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: 7
12
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2014 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: qmantoo
Makes sense, especially if they live underground. That would also be a reason why they are rarely spotted.




posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Who says no one has seen one? Many people have, just no one skeptics wish to believe. And we have lots of photos, even video, just not very clear ones. Kodak moments happen in ads, seldom in real time when you aren't expecting any. Bigfoot just aren't very cooperative about pics. They have been seen among Native Americans and many of their oral traditions speak of them.
I think a lot of animals can detect trail cams and other photographic equipment. I can tell because they are looking at the camera
.



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Could Bigfoot be out there? absolutely


Like most subjects aliens/bigfoot/nessie etc we tend to make assessments based on OUR senses and known species and behavior.


So why do we assume Bigfoot is some lumbering dumb creature? ....yes its probably not on facebook and it really dislikes twitter but you have to put intelligence into context.

Is it such a leap to assume a bigfoot might be as intelligent in its own environment as a great white in the ocean is for example?

We even use mans best friend (the dog) to pick up scents we are incapable of, and yet we assume that a creature that may have intelligence levels approaching our own and that may have elevated senses will just get found?



I live in the UK - a tiny country with 60 million people stumbling around it and yet there are still a few areas where you really wouldn't want to be stranded in. I remember years ago the possibility of 'big cats' living in the wild in the uk was laughed at....not so much these days.

Now looks at the vastness of other areas of the planet - there are still huge expanses of empty/unexplored land.


Could an intelligent creature exist and survive? - absolutely

especially when in my opinion they could probably smell us and our technology long before we were in range of them.

Consider how a trained woodsman/tracker/hunter would make the average person look like a fool in the woods.......then consider an intelligent creature that has evolved and lived in these areas for many thousands of years-really what chance does anyone have getting close to them?



posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   
+1 on the lost airplanes.
Many people don't realize that it really is a vast un-explored wilderness. You can go 100 yards into the woods and not see anything.
Often times, hiking around the Pacific Northwest, I run into derelict logging equipment that may not have seen human contact for over 100 years. Entire logging towns have been gobbled up by nature and time.

a reply to: tallcool1



posted on Dec, 3 2014 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Kandinsky -

Oh, here we go. Blame it on 'shills,' eh? Lol.
If you follow your own advice and read what was said please.
Context, context, I did not say blame Bigfoot skeptisism on the shills. Re-read what I said. I was talking about being organised and collating evidence in a logical way. If we did then the evidence for whatever it was... could not be dismissed by the government shills and disbelievers.

You seem to have ignored the points I made earlier about the plaster casts of Bigfoot and gone down your own thought-train. Please tell us why this scientist and others have colllections of feet and hand casts, yet you think these are hoaxes or not valid evidence for physical Bigfoot. Apparently, you still think he does not exist due to your own perfectly-reasonable-to-you reasons - which do not fit in with the facts (the foot and hand casts plus the sightings each year)

Of course there will be false alarms and samples which are not of Bigfoot. Why concentrate on them rather than the real ones which support a theory that the DNA comes from no known living animal. When the evidence for existence is so strong, I dont understand why you focus on the hoaxes and mistakes.

Bedlam -

Game cameras don't "floodlight" the area they're taking a photo of. They depend on body heat emission to trigger.
Actually, that's not true in the trail cameras I have seen. They have IR LEDs which DO floodlight the area in infrared light which is invisible to humans and (most) animals so that there is more light for the IR sensitive cameras to take a reasonable picture.

Has anyone thought of following the yeti's tracks in the snow (even from a helicopter/satellite?) and finding out where they go to? That would be easier than tracking them in the forest or woods?

Jeff Meldrum is a respected scientist not a fake or someone who is apt to make things up. He has many of these footprint and handprint casts from all over the world which have been sent to him and some he has collected himself.

So, just because we dont have absolute proof that they exist - in the form of body bits, does not make the other evidence invalid. It just means that those people who want more will have to work harder at finding the proof they need. There is little point in poo-pooing the existing plaster casts evidence, unless you also disrespect the scientist who collects it.

We seem to have discussed everything else BUT these plaster casts when discussing proof.



posted on Dec, 3 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I too think they can see in the infrared and just stay away during these night outings. I also think they could be a hybernating species in the winter like bears. There are a lot of cave systems in eastern Oregon, which also has 400 lava tubes, that will remain a constant 45 degrees all winter. Which could be a reason why there are few winter sightings. Also if they need a huge food source the rest of the year, I would guess that they eat less meat sources and more plant base and mostly fungus(mushroom). If you follow sightings of Bigfoots and the availability of the armillaria ostoyae fungus or honey mushroom for example which is the largest organism on earth and a huge edible food source, been around for thousands of years, they seem to coincide. This fungus is edible and blooms in the fall in some areas and is found in bigfoot territories such as Blue Mountains of Eastern Oregon, Strawberry Mountains of Eastern Oregon, Northwest forests and Southern interior of British Columbia, Pacific Northwest, Southwest Washington , Mt. Adams Washington State and Crystal Falls, Michigan. I think they primarily live in these underground cave systems mostly in Oregon and come out seasonally for food like bears or if there is a natural event like flooding, earthquake, etc. that may disturb the cavern system.



posted on Dec, 3 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: TamtammyMacx

What do the other species of Bigfoot eat though? The ones who live in snowy locations. These are often seen above the treeline and do not seem to be grubbing about under the snow for food - well, not that we hear about anyway. Could they cultivate their food in their caves? again, going on what you say, could they cultivate enough fungus to keep them going suplemented with meat etc? The Yowie in Australia, what do they eat?

