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.

 

how close are we to capturing a bigfoot ?

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by admriker444
 


I hit the link and didn't find the article. Can you tell me exactly which island they are searching. TY




posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Well I don't know if the 'Destination Truth' episode where they found a sample of unknown ape DNA has been debunked. Now fair enough they were searching for the Yeti in another part of the world but it only stands to reason that if an unknown ape can exist in one part of the world then why not another.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by pazcat
 


I think the entire show, 'Destination Truth' has been debunked. These are not the people who are going to find anything important in the wilderness.

The only thing they will find in the woods is a path to an early grave as they stumble around in dangerous areas of the wilderness at night. One of these fools is going to fall off a cliff or get eaten by a mountain lion or panther.

I would love for there to be a bigfoot lurking in the woods. But i have serious doubts. I can see both sides of the story.

1. lots of eye witness accounts(which really dont amount to much as eye witnesses are terrible at witnessing.)

2. Lots of footprints( but most could be faked or are possibly a known species.)


The piece of evidence that BF supporters hold so high is the Patterson film and I seriously question its authenticity. Two guys DECIDE that they are going to go get some video of Bigfoot. And on their first attempt they get by far, the best video evidence of this supposed creature. They do all this with a super 8 camera over 40 years ago.

Since then we have seen humans explore deeper and deeper into the previously unexplored wilderness, with more sophisticated equipment and we still havent got a film or picture that can hold a candle to the Patterson film.

There are literally thousands of trail cams located all over the country in really remote areas and none have picked up any significant footage. We have webcams in national forests, some in remote areas...nothing.

Again, I would love for this creature to exist but the evidence is just not there.

I feel at this point there are only two possible options.

1. Bigfoot does not exist(most likely,as there is no tangible evidence.)
2. Bigfoot exists but is an ET.(not likely but with the lack of evidence, i cannot see how this creature could exist without some evidence.)

And no video or photo will ever be evidence. Its going to take a skeleton, DNA or an actual body to prove that this creature exists.

I hope so but I seriously doubt that BF exists.

[edit on 3-9-2010 by iamcamouflage]



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   
I hope the creature if it does exist is never captured. I shudder to think of the pain and terror it would suffer at the hands of humans, especially when all the lab tests begin.



posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by iamcamouflage
 


What would, to you, constitute tangible evidence?

Some footprints are indeed faked. That much is true. Yet it doesn't explain the hundreds or thousands of others that have been researched by experts in fingerprint identification and have come back as either unexplained or identified as coming from an as yet unidentified primate.

These prints are lifelike right down to dermal ridges in the skin...

I make no claims to expertise in a field of forensic sciences such as this, but everything I've read of it, it's incredibly hard to hoax. Certainly not worth the time and effort it would take. Especially in the days before computer generated pictures and such like...

This seems rather tangible evidence that "something" is going bump in the woods. My own experiance not withstanding, it warrants at least an examination, don't you think?

But science is very hidebound and conservative in it's thinking...as strange as that sounds. It takes a lot for them to disregard their groupthink and look at "new" evidence...



new topics

top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join