137 replies to this topic

[Night Walker]

Rafterman, on 08 October 2012 - 11:20 PM, said:

Here's the problem - these things are seen everywhere, especially all over North America.  To have stable breeding populations in all of these locations, there would need to be thousands of them.  They simply couldn't hide.

A bigger problem is the culture of storytelling and fakery (you know, the ones that call it "research") that has built up around the Bigfoot legend. If Bigfoot is real then why are so many people mistaken or faking it? Do people really believe that Finding Bigfoot is about finding an undiscovered species?

ufonuts, on 09 October 2012 - 03:00 AM, said:

I effin Love Bigfoot! Of all the sightings and reports, never has any Bigfoot attacked a Human! There is something to this allrighty!

1892 Bauman Bigfoot - "Evidently unheard, it reached the man, and broke his neck by wrenching his head back with its fore paws, while it buried its teeth in his throat."

1924 I FOUGHT THE APEMEN OF MOUNT ST. HELENS

Mid-late 1970s Bigfoot Attack and Government Coverup - "a Bigfoot creature had gone through the day before and had torn up the campground; had overturned a "large" trash container that no man can even begin to move and had killed several people."

2009 Yowie Attacks Researcher - "It didn't even stop to check me out - started right into attack mode from the second it saw me."

2011 Bigfoot Attack Prompts Man to Build Flamethrower - "As it held him down, he realized that his assailant was none other than Bigfoot himself."

When Bigfoot Attacks

[justcalmebubba]

okay since its getting to be  the winter months here in the us of a  what say  sum of us throw it up to the wind and get togeather and go hunt down this beasty in the verises parts of the country say groups of 10 maybe let make this instresting first team to capture a big foot dead or alive  to have all proof and braging rights (straping on knee high snake bite boots )   now out of the 10 peeps  in search of this beasty  have 3 who's soul purpous is to film and video all persons and actions  1 cook  and 1 mapper the rest is for the hunt or sumthing like that and we gona need a sponcer  cause im not paying  for any one elses but my part we all have got to come togeather and put an end to this ledgon once and for all  okay whos with me?..((grabing up  my lock box of rifles an ammo boxes   tossing them over in the bed of the old 4x4))   okay so maybe i'lll buy the first case of mre's

[QuiteContrary]

Night Walker, on 09 October 2012 - 05:41 AM, said:

2009 Yowie Attacks Researcher - "It didn't even stop to check me out - started right into attack mode from the second it saw me."

So, there are areas in Australia where you can walk about and practically trip over these things. Yet no evidence to date?

Edited by QuiteContrary, 09 October 2012 - 06:09 AM.

[Bionic Bigfoot]

I'm actually quite surprised to read so many skeptical comments on a board about the unexplained.  I figured that the majority of members would be more open minded to the possibilties of the unknown.  Just because there is a lack of physical evidence of something, truly doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  I don't know how many of the members here believe in God or not, but if you do, then you are believing in an entity that offers no physical proof of existing whatsoever.

However, some of you have given great comments and feedback and I thank you for them.   The topic of this post and its intial story isn't remarkable by any means, certainly not a ground shaking story, but it is current and somewhat interesting.   The subject as a whole IS very interesting though and if you dig deep enough, weed out the lies, fakes and hoaxes, you can still find cases that defy explanation.  

[Night Walker]

QuiteContrary, on 09 October 2012 - 06:06 AM, said:

So, there are areas in Australia where you can walk about and practically trip over these things. Yet no evidence to date?

But there IS evidence of this "attack" - bruises which do not match the description of the "attack" and which aged in record time, plus a Yowie footprint cast that matches his own foot...

Bionic Bigfoot, on 09 October 2012 - 06:21 AM, said:

I'm actually quite surprised to read so many skeptical comments on a board about the unexplained. I figured that the majority of members would be more open minded to the possibilties of the unknown.

Is pointing out the long and ongoing history of Bigfoot storytelling and fakery being skeptical or realistic? I'm so open-minded about Bigfoot that I search for it myself - want to go bushwalking after dark in dangerous Yowie territory? They can rip your head off, you know...

However, having a mind open to the possibilities shouldn't mean turning a blind eye to what is actually going on with the Bigfoot phenomenon...

[Bionic Bigfoot]

Night Walker, on 09 October 2012 - 06:46 AM, said:

Is pointing out the long and ongoing history of Bigfoot storytelling and fakery being skeptical or realistic? I'm so open-minded about Bigfoot that I search for it myself - want to go bushwalking after dark in dangerous Yowie territory? They can rip your head off, you know...

Not at all, of course not.

Quote

However, having a mind open to the possibilities shouldn't mean turning a blind eye to what is actually going on with the Bigfoot phenomenon...

I agree and you don't have to convince me so I'm not sure what you're getting at by quoting me.

