Bigfoot does exist, claim scientists

page: 7
88
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by facelift
reply to post by Dishonored
 


Didn't check pages 2 and on to see if anyone threw this in, but the 911 call recorded here seems legit in terms of the 'anxiety' of the caller, though what he saw could be anything; but. the region gives some credence to it being BF:




If someone else already posted this, feel free to send me a nasty U2U...






now that sent a chill from the top of my skull all the way down my kneck and spine!
to me this is LEGIT that he saw something, whever a bigfoot is debateable

on a funnier side after calming my senses, maybe it was the undertaker in his garden

he is 6ft 10in


edit on 31-10-2012 by GezinhoKiko because: (no reason given)



+4 more 
posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Myself, and tens of thousands of others, have been saying that these animals exist for a long time. It will feel great to shove it in everyone's face once definitive proof is released. It will not be that long now I'm sure, and evidence like this is just added to the plethora of other evidence that is available, that so many seem ignorant of.

People will think this is the first DNA confirmation of an unknown primate, but that is far from the truth. Right now anyone can go to Youtube and pull up authentic sasquatch videos, but the majority of people have a hard time telling what is real and what is fake. Most videos are from far away and are not very clear, and there is a reason for this. These animals are too smart to let someone sneak up on them in most cases, therefore most people will not get close enough to take a photograph. Encounters are usually fleeting as well, and if the animal was close enough to photograph, by the time a camera is out and ready, it will be pretty far away.

Those that have GREAT evidence are the ones who rarely release it. This is because it takes a long time of trust building to get close to a group of these animals, and thus a type of relationship is developed. Granted, these people still cannot get within arms reach of these animals, but they can get close enough to photograph them. But the main reason they can get that close is because they have spent a long time not pressing their luck, and not getting too close and pissing the animals off. They will let you know when you get too close, and you will likely not ever see them. This can come in the form of a guttural growl, a rock thrown at you, etc...

People like me, who have had an encounter, are not interested in answering the question of existence. Rather, we want to know HOW and WHY they exist. Think about how advanced their woodcraft skills would have to be to remain undiscovered for so long. But the truth is that they have not remained undiscovered. Lucky for them though people apparently cannot trust their fellow man's experience, and therefore do not believe they actually exist.

One of the biggest problems that occurs today is that someone will have an encounter, and then forever be freaked out. It really messes some people's minds up. If people would listen and try to understand these animals, this would not happen. It does happen because people are not expecting animals of this nature to be out in the woods, so when they come face to face with one, their minds cannot handle it. Many of them never go into the woods again. So all I ask is that people start listening. It is not as if there are a handful of people claiming to have had experiences. There are tens upon tens of thousands, and the majority never report their encounters to an actual research group, so the true number is probably much larger.

There is a reason that Native Americans do not like to speak on the subject, and it has to do with the white man's skepticism and flat out denial. People need to grow up.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 




realy good post Jiggy
i hope everyone takes the time to read it




posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by kdog1982
I still believe the big guy is around.
Just my opinion.

www.bfro.net...

Kind of old news,but worth a revisit.
how do you see them being treated once it is established they are real? would confirming that one important piece of evidence be worth killing them off or at least really screwing them up as a species?



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Sounds very similar to that episode of destination truth. They found white hair in a tree and that geneticist said pretty much exactly the same thing



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


The Ra channelings offer a good explanation about the "how and why" the Bigfoot are here.

lawofone.info...

At your discretion. I won't go into defending the validity of the information, but I'll say it answers your question if you care to keep an open mind and entertain the idea.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by davespanners
 


Yes, this is obviously what is going on.

However, people who want to believe will believe.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by BigFrigginAl
 


Can they be more specific, is it a Pig? or is the DNA not matchable?



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   
We should all be wary anytime a blog/new story pluralizes "scientists" but then doesn't name any of them specifically.
There are plenty of non-scientists that declare that they are doing "scientific research", and journalists always seem to miss the fact that not all self-proclaimed science admirers are actually educated Scientists, and that many people lie about their credentials in order to get some publicity.
We need specific names.
Many newpapers have quoted so-called "military experts", "scientists", etc... that turned out to be nothing short of a few nutcases with undeserved superiority complexes.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I read in another forum that Jeff Meldrum said:

""There was no expedition. The conference participants were accompanied by the press on a field trip to a cave site. It is my opinion that the 'evidence' found in the cave was unreliable," said Jeff Meldrum, a biologist at Idaho State University and cryptozoologist. Meldrum, who took part in the expedition, added that the footprints in the cave, a "short line of right feet only," were not convincing, and the "nest" of ferns had never been slept in.