I think there is more evidence for them all being omnivores and eating a range of different foods.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   
If BF exists, it's a primate close to us. Thus smart. Maybe it hides its dead and traces like food rests and feces.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: anton74

Yeah what about the unexpecting campers that see one? Are we that conditioned to see BF?



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Bigfoot is the master of the forest. He knows every inch like the back of his hand. He knows escape routes and places that humans couldn't readily access. I bet he also buries his dead or puts them into very hard to find obscure places inside of caves and crevices etc.

And no "photos" of Bigfoot? What about that Patterson/Gimlin film? That has not been debunked to any satisfactory level yet.
edit on 18-12-2014 by Bloodydagger because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
Bigfoot is the master of the forest. He knows every inch like the back of his hand. He knows escape routes and places that humans couldn't readily access. I bet he also buries his dead or puts them into very hard to find obscure places inside of caves and crevices etc.


In fact ol' Biggy is so good at hiding all traces of himself it's almost like...he doesn't exist. lol.


And no "photos" of Bigfoot? What about that Patterson/Gimlin film? That has not been debunked to any satisfactory level yet.

Fake as a $20 Rolex. Well and truly debunked, though not to believers. The non existence of such a creature is a bit of a giveaway to begin with, but the story behind this hoax is shady enough to be comical.

There are no end of you tube vids that could claim "not debunked" to the same extent as the PGF hoax. None of them need debunking anyway, what they need something to support them being real (a bigfoot skull, or preferably a bigfoot itself, for instance). This has never and will never happen because they don't physically exist.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   


Possible reason why there are no good photos of Bigfoot


or fairies...or leprechauns...or dragons...or unicorns...lol.



posted on Mar, 18 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: damo1583
a reply to: Kandinsky

Being from the UK and having a life long interest in bigfoot I obviously watched the programme with a lot of interest and although the DNA came back as known animals and even the "yeti" sample came back as a polar bear hybrid is fascinating in its self. The problem I have is that they only tested a handful of samples and IMO doesn't represent the whole of this enigma.

Having just read Sykes' report, I would draw attention to the accompanying
challenge:

While it is important to bear in mind that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and this survey cannot refute the existence of anomalous primates, neither has it found any evidence in support. Rather than persisting in the view that they have been ‘rejected by science’, advocates in the cryptozoology community have more work to do in order to produce convincing evidence for anomalous primates and now have the means to do so. link



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   
So i ask again.... what of jeff meldrums plaster casts of feet and hands? Are these not evidence of existence? Just because some people dont have the evidence they need to convince themselves of bigfoots existence does not mean that the evidence we do have is fake.



posted on May, 15 2015 @ 10:57 AM
link   
i have just read that the dyatlov pass, students apparently took a picture of a yeti while on their trek and supposed footrpints and a reference on a supposed newspaper

apparently the documentary it featured on was not great but there was something quite errie about the supposed pic I found on google



posted on May, 15 2015 @ 10:57 AM
link   
i have just read that the dyatlov pass, students apparently took a picture of a yeti while on their trek and supposed footrpints and a reference on a supposed newspaper

apparently the documentary it featured on was not great but there was something quite errie about the supposed pic I found on google



posted on May, 15 2015 @ 10:57 AM
link   
i have just read that the dyatlov pass, students apparently took a picture of a yeti while on their trek and supposed footrpints and a reference on a supposed newspaper

apparently the documentary it featured on was not great but there was something quite errie about the supposed pic I found on google



posted on May, 15 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: qmantoo
So i ask again.... what of jeff meldrums plaster casts of feet and hands? Are these not evidence of existence? Just because some people dont have the evidence they need to convince themselves of bigfoots existence does not mean that the evidence we do have is fake.

What about them? They are evidence something impacted the ground and someone made a plaster cast of it, along with all manner of far fetched claims. When someone catalogues this species and studies it's foot structure, they might be relevant. That will never happen for obvious reasons.

It might be worth looking into the little bit of critique of Meldrum's pseudo science that is available, from the few scientists (and some very good amateurs) who have bothered. It is openly called a "belief based pseudo science" for good reason. I find it doubtful that he really believes it himself, it is so ridiculous. Meldrum has offered not one thing to the scientific community, regarding his bigfoot hobby, ever. You don't find this odd for a scientist with a great discovery?

Yes, it is all faked or mistaken, the lot of it. The entire subject has more prosaic explanation and this is how it is viewed by science. It's relative only to cultural mythology. We are not discussing God here, we're talking about breeding populations of massive apes being seen in every mainland US state. Creatures that large and widespread and who leave leave footprints can not only be tracked, but leave many other genuine signs that lead to their discovery. Except for Bigfoot that is, he leaves no such things.

The reason it is not possible to promote Bigfoot without venturing into psuedo science and the special pleading fallacies we see in threads like this, is because bigfoot is a social construct. Like God, it exists nowhere else outside the cranial margins of the faithful.



edit on 15-5-2015 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it.




top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join