[Night Walker]

Bionic Bigfoot, on 09 October 2012 - 06:56 AM, said:

I agree and you don't have to convince me so I'm not sure what you're getting at by quoting me.

Relax. Just making conversation...

[justcalmebubba]

well 1 thing is for shure.....no one will ever know if they just stay inside and on the computer  youve got to get out and explore the unknown

[Kasou]

lool bigfoot the "missin link" the "experimental alien product dropd on earth, and my personal favorite, the "man in a harry suit, gettin hit by a damn car!! trynna fool ppl!!"

[Neognosis]

Quote

I noted that you said Modern, since there have been several bigfoot sized stone tools found in various parts of the US that are crude and very old, but not pre-homo sapiens.

Do you have a source for this?

Quote

How would bone fragments with gnaw marks on them be IDed as ape gnawed?

I don't know, I'm not an anthropologist. I imagine that they would make those determinations the same way that they have determined that prehistoric homo species ate meat, based on the gnawed bones that they have found when excavating certain sites. Oh, and then there's that theory that at least some neanderthals were cannibalistic, based on the neanderthal bones that seem to be gnawed by other neanderthals....

So, I imagine that a species of giant ape that was eating meat would have to leave something behind. Yet nothing has ever been found. Ever. We have found the remains of things eaten by species that have disappeared tens of thousands of years ago, but nothing from a current giant ape species?

Quote

I've seen many gnawed bones in the woods and most that were even a couple years old were impossible to tell what gnawed them.

Probably because you don't have the training and experience that trained anthropologists and other such "ologists" have, I would imagine.

Quote

We know that whales have culture, but they don't make art, or tools, or anything lasting.

We're using a loose definition of culture here. But whales do pass songs back and forth from one generation to another, so I'll give that to you. But the problem with your statement is that it is this whale "culture" that has, in part, allowed man to hunt them so successfully and to document their existence. Not to mention all the other things whales do, like eat things and die and leave corpses that other things eat. Which bigfoot doesn't do, because whales are real and there is no evidence that bigfoot is real.

Whales also don't have  thumbs, and that is why they don't make things. Does bigfoot not have thumbs? I suppose you could claim he doesn't, as he is imaginary and can have whatever characteristics we want.

[Neognosis]

Quote

I figured that the majority of members would be more open minded to the possibilties of the unknown.

Open minded means considering all the evidence and possibilities.... but that includes the likely possibility that bigfoot is not real.

At some point, denying facts to continue to defend a belief has to be considered closed minded too, I think.

[Bionic Bigfoot]

Neognosis, on 09 October 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

Open minded means considering all the evidence and possibilities.... but that includes the likely possibility that bigfoot is not real.

At some point, denying facts to continue to defend a belief has to be considered closed minded too, I think.

I know and agree and I've considered lots of the theories on why such a creature COULDN'T exist.  If you research the topic of bigfoot long and thoroughly enough, listen to the very many credible eye witness testimonials, some of the photographic and video evidence, the tracks found (often in the middle of nowhere) etc., these things seems to constitute more proof than not.

Common sense and rational weighing of evidence sometimes goes a LOT further than scientific evidence or lack of.   I have known some really smart people in the various science fields, and yet, they wouldn't be able to figure out how to operate a microwave.

[Neognosis]

Quote

these things seems to constitute more proof than not.

Not if you are open minded.

Quote

Common sense and rational weighing of evidence

But.... there is no evidence, and common sense tells you that bigfoot isn't real though....

I'm sorry, this just is how it is.

[Bionic Bigfoot]

There is plenty of evidence, maybe not the evidence YOU want or need.    There are videos, pictures, tracks, sounds, all physical things that a creature is present.   Just because we don't have a body in a bag yet, doesn't mean it's not real.  At one time scientists didn't believe there was anything smaller than the atom. The instruments needed to see subatomic particles hadn't been invented when this idea was believed.

[Neognosis]

No, I'm very sorry, there is not evidence. Evidence has a definition. You really shouldn't apply the word "evidence" to whatever you think is appropriate.

Videos and pictures are not evidence. Well, they are, but not of bigfoot. Neither are "tracks" or sounds. They are not evidence of bigfoot. You are making a big mistake when you classify these things as evidence for bigfoot.

Quote

At one time scientists didn't believe there was anything smaller than the atom. The instruments needed to see subatomic particles hadn't been invented when this idea was believed.

This does not apply to bigfoot in any way whatsoever though.

And it's not JUST that we don't have a body in a bag yet (nor ever will), it is that bigfoot violates some of the most fundamental rules that nature has set up for us. As well as the complete lack of an ecological footprint.
My position that the existence of bigfoot is virtually impossible is based in hard science, your position is based on eyewitness reports.

I go with the science.