Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

US Army WTF Moments-Sasquatch

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by boomer135
 


As I have no personal experience seeing wildmen (other than hairy reg humans) in the woods, I remain open to the possibility they don't exist.

However, after a few in-depth talks with some serious anthropologists, I was surprised to learn many (repeat many, not all or most) take their existence as a matter of fact.

Apparently, at the U of A, for instance, there is a drawer with casts that sport dermal ridges, callouses and injury along with hair that comes up as "mostly human" but still "inconclusive" in dna tests. It's human dna, or at least so close that without a body it still falls in the realm of possible human.

Nests, or beds have, indeed, been found on numerous occasions, along with scat and even tools of a sort but what proof does that offer?

The individuals I spoke with were reluctant to discuss it because they felt that the ridicule factor was "preferably avoidable" but mostly because the Sasquatches seemed intelligent and thus, human, and should be left the heck alone.

Maybe there was more to the story as to why it was so hush-hush, but I dunno.

I should add the Dr. I spoke with (as opposed to the grad students) had a distinct sighting and had no hesitation in calling what he saw a previously unknown hominid... of immense proportions... for what it's worth. I believed he believed it.

But those guys with degrees aside, the thousands of reports taken as a whole and the public evidence should make the case that it is at least possible, even with the paucity of concrete evidence.




posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Druscilla
 


Well by god, color me a mouth-breather.


Seriously, that post was insulting to a large number of people.
Well done.

I am also of the opinion that Sasquatch could be real.
My sighting was extraordinary. But I do leave plenty of room that my eyes were deceived. Regardless, an awful lot of people report seeing them.

I certainly wouldn't call such people idiots.


Not idiots but either mistaken or uneducated.


Or accurately reporting what they saw. We simply can't say for sure that they are wrong, and the presence or or lack of education is at best of secondary relevance to the accuracy of their perception and description. There are highly-educated people who can't describe simple scenes, and illiterate people with nearly perfect memory and sharp perceptions.




There is no evidence to support Sasquatch in the fossil record ( Gigantopithecus does not count. It lived half way around the world in tropical southeast Asia and has been extinct for hundreds of thousands of years.)


Which establishes noting either way.




All of the worlds primates originated from tropical climates. Temperate forests such as the Pacific northwest are a much more hostile climate than some believe which is why bears hibernate through the winter.


And the Arctic is more hostile yet. Polar bears thrive there. Temperate forest can and do sustain large creatures in the winter, of various sorts, who do so by various means.




Nearly every square foot of forest has been harvested at some point, often twice in the last 150 years. The few stands of old growth left see more visitors than anywhere.The mountains are crawling with people year round yet nobody has ever found a single bone, scat pile or den as evidence.


Some parts are, some parts are hardly visited.




No roadkill, ever. Because there are people literally everywhere there are roads everywhere.


Except in those regions where there aren't many people, and not many roads, and there are quite a few such regions. North America is much more sparsely populated than is widely realized, esp. west of the Mississippi, and it's simply untrue to say that people are common everywhere.




The data that has been entered into the record supports misidentification and hoaxes. The best piece of photographic record, the Patterson Gimlin film is even an admitted hoax from both the guy that made the suit and the guy that wore it.


Of course, it's also true that the veracity of the 'hoax' claim is in doubt. Just as believers tend to leave out the fact that the hoax claim exists, doubters tend to overlook the fact that the hoax claim is shaky.

The original document very probably is a joke. That doesn't change the fact that the question of the existence of Sasquatch remains unsettled.





new topics
 
23
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join