It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why "i" think bigfoot is not real

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 01:50 AM

Originally posted by Nouvelle
I know i'm going to get guff about this post. But I do believe there is some kind of erect gorilla type creature out there.

You make good points Nouvelle, but in the end it will be only a be the real thing that will convince people. I mean there is a crystal clear picture of the skunk ape on the Internet. Yet, everyone is still skeptical about its existence.

Shark or no shark, pterodactyl or no pterodactyl, Nessie or no Nessie, sea snake or no sea snake . . . it all boils down to one realization that we all cryptozoology lovers must come to. Photographs are futile. No matter how clear, how close, or how real one may possibly seem, folks will still doubt, and nothing is proven, and thus nothing is accomplish. Tangible evidence is all that matters.

Video footage. What about video footage? In short, it's tough to say. Video editing is quickly becoming as easy as photographic editing. In truth, if someone were to videotape an animal in broad daylight and up-close using a home camera, with the creature moving about in a clear, natural way . . . perhaps. Such has been done, however, of a lake monster in Lake Van, Turkey, and the video footage can be found here. Nothing was proven, and nothing was authenticated, and so it must be said that, sadly, even video footage is altogether futile.

And so the search continues for new and unidentified creatures. Toss the cameras aside and friend, grab the harpoon or cage, cause it's the only way this world full of skeptics will ever come to believe.

(I sense some hatemail coming my way...

posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 02:04 AM
Well, it's hard for me to believe anything anymore, after so many people have made it their goal to trick and poke fun at everything. With fake pictures, videos, etc etc. It's hard for me to believe in anything now-a-days that I can't see clear proof of. So many fakers.

One ugly looking squid.

[edit on 12/12/05 by Nouvelle]

posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 01:04 PM
I agree with Gemwolf, but capturing cryptozoological animals is notoriously hard to do. I doubt that a bigfoot type creature will go down without a fight, since grizzley bears are known to take bullets and shotgun slugs without falling. In my opinion, finding a bigfoot would be the most scientific breakthrough for both scientists and cryptozoologists.

I was watching a show on NGC, and they had an interview with this woman in which she said that bigfoots lived with her family for decades and still continue to visit her on a weekly basis. I'm not sure how credible she is, but she seemed to know a lot of never talked about subject matter dealing with bigfoots. She talked about the hunting methods of the bigfoot, saying that one would charge it into an open field while another one would wait in ambush. The hidden one would then run behind the deer and break its legs
. She also said that they could speak simple words in english, and had a deep/rough voice.

I think that they should either set up cameras in the trees around her house to find out whether they really visit her family. If they do, then we should send soldiers or armed hunters to lie in wait. This is where the question of ethics come in. If they can speak english, that means that they are sentient beings. And if we actually do shoot one, I really hope that the bigfoots will not go on a murderous rampage killing everything in site for revenge!!!!

posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 01:41 PM
so how do you think they catch bears , tigers , lions etc etc etc ?????????

unless " resistant to the effects of ketamine " is to be added to the bigfoots already impressive list of improbable powers , then IMHO no harder than a polar bear ONCE you have a trained guy with the correct kit within 50 yards of one

the town of churchill , canada has a full time polar bear catcher - who tranqs , cages and then relocates bears who cause problems invading the city limits

posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 01:29 AM

Originally posted by ignorant_ape

my basic observation is " why didnt the first european settlers to the americas discover bigfoot in his pasoroal idyll and report on it / shoot the crap out of him ? "

US pioneers shot just about everyting in sight

in australasia - they killed off the thylacine , dodo etc etc

i admit is almost an " absence of evidence " aregument

but there seems a dearth of ` sightings ` from the first eutopeans to venture to the new worlds

This is an excellent point. I am not entirely certain of the creature's existence or nonexistence, but you make a strong argument to the credit of the latter.

It also leads me to wonder whether any native American lore makes reference to Bigfoot... it seems unlikely that such a creature could exist unnoticed for so long, unless its habitat was restricted to an extremely limited and not readily accesible area.

posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 07:59 AM

Originally posted by The Parallelogram

It also leads me to wonder whether any native American lore makes reference to Bigfoot... it seems unlikely that such a creature could exist unnoticed for so long, unless its habitat was restricted to an extremely limited and not readily accesible area.

