What is Bigfoot ....?

a reply to: Blue Shift
There's several different close encounters with a so called Bigfoot that it rules out anything having to do with our brains. I mean there's a story of a Bigfoot being captured by a village and keeping it as a capture. A man in the 60s even shot and killed one and froze it's body and brought it around the country to fairgrounds

a reply to: usernameconspiracy

We don't have the tech to even come close to map the worlds forests. Humans only inhabit around half of the planets habit land, we are only able to fly over these parts of the world and have in no sense of the word come close to surveying these parts of the planet. With sightings still happening in several different countries of the planet I'm inclined to believe there is in fact a reality of an upright walking prehuman

a reply to: fishy6

I know you don't agree.
What I'm trying to gleen from you is what you think hiding this info from the public is gaining them in the control dept.?
I see no advantage, seeing as how, bigfoot for instance would probably met with a collective : "hunh. How about that
Neat." From the general populace.

a reply to: dzakali

With all due respect, that is kind of a cop out.
You might as well say the world was ordered, built, and run by mice who are experimenting on us.
Possible?
Sure.
Probable?
Hahahaha.
No.

a reply to: visitedbythem

I believe the Bigfoot foot prints (the real ones with markings created by flesh and not a fake foot) have five, but since there seen on different parts of the planet and have varying colors of hair some could be different types, but I think all the prints have five toes. Remains of a bigfoot body or bones aren't ever found because they live in areas where nature eats everything and bones can only be persevered if a rare occurence happen with the way it dies, however it my belief that the Bigfoot would just be the same as a Neanderthal. Bigfoot prints as exactly like Neanderthal prints and Neanderthals have massive bones and muscles. I follow the intervention theory that contends the idea that humans didn't evolve normally and come from those prehumans but that we were genetically altered by an outside race, aliens, someone. And that Bigfoot is the native beings to this planet or if not native they were at least the dominates of the planet. As for extra dimensional that could be, but I just think their a really clever being that's powerful and fast, but I fully believe in dimensional beings - aliens/spirits/angels

a reply to: SheopleNation
That's why sightings go back hundreds of years and still occur on several different parts of the planet

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Well a PhD in chemistry is as good as a degree in Vetenary Science, when its Genomics you are doing

Mind you I am biased having a PhD in Chemistry (but also a postgraduate qualification in Bioinformatics, which Genomics is a sub discipline of, my research supervisor for that Bioinformatics work was a Statistician with zero biological background, yet he works in a Biochem department, publishes heavily etc). All this means is a properly trained scientist, working hard, can do good work outside their discipline. Ketchum wants fame, and will do shoddy work, and withhold data (the whole body of her genomics studies are NOT available, if they were I would have crunched some stuff myself, she did really rudimentary Bioinformatics work, as in undergrad level).

He readily says this isn't his specialty, it certainly isn't Ketchum's (it's a very specialised area of scientific research) and the point was that her supporters like to think she is highly qualified for some reason. A Ph.D at least normally requires quite a bit of scientific research and a thesis at minimum (ie. a "scientist"). A basic science degree and couple of years at vet school isn't close and certainly doesn't qualify as specialising in genomics (as her paper would indicate). It appears they must have overlooked "biological evolution", as she seems to have not the most basic understanding of the concept.


The part where the "other experts" agreed with him (quite separately) is relevant. They gave very good explanations (and easily explained/understandable) if you'd like links? They didn't go to the bother of trying to publish a paper on it though. It isn't a "whole genome" to begin with, nor is it hominid, according to the real scientists.

Such as this Ph.D in Evolutionary Biology/Genetics (who has research experience in this very subject-genome sequencing) that completely agreed with him. Or this Ph.D in Molecular and Cell Biology that went to some trouble to get clarification from the author herself where necessary, who also completely agreed with him. It's nonsense.

a reply to: Telepathy3

See the relevance of footprints, with dermal ridges, deformations from broken bones, and odd gaits from leg injuries is very hard to dispute because they are hard to hoax, nay, impossible...especially ones found in the middle of nowhere, when they were discovered purely by chance.
Those are the 5% scientists should be getting excited about....
But...crickets.

a reply to: dzakali

Also, if you remained in control of the chain of evidence like I said earlier, your premise of "changing" it to bear would be impossible.
Unless you figure they actually control reality, in which case what?

originally posted by: VictorBloodworth
a reply to: Telepathy3

See the relevance of footprints, with dermal ridges, deformations from broken bones, and odd gaits from leg injuries is very hard to dispute because they are hard to hoax, nay, impossible...especially ones found in the middle of nowhere, when they were discovered purely by chance.
Those are the 5% scientists should be getting excited about....
But...crickets.

Not so. The dermal ridges can easily be faked (it has been demonstrated).