"There was no other sign of occupation in the cave, except a few empty soda cans and snack food wrappers," he wrote in e-mailed comments to The Moscow Times on Tuesday."

link

Credit goes to the original poster.

I just thought this is important info. If you want to know the forum--- PM me



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by hesse
 


those god damn cheap Russians

from your LINK

His latest announcement was hailed by the Kemerovo regional government in a press release. Tuleyev has promised a 1 million ruble ($32,000) prize to anybody who can present an actual yeti. Read more: www.themoscowtimes.com... The Moscow Times


Its $10 million in the US


edit on 1-11-2012 by GezinhoKiko because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
Myself, and tens of thousands of others, have been saying that these animals exist for a long time. It will feel great to shove it in everyone's face once definitive proof is released. It will not be that long now I'm sure, and evidence like this is just added to the plethora of other evidence that is available, that so many seem ignorant of.

People will think this is the first DNA confirmation of an unknown primate, but that is far from the truth. Right now anyone can go to Youtube and pull up authentic sasquatch videos, but the majority of people have a hard time telling what is real and what is fake. Most videos are from far away and are not very clear, and there is a reason for this. These animals are too smart to let someone sneak up on them in most cases, therefore most people will not get close enough to take a photograph. Encounters are usually fleeting as well, and if the animal was close enough to photograph, by the time a camera is out and ready, it will be pretty far away.

Those that have GREAT evidence are the ones who rarely release it. This is because it takes a long time of trust building to get close to a group of these animals, and thus a type of relationship is developed. Granted, these people still cannot get within arms reach of these animals, but they can get close enough to photograph them. But the main reason they can get that close is because they have spent a long time not pressing their luck, and not getting too close and pissing the animals off. They will let you know when you get too close, and you will likely not ever see them. This can come in the form of a guttural growl, a rock thrown at you, etc...

People like me, who have had an encounter, are not interested in answering the question of existence. Rather, we want to know HOW and WHY they exist. Think about how advanced their woodcraft skills would have to be to remain undiscovered for so long. But the truth is that they have not remained undiscovered. Lucky for them though people apparently cannot trust their fellow man's experience, and therefore do not believe they actually exist.

One of the biggest problems that occurs today is that someone will have an encounter, and then forever be freaked out. It really messes some people's minds up. If people would listen and try to understand these animals, this would not happen. It does happen because people are not expecting animals of this nature to be out in the woods, so when they come face to face with one, their minds cannot handle it. Many of them never go into the woods again. So all I ask is that people start listening. It is not as if there are a handful of people claiming to have had experiences. There are tens upon tens of thousands, and the majority never report their encounters to an actual research group, so the true number is probably much larger.

There is a reason that Native Americans do not like to speak on the subject, and it has to do with the white man's skepticism and flat out denial. People need to grow up.


If you prove the existence of these creatures, beyond reasonable doubt, to the general public, you will condemn these creatures to a gradual extinction. Hunters, private collectors, amoral millionaires, glory seekers, every corner of the black market, all will have a golden new opportunity to exploit.

As it is now, with them being a cryptozoological myth, they aren't taken very seriously. But replace that myth with fact, and everything changes. You and all the others others so determined to lift that veil, will certainly have your egos stroked and validated. But you will have forever destroyed the secrecy which alone has protected them from us.

I really hope you thought about that.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Sasquatches are more spiritually advanced than humans. That's going to be an even harder fact to accept after the inevitable acceptance of their existence.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


Hey Jiggy,

Excellent post. I've been following your posts whenever I come across them here and at other forums and websites. Always have something good to add to the threads. Thanks again.



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by klhbrown
Over the years several hairs have been tested and found to belong to an "unknown" primate. People still refuse to believe for whatever reason.


Exactly


Especaily in Northen Regions !! in Cold Climate

Like Canada in various parts, Siberia Russia , In USA, Washington State to UP-state NEW YORK!!


In the thick Niches

edit on 1-11-2012 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


realy good post Jiggy
i hope everyone takes the time to read it



Thank you very much for the kind words. It's funny that many of the posts I write on which I spend a lot of time pondering and rehashing, and I think are really good, are the ones no one stars or anything. And posts like the one I made above, which I did not need to think about, and just wrote quickly, are the ones that people enjoy.

I think this is a good lesson for me to stop overthinking some things, and just write what comes naturally and that I am passionate about. Sasquatch is definitely one of those types of subjects for me. I just really wish that everyone could see what I, and many others, have been fortunate enough to see. But I would want these people to know what to expect, so they aren't traumatized or freaked out. These animals are very large, even the smaller ones to a degree as they are stocky and built much of the time, and I will admit they are flat out scary in my opinion.

