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.

 

What are the scientific chances of Bigfoot?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The existence of a large undiscovered primate in western North America is conceptually possible, but highly unlikely.

Contrary to the popular misconception there are very few areas of the western U.S. that are unexplored. And they are small noncontiguous pockets.

Lots of anecdotal evidence. Very little hard evidence. I call myself an open-minded skeptic. I wanna believe, but there is nothing so far to convince me.

The Patterson film is a fake. The ability to make a costume of that detail was readily available in the 1960's. Check out any of John Chambers special effects in any of the movies he did the costuming/special effects (the consensus opinion of Hollywood special effects community is Chambers made the Patterson suit). Dermal ridges have been made in latex feet and hands for decades.




posted on Dec, 9 2005 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by SneakySnake
After 30+ years of research and $$$ being spent in the pursuit of 'proof' we finally have the Giant Squid on film. We knew it was there from caracasses we found but even knowing that it took 30+ years of concentrated, dedicated scientific study and research to 'prove it'.

Is ANYONE spending that kind of money/effort/time on Bigfoot? There are dedicated groups - small and spread out - attempting to get that proof, but nothing on the order of magnitude used for the Giant squid. Until this 'committment' (from individuals or a group) is made, then the probability of getting 'definitive proof' is very low. The probability of finding something you're only half looking for is even lower.


To be fair, we knew that giant squid existed from the carcasses. We just had never found a live one. If we had a Bigfoot corpse, you'd start seeing the money puring in to find a live one. Whereas Bigfoot may exist, there was very little doubt that the giant squid did.



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Show me evidencce of suits in the 60s with that kind of detail. The Patterson film to me is the best evidence we have be it inconclusive. Today it is very hard to copy a suit of that complication. Who wore it where is it?



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   
I wont be totaly convinced untill we find a corpse. Or atleast capture a live one for study. Some kind of hard eveidence froma credible source. Like perhaps a university or such. Not some average joe in the woods with a camera.

As far as the question raisedf about life span, you have to follow the patterns. Is there ANY other primate with anything resembeling the kind of life span you have in mind?



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Not sure if this helps, but I found this site that lists known primates lifespans, some are approx. pin.primate.wisc.edu...

As for the unexplored areas of the world, I agree that there are not many, but take this into consideration: How many people were exploring them at one time vs. how many of these beings in a said area where trying to avoid them?

Hope that makes some sense!?



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 05:22 AM
link   
Is it possible that this Being is NOT Earth based???
Reports from the researchers have noted that the trail of footprints
just end.
Disappear into "thin air." With no way for the creature to get into a tree---no trees available, no rocks, nothing that would make it possible for anything to get away without leaving more prints.
Another report came from a ranch out West that is now in the possession of the Feds. Lots of UFO activity, strange animals, dead pets and cattle, weird noises and one really interesting thing. A very bright light would open what appeared to be a doorway, out would step what they all called a Bigfoot, and then it would close. Leaving Bigfoot to vacation wherever it so desired. They couldn't catch it either because it would race off into the night...Zoom. Then some time later, a report would come in from one of their patrols that were stationed all over the ranch. A bright light would open that door again and guess who went back out the same way it
came in??
This situation seems to happen on a regular basis. Along with all the other crazy stuff that happens in that area. That's why the Feds own it now and no one is allowed out there any longer. Would be interesting to get the reports from that place!! But, like all the others they have done their best to debunk and make fun of, we wouldn't get too much of the actual truth. Look how long it's taken to get anything about Roswell. People that were actually there and saw everything were on their death beds before they started talking!!! Oh well, we have way too many other serious things going on in the world today to put up with more disinformation from the Feds. We always do better research on our own
anyway!! LOL
Anyhow......just wanted to see what you thought or if you had read anything about the ranch.
Enjoy and happy hunting!!



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   
BF is no alien unless he comes from Mexico or elsewhere, to me he is an undiscovered primate evolved from Gigantopithacus we just need some hard evidence like a corpse. Unless the indians called him Chubacka he is no alied CP3O.



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Another question, how many new species of animals are found each year in the tropical rain forest? I do believe the pacific NW is considered a rain forest correct? So does that not make it possible that there is an undiscovered primate there?



