Bigfoot ATS members thoughts and comments. What have we learned?

This is probably one of the most "change my mind, not sure. WTW!! Just can't make my mind up!! Of all things (UFO'S included) I've thought and read about since ..well I read, and heard about it. Bigfoot.

You are reading this now because you feel the same way. Or not (It's just a rock)

Let us use this thread to put to rest once and for all how we really feel about this "bigfoot", thing.

What is the best proof. Why is that not proof. No body no bigfoot!! Thousands of sightings are all wrong. It's a bear. It's a book deal. It's a TV show.

My oh my.

Bring to this thread all you have. Or just say what you think.

Link pictures and stories or anything that proves or not ..Bigfoot.

It seems Les Stroud, Survivorman , has only made it harder lol!!

He is not even sure. Was he hoaxed ??

Put your best forward here ..

Caught on film over 40 years ago, the Patterson-Gimlin footage is the most important piece of evidence of Bigfoot in history. Is it real? According to Bob Gimlin, the footage is real and the creature is real -- and these apes exists.

bigfootevidence.blogspot.com...

I'd love him to exist but my boring sensible side tells me he's not.

Anyhow here's a link to Thinker Thunker's youtube page.
He goes into depth on a few bigfoot video's

i believe there are 'bigfoots'. totally.

but i have yet to see the video or photographic evidence of such that would settle the matter once and for all.

Check this video from 24:24 min.

Quite convincing, a good hoax?
Or the real thing?


What say you ATS?

If ATS has taught me anything over the past 7 + years its to keep an open mind no matter what.

I haven't seen anything yet that convinces me 100% that the Big guy is out there but that does nothing to persuade me that it and family don't exist.


For those who are interested, I posted a few thoughts on the subject here

Bigfoot/Sasquatch Fact or Fiction?

What have we learned?

Apparently he plays hide and seek better than Osama bin laden.

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

I think its rather funny.

So a shaking camera, with close up fur dangling in front of it, with sniffing sounds, and at the end some kind of wild pig sound = bigfoot?

This is actually a pretty bad hoax...i mean...bad.

Edit

Sorry I can't prove it is fake, but in my opinion it is simply what i said above. Some dangling fur in front of the camera and making noises. OR it could actually be a wild pig.

Well, my case is a Class A with Big Foot
My Sighting Report with BRFO

It was amazing and not my idea of something I would see out in the snowy evening (gray clouded snow sky toward evening) hunting deer. I also had one in our hunting camp in Georgia just outside of Way cross, Ga. The DNR later cast a foot print of the 'skunk ape', which they call it down South here. I never in my life saw a bunch of brave hunters who hunted bear, hogs, etc. be scared of this thing. They left the woods for camp at 4:00 every day and thought we were crazy for staying for dusk. I did hear the thing and it was too close for comfort. I wasn't too worried because I was well armed, although it would be the last of things I wanted to do. The scream - howl was deafening and scary. It shook me up a little because I have been hunting down here in Florida, Georgia and South Carolina since I was 13 and I never came across one that agitated. In Colorado the DNR listed the ape as an Endangered Species. However, If that thing came after me, as they have other hunters, i would take the penalty because it is fast enough to take me if it desired to. It is too fast for me. It catches livestock and wild animals such as deer. I don't have a chance of catching a deer!

Well, that is two of my experiences. I know people don't believe they exist, but I know for a fact they do. I have seen them person to hybrid. They are smart and I suspect they don't like people. People disturb their homeland, shoot at them, hurt them, and for no reason. I don't feel that they feel we are a harmless species and are rather dangerous in ourselves. I often wanted to meet them and talk or communicate with them. Maybe some time in the future. Until then they seem a little dangerous to approach. Maybe I am wrong, but that is my experience. Of course if someone was shooting at me, I would be hostile as well.

a reply to: RUFFREADY

HI there Ruffready. This is my all time favourite bigfoot/dog-head/weird bloke in an even weirder suit-photo, and it creeps me out! I keep posting it here on ATS, I'll need to stop, but I don't think it's been explained as a fake:



The Beast of 7 Chutes

a reply to: RUFFREADY

Dermal ridges on many of the footprints

Native American accounts told by every tribe.
Some say that Sasquatch is another tribe indian.
Cannabalistic wildmen.
Others refer to them as hairy devils of the mountains.

