Are we closing in on Bigfoot?

[Jeff Albertson]

W ell, that's what I'm saying. However, we first must establish they are real and where their DNA places them on the evolutionary line. Are they humans or are they apes? Keep in mind that a Chimpanzee shares 98% of our DNA and Mountain Gorillas 97%. Also keep in mind that it took three separate expeditions to "discover" the Mountain Gorillas with local guides who knew where they lived.

Yeah, I know I sound like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth on Bigfoot but some thing relate in a left handed sort of way.

No I don't beleive that you are talking out of both sides of your moth, you are just rational and keeping a open mind on the subject a hand. That is intresting say after we have confirmed DNA evidence (If bigfoot real) and using cladistics and phylogentic to determine that we are dealing with. Do you think then a clear picture would confience people, also do you think people would be more open minded to the patterson fim? Great reson for using disscusion boards you can be open to new idea and views.

[keninsc]

I still can't make up my mind on whether the PG film is real or not, every attempt to clear it up, stabilize it, apply science to it just opens up more questions or more fuel on the fire of uncertainty. I will say, this was the first film ever shot of one and it's the best quality of anything else out there and it creates more questions than it answers, so all these fuzzy "Blobsquatch" videos don't do much for me really.

[Jeff Albertson]

I"Blobsquatch" videos don't do much for me really.

I agree the patterson film is intresting but roger patterson did relase a book "Do ambomible snow man exist in america" that has a drawing in it that lok exactly like patty in it, that is a big res flag for me. Bill munns does some intresting work but the book makes me skeptical of it. In regards to blob squatches I think they are a just a joke they should never be released they ad nothing in determining if bigfoot is real or that he does not exist. All they do is make more likely that bigfoot does not exist do to lack of photo when app;ying the Null Hypothesis (HO).

http://themunnsreport.com

[evancj]

W ell, that's what I'm saying. However, we first must establish they are real and where their DNA places them on the evolutionary line. Are they humans or are they apes? Keep in mind that a Chimpanzee shares 98% of our DNA and Mountain Gorillas 97%. Also keep in mind that it took three separate expeditions to "discover" the Mountain Gorillas with local guides who knew where they lived.

Yeah, I know I sound like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth on Bigfoot but some thing relate in a left handed sort of way.

Not true keninsc,

The mountain gorilla was discovered by chance in 1902 when a German soldier machine gunned a couple of them while on patrol. It was not identified as a new subspecies until after it was studied by scientists in Germany.

Edited December 11, 2012 by evancj

[Insanity]

Not true keninsc,

The mountain gorilla was discovered by chance in 1902 when a German soldier machine gunned a couple of them while on patrol. It was not identified as a new subspecies until after it was studied by scientists in Germany.

The western gorilla were first described by Thomas Savage and Jefferies Wyman in 1847 from specimens obtained in Liberia. Paul du Chailu was the first westerner to see a live gorilla around 1856 to 1859, in Africa, and brought dead specimens to England in 1861.

The mountain gorilla were discovered in 1902 by Friederich Robert von Beringe, and described as a separate species from the western gorilla. Seems his purpose of being in German East Africa was to visit German outposts, to keep in touch with local chiefs and maintain good relations with them.

Gorillas were certainly known before the 20th century, but the mountain gorilla was a new species.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Insanity

[Dontlisten2me]

Other cryptic animals would have to be true since there's the same evidence accept plaster cast foot prints and maybe DNA. I think but I'm unsure if there's evidence other then word of mouth for another cryptic. What about ghosts?

[keninsc]

.....and it never occurred to you that they were found in the Burundia Region of the Congo......a fer piece from Liberia?

*I have no idea how to spell Burrundia and I'm too lazy to look it up*

Edited December 11, 2012 by keninsc

[keninsc]

Other cryptic animals would have to be true since there's the same evidence accept plaster cast foot prints and maybe DNA. I think but I'm unsure if there's evidence other then word of mouth for another cryptic. What about ghosts?

Personally, I don't really care about ghosts, however we have an entire section devoted to them. Feel free.

[Jeff Albertson]

Other cryptic animals would have to be true since there's the same evidence accept plaster cast foot prints and maybe DNA. I think but I'm unsure if there's evidence other then word of mouth for another cryptic. What about ghosts?

I fail to see how this is true. First I can't think of another cryptid who DNA has been recovered.There is a lot of anedotale, evidence for other cryptids but this is far from being Imperical evidence to prove they are real.Even if the DNA is proving to be from bigfoot that does not make the cast real.

[keninsc]

Once you establish it's a real creature then it isn't a cryptid any more, it's a real creature that requires real scientist with real degrees to study them.

[Bluenose Bulwark]

If there's 1 cryptid I believe exists it's Bigfoot. So many cultures have stories about them that are identical (almost).