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
They do exist. There are places where the woods are thick & the terrain too steep for humans - except the rare hiker/climber. They own the terrain, they use everthing & the area to create blinds and appear to move very quickly from blind to blind - move in groups & or use cave systems. If you look their way they will freeze as still as a stone until you leave and may use others in their group to distract you or will move a branch or small tree within a short distance. When they move they move faster then you can & quieter.

While you make think you're a badass, (I know I am
) if you come upon them you will be like a child. While I'm sure they could be captured with the right group of people with sufficient tech gear - I'm not sure it would be right to kill in order to satisfy our curiosity & prove that were not FOS.





[edit on 17-12-2005 by outsider]



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   
A tribe that fled communal life, and chose wild nomadic life. They have a long history here, but few believers. Hunters seem to be the most skeptical, due to there extensive bush travel and virtually complete absence of evidence of Sasquatch.



posted on Dec, 17 2005 @ 11:58 PM
link   
You must be talking about the state of West Virginia. Just kidding, but I totally doubt the hairy human thing. If that was the case what do they eat? Or better yet I will be their NFL or NHL agent.



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Even though the Pacific northwest is definetley not a rainforest, I do believe that Bigfoot exists. We have just yet to find one.



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   
I beg to differ on the Pacific NW not being a rainforest, it is actually classified as a temperate rain forest here is one link but there are many more check it out.

www.scsc.k12.ar.us...



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Born and raised, 41 years living in SW BC, Pacific Northwest, and I can tell you that this is a rainforest. It rains here all the time, just ask David Duchovny of the X Files TV series. It has rained for about two weeks straight now, and I recall summers that seemed to be devoid of sunny days. Of course this is the coast, inland, in the Okanogan, and up in the Peace River valley, it is not a rainforest. In the Okanogan town my parents live in, they get 8 inches of precipitation a year, which is semi-desert. But here, around Vancouver, you can believe me when I say this is a rainforest.
Mt. Baker, 50 miles SE of me, they had well over 1000 inches of snowfall in one year recently, breaking the world record.
PS, regarding Sasquatch, the people I notice doubting his existance are hunters, who spend more time in the bush than most people. I hike alot myself, and I haven't seen one. Still, I wouldn't say I am sure they aren't real, just that I am very skeptical.



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBlueSoldier
Even though the Pacific northwest is definetley not a rainforest...


The term 'Pacific Northwest' covers a large area and the boundaries are somewhat user defined. It covers the entire states of Oregon and Washington, and depending on how you define it, The panhandle of Idaho, the northern third of California, and possible the NW part of Montana. And of course a large chunk of BC. The coastal ranges are a rainforest by definition. The interior portions are not, although a broad ranging arc from the coastal BC into northern Idaho and NW Montana is ecologically a maritime forest.

The generally accepted habitat of Sasquatch is a mixed conifer mosaic forest of mostly younger age classes and openings. It is NOT an old growth dependent animal. Sightings in old growth forest are most likely traveling through. The creature spends winters below the snowline. It may summer in the higher elevations, but migrates out of the snow. It does not hibernate.



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
To be fair, we knew that giant squid existed from the carcasses. We just had never found a live one. If we had a Bigfoot corpse, you'd start seeing the money puring in to find a live one. Whereas Bigfoot may exist, there was very little doubt that the giant squid did.


Actually a huge massive squid was discovered on the beach of Chile. It was massive!

What I've researched on the bigfoot, is that it was an experimentation from Antlantis mixing Human DNA with that of a bear.

All the best
Merger



posted on Dec, 30 2005 @ 02:39 AM
link   
If these humanoid wilderness nomads do exist, and their reclusive nature is why they are so rarely seen, I hope we do contact one someday. I am doubtful though, and feel that they are either extinct, or mistaken sightings of bears such as the ones that are now considered the likely source of the Himalayan accounts. It is a rare bear, whose print resembles a human footprint due to the combination result of the front and back feet often overlapping each other. Many firm Yeti fans are now of the view that this "Kemo"? bear is the true source of the tales.
In this area the Sasquatch story predates Europeans, and the story goes that they are a tribe who chose to avoid civilization and retreat from other tribes into the remotest wilds.
My favourite explanation of their scarcity is that they are interdimensional travellers, so they are often away in another dimension... hence their absence from virtually anyones wilderness trips. Here's to Bigfoot, may he live long, and if he desires, keep on evading his pursuers.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join