bigfoot is apparently immune to disease, accidents, natural disasters and hunters. It also has impeccable traffic awareness that gives it a 100% success rate for avoiding accidents.


the pacific northwest is pretty big...i wouldnt think it would be too hard for anything to avoid an accident....

we dont know if they are immune or prone to disease....

how many hunters hunt deep in the northwest?

even if it is a staggering number, i wouldnt really expect them to bag a bigfoot.

how many people go hunt dear, rabbit, fowl, etc in their small little patches of woods and come up empty?
lots
traffic awareness??????

is there lots of traffic deep in the pacific northwest?

how many dear, mountain lions, whatever do you think are alive out there?

50k
100k
200k

even if it is lower than that....lets say 10k animals total roaming the pacific northwest.....
how many do we see lying on the side of the road each year?
how many bones do we find each year?

im talking from known, verified animals.......

let me say all this is my opinion. the numbers and animals i mention are gross generalizations....

it has never felt like a stretch to me......

seems like a big enough area for something like that to live and even thrive....even in small numbers....

i actually think it is silly to think something like that cant exist in an area like that.....



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Grovit

Millions live in the PNW. Thousands of tourists and visitors every year. Indigenous people as well as hunters cover these wildernesses. Every animal you mention has a stuffed example somewhere or other. Every one has a skeleton and every one of them is subject to disease in their populations.

Where is a single bone from a bigfoot?

We could put a small, trained group of people into the wilds of the PNW and, sure, they could get by unnoticed. Could they exist for tens of thousands of years unnoticed? Have you ever crunched the numbers of how much vegetation a primate needs to eat to survive? Or how many it takes to ensure a surviving population. It's a LOT of eating and a lot of mating. Lot's of terrain and no territories? No groups? No fighting? Every primate fights over territory.

Shall we add that to the list of problems? Immune to fighting...or immune to injuries through fighting?

Peaceful, secretive, immune to injury, illness, accident, cameras, natural disasters and roads. Wouldn't that make the big fella a superhero, supernatural or a Ninja Gandhi?? This is why I don't accept Bigfoot is a real creature.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Grovit

Millions live in the PNW.
yet only a small number are in traffic accidents

Every animal you mention has a stuffed example somewhere or other.
ok....how many of the millions of animals that live in that area are stuffed each year

Peaceful, secretive, immune to injury, illness, accident, cameras, natural disasters and roads. Wouldn't that make the big fella a superhero, supernatural or a Ninja Gandhi?? This is why I don't accept Bigfoot is a real creature.


^^we dont know any of that.....bigfoot could be a war machine....cold be prone to injuries...
just cause one has not been seen on camera does not mean they do not exist....


honestly, i dont really care to debate it...i just wanted to chime in with my opinion...i admit it is no more valid than yours....in my brain it seems plausible that a creature like that exists.....
we should never stop looking....

just cause one has never been found does not mean it wont be found tomorrow....

there was a time when megaladon was a myth...the giant squid too...

myths for more than a hundred yeas and then all of a sudden, bam....proof

again, in my brain i dont see why it cant or didnt happen....a species like bigfoot i mean....

primates exist....humans exist....gigantopithicus did exist...

why not a bigfoor or yeti today?

yeti iis another that i think is totally possible....

the himalayas are largely unexplored......who goes up there?
a handful of sherpa and the people they guide?

just my thoughts



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: trollz

Thanks



new topics




 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join