As we've evolved we have lost most of our animal abilities (hearing, scent, etc) because we haven't needed them. Now imagine a near human-like intelligence on a creature who still has these attributes.

Some people can detect minor electrical fields...similar to walking into a house and sensing a TV is one even if it's on mute. Why couldn't a more primitive creature detect a trap camera, especially since it would have a scent (plastic and human) on it?

I could go on and on, but I won't.

[evancj]

No. If anything we closing in on showing bigfoot is just a myth.

How long can believers go on believing with absolutely nothing believable to base their belief on?

Eventually people are going realize all this was much ado about nothing...aren't they?

[Dontlisten2me]

Personally, I don't really care about ghosts, however we have an entire section devoted to them. Feel free.

I don't either. But George Washington of all people communicated with one during the Revolutionary War. There's a problem with Ghosts and it's the same as Bigfoot and cryptic animals. Ghost fall into religion too just like Bigfoot and cryptic animals.

Edited December 11, 2012 by kampz

[keninsc]

Yeah, there are times I feel so convoluted on the subject I feel like a spiral staircase.

I've wondered myself why we haven't seen more or rather better images, but that's part of the lore I suppose. I recall hearing an Indian, excuse me Native American, talk about the lore of his tribe and he said they believed they could hide themselves so well, like become unseen by humans, no to be confused with invisible. He said they could be standing right in front of you and you'd not see them. Just find footprint later after they left. Which I find a little creepy, but it's NA lore, so there it is.

[keninsc]

I don't either. But George Washington of all people communicated with one during the Revolutionary War. There's a problem with Ghosts and it's the same as Bigfoot and cryptic animals. Ghost fall into religion too just like Bigfoot and cryptic animals.

So did Jesus, Mohammad, Moses and the Buddha. Was it a ghost or a vision? Or something else completely? Although I'm not aware of anyone worshiping Bigfoot.....or Washington come to think of it.

[evancj]

I don't either. But George Washington of all people communicated with one during the Revolutionary War. There's a problem with Ghosts and it's the same as Bigfoot and cryptic animals. Ghost fall into religion too just like Bigfoot and cryptic animals.

Very interesting statement kampz. Can you elaborate on the religious/cryptid link?

[keninsc]

No. If anything we closing in on showing bigfoot is just a myth.

How long can believers go on believing with absolutely nothing believable to base their belief on?

Eventually people are going realize all this was much ado about nothing...aren't they?

I see no harm in looking so long as it doesn't become an obsession. I happen to like being out in the woods myself, hiking and camping and all that so while I'm out I might as well do a bit of looking for old Sasquatch, after all the time is mine to waste.

[Jeff Albertson]

Still waiting for evidence to prove that Bigfoot doesn't exist but also still waiting for evidence to proof he exist to though. This is what science (to seek the truth) is all about. Aristolotle said it best "All men by nature have a disere to know."

[Dontlisten2me]

Very interesting statement kampz. Can you elaborate on the religious/cryptid link?

Ancient Sumer and Native American Lore.

Ghosts and Spirits like the spirit of God is all over religion.

Bigfoot and spirits actually seem to be apart of there everyday lives especially Native Americans.

Edited December 11, 2012 by kampz

[Insanity]

.....and it never occurred to you that they were found in the Burundia Region of the Congo......a fer piece from Liberia?

*I have no idea how to spell Burrundia and I'm too lazy to look it up*

The western gorilla specimens were from Liberia, the mountain gorilla specimens were in Rwanda, or nearby, which is bordered by Burundi.

Regardless, both were known to the locals for sometime prior to westerners documenting them.

[evancj]

Ancient Sumer and Native American Lore.

Ghosts and Spirits like the spirit of God is all over religion.

Bigfoot and spirits actually seem to be apart of there everyday lives especially Native Americans.

Do you think that religious people are more likely to believe in cryptids like bigfoot than non religious people?

[evancj]

I see no harm in looking so long as it doesn't become an obsession. I happen to like being out in the woods myself, hiking and camping and all that so while I'm out I might as well do a bit of looking for old Sasquatch, after all the time is mine to waste.

Oh, I love the wilderness and spend any free time I have hiking fishing and camping. While I do find bigfoot very interesting, I find real animals and plants more so.

[keninsc]

Oh, I love the wilderness and spend any free time I have hiking fishing and camping. While I do find bigfoot very interesting, I find real animals and plants more so.

Well, true. You can't discount them either.

[evancj]

I must admit I do find myself looking for any sign of the big guy some times.

[scowl]

I must admit I do find myself looking for any sign of the big guy some times.

The big guy I look out for is the bear. Just this summer I was hiking with someone up a hill. When we looked back down, there was a bear crossing the trail where we had been a couple of minutes earlier. We have no idea where that huge guy had been hiding. Yikes!