BIGFOOT - A Case for a North American Ape
Most skeptics will tell you that Bigfoot is just a myth. Most scientists agree that the legends of ape-like creatures in North America are just that,
legends. Legends perpetuated by misidentifications of known animals, human superstition and hoaxers. The sightings of eye witnesses are not definitive
proof and footprint castings have proven inconclusive to most biologists. What is stopping hoaxers from strapping wooden feet to their shoes and
making these prints out in the woods?
So to most, the idea of Bigfoot is laughable. If they actually thought logically about it they would find that the odds of a North American ape are
actually much better than the skeptics would have you believe.
The Native Americans had many names for the ape man. Sometimes he was the Wendigo, Manabai'wok, Kecleh-Kudleh, the Lenni Lenape Native tribes called
the creature Wsinkhoalican.
Seems there were an awful lot of names in an awful lot of tribes. If this thing was a mere legendary spirit why would so many tribes, divided by
massive distances and culture differences all have a name for a similar creature? Why would the legend be pervasive across the entire land? Is it true
that bigfoot is a mere product of our unconscious fears. A psychological aberration created by our fear of reverting into a primal state? Fear of
becoming feral, of going back to the jungle, of becoming apes once more? Are these genetic memories stored in a collective unconscious teaching us to
hold onto to civilization for fear of devolving into something subhuman? OR, are we dealing with something more than Native superstition and human
There is another claim that skeptical minds often make about Sasquatch which I think deserves to be debunked once and for all... The "Why haven't we
found a body?" excuse is a poor excuse for skepticism that fails to take into account any real knowledge of the way ecosystems work. Finding a body
in the forest is no easy feat especially if you are not looking for one. Tests have shown that a fresh carcass can disappear into the foliage, be torn
apart by scavengers and the bones scattered in less than a month after the animals death. Time lapse has shown that the bodies become unidentifiable,
what isn't scattered or eaten would be hidden under foliage. Even if discovered identification of the body would be impossible to any but experienced
wildlife experts. And that is true for the common animals, deer, raccoons, foxes... what we're dealing with is a much smarter and far more rare
And there's another reason Bigfoot sightings are fairly rare and no remains have been found, we're dealing with a shy and intelligent animal. If
Bigfoot were an undiscovered primate about 7-9 feet tall it's likely got a large brain, plenty intelligent enough to steer clear of humans. The
population would almost certainly be small. Many scientists question how animals so large could find ample food supply in the forest but most don't
consider the idea that they have learned how to eat meat and I don't just mean raw meat, I mean that these animals might be smart enough to start a
fire. It's not entirely implausible when you consider than man has been eating meat for thousands of years but that it was not a biological
necessity. Could Bigfoot be omnivores enough to stomach raw meat or smart enough to learn how to make fire? If not meat could the forest vegetation be
enough to feed large primates?
So, given the rarity Bigfoot must have as a species and its general desire to stay away from us humans if it can help it basically answers the
question of why a body has not been found. Another answer is that there are very few scientists or wildlife experts out there on the look out for a
primate or for new species at all in the United States. So if there are no experts out there looking for it how are they supposed to find it?
Scientists cannot leave this work to amateurs and then blame the amatuers when no concrete evidence is found.
But perhaps concrete evidence does exist... in the form of the Patterson Film. The film has been dissected, enhanced and examined ever since it was
taken in 1967. In my youth when I first took an interest in unknown animals I flip-flopped over whether or not this footage was hoaxed, especially
after several men came out claiming to be the ones in the suit (though none ever produced the suit itself or any evidence of their claims). However,
after seeing the footage again and noting the movement of muscle in the legs I realized that there is no way for a suit to reproduce this effect
unless it were skin tight painted on or glued to the skin... After watching this footage countless times I now believe it to be definitively real...
however my beliefs do not come with an equal bit of skepticism for while I believe it to be real I understand it will not convince the scientific
community any more than UFO photos do.
^ While certainly a conjectural video analysis it shows the movement of the muscle pretty well... something nigh impossible to make-up effects in
Most scientists have made up their minds that Bigfoot does not exist and therefore refuse to search. It boggles my mind why they, who discover new
primate fossils all the time, will not entertain the idea that some of our ancestors evolved, survived in the New World and are still here with us
today... Why is that such a leap for their minds? They accept Ardi and Homo floresiensis but discard Sasquatch like yesterday's garbage, without ever
thinking that Sasquatch could just be another Ardi waiting for discovery, only this one isn't fossilized, it lives and breathes in our own backyard.
How are there not hundreds of scientists willing to go out and find this thing? I mean sure if they can't find it they have to explain why they
wasted their time... but IF THEY DID, can you imagine the headlines?
^ It is believed that Homo Floresiensis lived up until about 12,000 years ago. From Wikipedia:
Because of a deep neighboring strait, Flores remained isolated during the Wisconsin glaciation (the most recent glacial period), despite the low sea
levels that united Sundaland. This has led the discoverers of H. floresiensis to conclude that the species, or its ancestors, could only have reached
the isolated island by water transport, perhaps arriving in bamboo rafts around 100,000 years ago (or, if they are H. erectus, then about 1 million
years ago). This idea of H. floresiensis using advanced technology and cooperation on a modern human level has prompted the discoverers to hypothesize
that H. floresiensis almost certainly had language. This suggestion has been one of the most controversial of the discoverers' findings.
Local geology suggests that a volcanic eruption on Flores approximately 12,000 years ago was responsible for the demise of H. floresiensis, along with
other local fauna, including the elephant Stegodon. Gregory Forth hypothesized that H. floresiensis may have survived longer in other parts of
Flores to become the source of the Ebu Gogo stories told among the local people. The Ebu Gogo are said to have been small, hairy, language-poor cave
dwellers on the scale of this species. Believed to be present at the time of the arrival of the first Portuguese ships during the 16th century,
these creatures are claimed to have existed as recently as the late 19th century. Gerd van den Bergh, a paleontologist working with the fossils,
reported hearing of the Ebu Gogo a decade before the fossil discovery. On the island of Sumatra, there are reports of a 1-1.5 m (−1.6 ft) tall
humanoid, the Orang Pendek which might be related to H. floresiensis.
Continued in next post