They are modern day, real life, monsters. There is not a better way to put it really, lol. Another thing that really upsets me is that I know for a fact that many researchers have very good video evidence of sasquatch. I mean crystal clear, close up evidence. I sort of explained why they do not release this evidence, and although I understand, I do not agree with their reasoning.

Being scientific in my approach to the subject, I believe that all data should be shared, as this is what science is all about, and this is how a field advances. Videos will not convince everyone, but it will bring more to the correct side of the argument, and will prepare a handful of people for something they no doubt will see in the future.

Through my research and hypotheses I have concluded that the sasquatch population is in fact BOOMING. The largest concentrations of their population tends to be in the most remote areas, and all the sightings on the outskirts of towns and cities are the result of overcrowding deeper in the forests of North America. These animals are branching out due to their expanding population, and this is why I think educating people is more important now than it has ever been in the past. People also would not feel the need to shoot their rifles at these animals if they knew what they were, and just basically knew that these animals are there in the first place.

It is understandable to be confused after an encounter, and I just want to save people the grief and possible accidents that may happen due to ignorance of these animals. For instance, people may feel threatened, and behave in a way that could hurt themselves or the animals. The truth is that these animals can be aggressive, but this behavior is not intended to inflict injury upon a person. It is nothing more than a territorial display. The behavior will escalate if one presses their luck, and this is what I was talking about in the other thread about respecting their space, and building a relationship of trust. It is not like a human relationship by any means, or like seeing a friend in the woods.

One will not be able to touch them, or get all that close, but once they are used to you and know you are not going to hurt them, they are not so skittish about remaining hidden in your presence. I know a researcher who has gotten within 15 or 20 yards of a group of sasquatch who remained still as the guy approached, before they warned him to get back by the large male stepping forward and growling and baring his teeth at the researcher. He then backed up a distance, and they were comfortable with that apparently, because they did not try to run him off again.

This is what I mean about respecting their space. I was just thinking of the video on youtube called bigfoot baby in the craw of a tree. This is the best piece of footage available to the general public via the internet that depicts a baby bigfoot. I highly recommend watching it, even if you've already seen it. The guy doing the filming behaved in the manner I have been describing, and this group of animals let him get that close to their BABY. They are very protective of their young, just like many other large mammals and other animals in general.

I have a plethora of ideas, hypotheses, and just information that I have compiled, including inventions for devices to gather evidence, etc., and I do not know where to share this information. ATS is not really a hub of sasquatch research, as it seems to specialize in other areas of interest for the most part. So whenever I get the chance to discuss sasquatch related material, I just ramble on and on. So if anyone wants to talk bigfoot, or anything else, please don't hesitate to send me a message. I will answer any questions you have, and maybe I can learn something from you as well. This goes for ne1 btw.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by BigFrigginAl
 


Of course Bigfoot and his kind exist. If not, a thousand people all over the world have been lying about it for over 200 years.

Lying must come natural to all skeptics to believe otherwise.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


Nice post, but as for the Baby swinger, I am not buying it yet, for the very reason that humans are TOO CLOSE. Not typical of the Bigfoot norm.



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by GezinhoKiko
 



This is a great lecture, well worth the 2 hours.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 2 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Hi there, Crypto FSME here, couple quick comments:

1. Many people have posted regarding lack of physical evidence. Soft tissue, and even hard tissue, can decompose rapidly or be consumed in most environmental conditions. That's why you don't see dead squirrels and deer on your hikes through the woods, lining the ground. Their foraging might look similar to foraging of other species. They really could be quite hard to track. I don't know about tools and hearths, but I'd say not to count on anything that would clearly read "wow, undescribed advanced primate living in the woods around here!"

2. Also, many people have posted regarding the fact that it hasn't been found yet, that if it existed it would be on display in a zoo or museum. First, recently, newly described large species of primates have been found, as well as moderately sized marsupials, and a cow... a rabbit... lots of "larger" species are "discovered" all the time. It's not unreasonable that undescribed primates are out there. It's actually a 100% fact. Gorillas *were* discovered relatively recently. The more intelligent, the more likely that they can stay hidden. Also, for conservation reasons, if there is such a small population... if someone's found one, it won't be on display. In fact, someone probably has and we just don't know. If they had half a brain they would want to protect them and we'd never know where it was found or that it was found at all. Otherwise people would be out there hunting for trophies and the population would be extinct in days.




new topics
top topics
 
88
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join