You do know that the word Sasquach (sp?) is American Indian? So, obviously bigfoot was in their lore.

posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 09:13 AM

Originally posted by baptismbyfire12345

2.That excellent fossil record continues to be free of Bigfoot

That excellent fossil record already has something that matches Bigfoot just about exactly. A 9ft-10ft 1000lbs+ ape called Gigantopithecus blackii. Even the experts cant explain why this animal died out thousands of years ago.

Originally posted by baptismbyfire12345
3.Why hasn't someone shot one yet.

srry but unless someone throws a dead body of one on my door step i wont believe

Killing a Bigfoot in some places like Skamania Country carries a $10000.00 fine and can land you up to 5 years in prison.
Most bigfoot hunters you find dont even carry guns and are in no rush to kill would would be a amazing animal. Many would much rather find other evidence like hair or really great video footage.

But your right about the body The scientific community wont except anything less then the body or bones.

posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 09:36 PM
If I saw a Bigfoot, I would honestly try to kill it if I had any means to because :

1) A corpse of this creature would mark an enormous landmark discovery.

2) It would shine new light and give refreshened hope to cryptozoologists and cryptozoology enthusiasts around the world.

3) For a single life in a population of at least thousands, this discovery would prompt the government to finally act and protect the rest of these endangered animals.

4) A $10,000 fine? That would be pocket change compared to how much money I get for the corpse. I'm not greedy though ("For it is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven") so I would donate most of the money to promote for research in cryptozoology.

5) Scientists woud finally have to bow down to us and star taking cryptozoology seriously. With thousands more professional scientists coming to the aid of cryptzoologists, just think of how many more creatures we will discover together.

6) And lastly, cuz their just so damn cool!
I wanna keep a baby one as a pet.

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Nouvelle

And for the giant squid, pretty amazing they find it, when the earth in about 70% water, and avegrage depth of the ocean is several thousand feet. EVEN THOUGH, 98% is salt water. So was it a salt water squid of fresh water? BUT, they can't find bigfoot in less than 30% of land. And for bigfoot to exsist, there would have to be groups of atleast 30-40 to sustain their exsistance, and continue to breed new life.

Actually the number of possible big foot could range into the thousands.
You, and some other posters, seem to be under the delusion that the pacific northwest is a giant megacity.
It is not.

It has thousands of miles of territory that no human has EVER entered.
That is NOT an exageration!
So it's not surprise that it's hasn't been found.
I think we eventually will.
It's all matter of persistance.
Most so called big foot hunters that I heard of will only be out there for a few days at most.
And then there's the weather. Rain is not very conductive to tracking.

[edit on 22-12-2005 by I_AM_that_I_AM]

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 12:43 PM
Most of the bigfoot hunter are non-kill. In many of the reports i've read where hunter have had an encounter they have stated that bigfoot looks to human like to shoot.
Lets not forget that you may not want to piss off a 7 - 8 foot tall monkey that can run faster than you.

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 10:45 PM
bigfoot is just a giant who got cast out of society coz he was so ugly now he just lives in the mountains

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 11:47 PM

Originally posted by TheBlueSoldier

4) A $10,000 fine? That would be pocket change compared to how much money I get for the corpse.

Your right if you had a body you could pretty much name your price. Near complete (about 80%) T-rex skeletons have went for like 8 million. A one of a kind animal find complete with full skeleton plus intact DNA
People would be beating a path to your door to buy it. Thats of course if they didnt just confiscate the body.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:28 PM
another thing is... just like aliens, if one sighting is made... perhapse the others are claiming to see things of simularity for popularity?

posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 05:45 PM
i think that most people would be afraid to shoot one.

posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 12:34 AM

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
...It also leads me to wonder whether any native American lore makes reference to Bigfoot... it seems unlikely that such a creature could exist unnoticed for so long, unless its habitat was restricted to an extremely limited and not readily accesible area.

There is ample Native American folklore about Sasquatch. But native folklore also has giant snakes that fly, animals that talk, trees that walk around, and rocks that transform in people and vice versa. Some folklore has a basis in some natural phenomena, and much does not. Some folklore is nothing more than a made up fable to illustrate a moral point.

This is only a very small sampling of the variety of folklore in native cultures:

Just because an old fable exists does not imply the story is true.

And just because about 99% of the 'bigfoot proof' is faked or misinterpreted does not mean the creature does not exist.

On the other hand look how many very competent and intelligent people have been taken in by the Patterson film hoax. There are still 'technical experts' that claim it is genuine even after it has been thoroughly debunked.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in