The Patty film never proven to be a hoax after
almost fifty years even under the scrutiny of
todays technology. And in most cases turning up
more evidence that it isn't a hoax.

And thousands of eyewitness reports by some
very credible people reaching back to the first
settlers.

By this I believe there is something out there.
But it obviously isn't an ape. The fact it can avoid
detection is a sign of intellect beyond a simple minded
ape. They aren't stupid by a damn site.

SnF

It is important to remember that no evidence, aside from a body on a slab or in a cage, will settle this issue. There will always be doubts about any footprint, video, still image, audio recording, hair sample that is only analyzed morphologically, etc. I contend that even a DNA sample will not prove the existence of bigfoot unless there is an accompanying body. This is because if one gets a novel DNA sequence there is no way to tell what the animal it came from actually looks like. You could determine certain things from the DNA, I mean you would know it was a primate, and could even tell that it was an undocumented primate, but that doesn't prove the existence of bigfoot. Then there is also the possibility of the sample being an isolated incident, which means the following: the sample could be used up in initial testing.

This is a huge problem because other scientists will want to try to duplicate the results. They will attack the person's methodology and techniques, and could claim all types of things. It takes multiple independent sources confirming the same thing to establish something scientifically in most instances. DNA is a little bit different because to my knowledge it would be impossible to fabricate a novel DNA sequence, but perhaps I am wrong and it is possible. This would just add more problems to proving the existence of bigfoot.

Some of the claims of a bigfoot body being discovered have occurred far into wooded terrain. There is a huge logistical problem with retrieving an intact sasquatch body from their native habitat. They tend to live in areas that are not frequently or even easily accessed by humans, and many sightings occur where human civilization meets the wild expanses of inaccessible terrain. In the Pacific North West especially, there are human settlements in areas that are, overall, considered remote due to their terrain and the foliage and whatnot. Or to put it another way, settlements were often established in prime locations, while the surrounding areas were a bit more "wild." My point is that bigfoot doesn't tend to gather around human settlements, unless those settlements are smack in the middle of prime habitat.

There are many other things to consider, and I have my own hypothesis about a sasquatch population that is quickly on the rise, and has been for centuries. Sightings will increase, and so will the likelihood of their discovery. Anyway what I was saying earlier was that it is hard to move such a large body. And a dead body will not last very long in the wilderness, especially in the acidic soil of the PNW, where the greatest concentration of bigfoot within the United States is located. I had my sighting in Texas, in the Sam Houston National Forest, and even though the surrounding areas I would not consider "remote," the whole of the forest is relatively remote, with tall pine trees for many miles. A sasquatch could probably move huge distances without ever crossing a human habitation if it was so inclined. There are these highways of forests all over the US, and they are likely used by bigfoot, who tend to stay in the safety and cover of this foliage.

I postulate that their first line of defense is just staying away from people. Why the stay away from people I do not know, but it probably has a lot to do with instinct. This is not unheard of in wild animals at all, although bigfoot have more intelligence than any other wild mammal in North America, or the world, aside from humans of course. Their second line of defense is to stay hidden. They prefer the forests because that is where they live, and they are adept in this environment. They are aware. They can easily get away from people in such an environment. Whether they are naturally inclined for forest living, or whether they live in forests because of the safety or food sources offered I do not know. Probably a bit of both.