In certain instances where direct experiments were carried out, they were shown to be completely consistent with casting artefacts. So we have dermal ridges on casts...not noticed in the track itself...with a different pattern to any known primate...completely consistent with casting artefacts...Yet still put forward by certain "bigfoot scientists" as legitimate.

The expert himself (Chilcutt) has agreed this is something bigfooters need to consider and be aware of.

The "gait" nonsense is simply a vague and unsubstantiated claim based solely on credulous opinion of believers.

These are the reasons why science doesn't take this seriously. Once something is debunked or lacking, in real science, it is put aside until better science is provided to support it. Not so in bigfootery where such claims circulate in perpetuity. This is the sign of a genuine pseudo science, which bigfootery is.

Tracks indicate something impacted the ground. That's it. What would be hard to fake is the "claimed" foot that made the tracks itself. Why have no bigfoot tracks led to a bigfoot...ever...? They do for all other creatures...

I for one will be slowly collecting some basic kit if and when I decide to go out there but nothing would make me feel safe but a lighter more efficient or better yet heavier safer against group attack version of an MRAP with a quiet engine and a full suite of sensors mounted maybe large paint ball cannons too for good measure. I am still fairly young but I am beat up a bit too so no deep woods stalking for me. I now put a whole lot of stock in getting the quietest vehicle you can and a few recording toys since you never know what you may hear/see if you just stick your head out in the wilds.


I would rather leave it alone but finding them is obviously this great challenge anyways even if you have seen one once or heard one for that matter. Realistically they scare the heck out of me and though I was dead calm when I saw one it was still a undercurrent of primal fear and if it were a few hundred years ago I would have shot it dead just for hunting on my territory and stealing my stuff and scaring me and mine.

Still just cue the predator music
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

OK, point.
I was not aware of that.
I've seen debunking but it wasn't convincing to me...perhaps you can link me an alternate study?
I say this in all seriousness..
I want proof too.

a reply to: stabstab

Dude..I spend time in the wild...
All you need is food and water, unless your skill level allows you to acquire insitu.
Most animals smell or hear you and bolt.
If you are prepared, the woods are no less dangerous than most major American streets...no hoods, no cops...so relatively civilised...


Well shelter, if the weather requires.

a reply to: VictorBloodworth

Scratch that.
Less dangerous.
Way less.

Nobody in a costume tried to make me aquiesce to his will anyway..
Not that you could with a 9 mil when I'm packing a crossbow in Treestand....dead before you see or smell me, lol..

a reply to: VictorBloodworth

That would defeat the purpose of ATS where we give our opinions on the subject, in case you missed that part. No its not just where everyone blindly follows lock and step behind you, lmao!

And we can find dinosaur bones, but no bigfoot bones whatsoever? Hey Unicorns are cool too, but nobody has ever found a horse skull with a horn sticking out of it. ~$heopleNation

originally posted by: Telepathy3
That's why sightings go back hundreds of years and still occur on several different parts of the planet

Why no bones? Did they vanish sooner than dinosaur fossils? Lmao! Hey the idea of bigfoot is cool, but its nothing but camp fire folklore. ~$heopleNation

originally posted by: VictorBloodworth
a reply to: fishy6

I know you don't agree.
What I'm trying to gleen from you is what you think hiding this info from the public is gaining them in the control dept.?
I see no advantage, seeing as how, bigfoot for instance would probably met with a collective : "hunh. How about that
Neat." From the general populace.

Riiiight

a reply to: fishy6

The same Ketchum who tried to pass Oppossum DNA off in a Self Published paper that failed under scrutiny?

originally posted by: VictorBloodworth
a reply to: dzakali

Also, if you remained in control of the chain of evidence like I said earlier, your premise of "changing" it to bear would be impossible.
Unless you figure they actually control reality, in which case what?

That's exactly what I'm certain. It's the only way to explain "our world".

A small comparison...take how terrorist plots are always foiled in America. It just so happens as its reported in the media that, "The terrorist were plotting with someone who happened to be an informant". I've heard at least five cases in the past year.

Impossible...our country is using some new tech that has tabs on everyone. It's rather obvious now.

The tech this advanced society/species has is probably a million years beyond that. So in effect...they can control reality at least for us.

They control our science, religion, and government. As many people submit COMPLETELY to our science, it's easy for them to have us believe as they desire. Which means if they don't want something such as bf discovered, it won't be discovered. Our science (which is given to us and regulated by them) won't allow it.

Every bf body found will be confiscated. If we run tests on the blood, firstly we won't interpret what we see and deem it contaminated. Secondly, they can alter our reality of the remains to where it is nothing more than bear meat. Probably inject the person who killed or found the bf, a memory of committing a hoax.

Much more thoroughly than we control the reality of animals in our zoo's and aquariums.