Their next line of defense comes from the terrain itself. Sighting reports sometimes detail sasquatch who are fleeing from humans will take unexpected tacks or lines, possibly moving up steep inclines or rocky slopes, while a much easier path would seem to make more sense to us. So apparently it would seem they know it is difficult to follow such terrain, and choose these routes for tactical reasons. I understand that you were asking for something different in this thread, but I just want to point out that any understanding that one wishes to gain about why bigfoot has remained undocumented must be preceded by an understanding of the nature of the animals themselves. They are not normal in the sense we think of most animals. We think of most animals as being beneath ourselves as far as intelligence and other things, but this assumption is partly why bigfoot has remained undocumented.

Then there are the faults of science in general. Scientists have made no well-funded or concerted effort to make any form of contact with a bigfoot, or find evidence of any kind. The two scientific studies that have been done were only done on tissue and hair samples sent in by random people, thus there was no scientific control or chain of evidence. These studies were flawed for a variety of reasons, and only served for these scientists to claim that science was not ignoring the possibility of bigfoot. But they definitely are. Take a scientist who has used their area of expertise to analyze the bigfoot problem, Dr. Meldrum, and he has studied the sasquatch foot by analyzing hundreds of footprint casts. He has determined that the possibility of all these tracks being faked is zero. It just wouldn't happen. This is not because of the sheer number of tracks, although that does make a hoax much less likely, but rather has to do with the morphology of the foot itself.

Graphing the measurements of the tracks that have been discovered in North America yields an interesting result, which is a curve on the graph that would be expected if one were truly looking at an animal population. And these tracks are much larger than a human footprint. But the most telling evidence comes from the minute characteristics found on many tracks. Things that would be next to impossible to fake, and would require such an understanding of the anatomy of the foot to make the idea preposterous. If someone were to make a copy of their foot, then somehow blow it up to massive proportions, even this would not account for what is seen in many sasquatch tracks. There are some peculiar things about them, and about the structure of their foot in general, which would make sense for an animal living the type of life they live, and who must carry around so much weight. It would not be structured like the human foot. I urge anyone interested in sasquatch to check out the scientific work that has been done in this regard.

I could go on all day about bigfoot to be honest. There is so much information that I think everyone should know, and I can only briefly touch on a portion of these aspects in this thread. I will say this: even if I had not had my own encounter, I would be leaning towards the existence of bigfoot. There is too much unique evidence that points to a new species of primate living in the forests of North America to simply ignore it, or to account for it by hoaxes and misidentifications. The sighting record is a valuable form of evidence, but other areas, some of which I mentioned, offer the best scientific evidence for the likelihood of bigfoot. But we need a body.

a reply to: Walkingsenseless

I found it quite interesting, personally. Could it be faked? Of course. But if it's not fake, it's definitely not a wild pig, as you can hear it when it's walking, and it's definitely bipedal as you can hear the footsteps of 2 legs, not 4. The grunts that are being made are also extremely deep and guttural, and if it's real, whatever is making those sounds is huge. I'm not vouching for the authenticity of the video, merely stating that if it wasn't faked, that is definitely not a pig making those sounds.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
If ATS has taught me anything over the past 7 + years its to keep an open mind no matter what.

I haven't seen anything yet that convinces me 100% that the Big guy is out there but that does nothing to persuade me that it and family don't exist.


For those who are interested, I posted a few thoughts on the subject here

Bigfoot/Sasquatch Fact or Fiction?

I know right mighty Slayer69 !! your link is nice..But we don't need no links without thoughts on said links..duh??

I want (we want) ATS members thoughts and ..yes "links", that convince them that Bigfoot is real or not.

Or ATS members frustrations with the whole mess.

If we all do a little searching we know that this has been going on for a really long time (Indian legends etc.) and why is that??

Why ?? Is everybody that makes reports looking for a prize?? We love to here and watch about bigfoot..Why??

originally posted by: beansidhe
a reply to: RUFFREADY

HI there Ruffready. This is my all time favourite bigfoot/dog-head/weird bloke in an even weirder suit-photo, and it creeps me out! I keep posting it here on ATS, I'll need to stop, but I don't think it's been explained as a fake:

The Beast of 7 Chutes

Hhahaha!! Hi there to you too!!

I read and study all I could on that picture awhile back. I learned nothing!! Hahahaha!! back to WTW!!

That is a good example of why we keep going for this subject!! Why not wait for the "breaking news", that says..we found bigfoot (or dogman) why do we keep getting sucked in???

a reply to: DeadSeraph

valid point

I would love for bigfoot to exist. It is one area where I find myself more willing to ignore the lack real evidence and allow that maybe just maybe somehow they do exist.

originally posted by: Walkingsenseless
a reply to: DeadSeraph

valid point

What the heck is going on then ?? That is what I'm all about!! Why do we keep watching these shows (finding bigfoot) and following the trails that take us no where >> ?? cause it's fun?? because maybe we will see a bigfoot??

If a real bigfoot is seen or whatever..won't it be on CNN ?? FOX ?? MSNBC?? BBC??

What are we doing??

Proof he exists.

I have no more experience about the subject, than many others on ATS. All we can do is look at the information presented, and try to make an objective opinion.
Which of course is difficult, without clear evidence....So it is only an opinion.
I have read a little recently about our own Yowie. How truck drivers travelling thru thick forest area in New South Wales, and stop to change a tyre or something at night, and are bombarded by large rocks just flying from nowhere......similar to many USA bigfoot encounters.....Or a lady who lives near scrub, after hearing her dog wildly barking, opens a window and can hear a gutteral, "Talking" in non human fashion, between several "creatures"...and when shining a bright light in that direction, sees several pairs of glowing redish eyes (like many animal when hit by bright lights), but when the height is estimated next to a tree, they are 8-9 feet above the ground.
Many stories of the Russian Almasty, which has been proven to exist (Zana), and has ancient DNA connection to early man.

Put it this way....if some Alien species was given 2 hair samples......One of a Chimpanzee and one of a modern human, BUT was Not told that one is an ape and one is a human....
Upon their DNA testing, and with no genetic background to compare, they would conclude that the 2 hair sample's DNA are within 98+% of being a match, so it would be logical to assume they are of the same type of creature.
In the opinion of some Alien race, who does not know Earthlings.
But we know we are different to apes...arent We?
So how much different would the Bigfoot be??

I do believe they are very intelligent, obviously, ...I believe they have a language, Beliefs, bury their dead etc but are generally pacifists, and know of Humans aggression and technology....I believe the DO live either in cave systems And/Or have secret openings to subterranean tunnels, maybe even cities, carved out of natural rock, by nature or Bigfoot.
I believe we underestimate them, which is to their advantage.
To remain relatively unscathed by modern humans is to their credit...Remember, we are still finding lost tribes of Aztec/Inca type people in the jungles of Brazil and headhunters in PNG, even today...not to mention that tribe of ancient Africans near India who kill any modern people that set foot on their island.

So if Bigfoot maintains a small sustainable population, is self sufficient, is intelligent.......then I have no problem with the fact that we cant find them.........Heaven help us if they become aggressive and make war with modern man.

I wonder what happened with that footage recently on ATS, about the large BF stepping down a ditch and disappearing?
Just my thoughts on the subject.

I go out in the woods looking for Sasquatch. I have found track lines, seen hairs, heard wood knocks, whistles, yells and clicks. I think they are real. There is even a full DNA work up from tissue and hair. Why don't people want to believe they exist? Mainly because they haven't caught one. Man is just not willing to believe there is an animal out there that can outsmart him. They can't conceive of an animal that can be huge, agile, wily, and capable of moving quietly. Less that a century ago we couldn't believe man could flly, walk on the moon, talk to the whole world on computer, etc. So, if you don't want to adventure into the woods, check it out yourself, or just stick you neck out and believe you'll just have to wait for a body.