Didya See That Posted March 9, 2015 #1 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Reading over some of the recent Bigfoot threads on this site brings up many questions and thoughts. First off let me explain that I like facts and logic even though I joke a lot, but I like to think I am an open minded person about things. Whenever I read stories about Bigfoot they throw around terms like “credible witness(es)” and “proof”. To be honest, I would have to see one dead or alive to believe that such a creature could exist. Question: If “credible witnesses” and all the stories, pictures and videos have any truth to them, why does physical proof always end up being identified as human or a common animal? My thoughts: If the stories and witness(es) are “credible” and people have seen something, my mind attacks it with logic. The first thing that comes to mind is hoax in most modern reports because most of the newer stuff is a hoax. The only other explanation I can come up with for the sightings, reports and experiences probably sounds crazy also, so I will call my theory “crazy logical”. My crazy theory: The North American Bigfoot is 100% human. Hear me out before you pass judgment on my sanity, humans can have really big feet and can be tall, will explain more as I go along. How to best explain this? Have you ever watched movies and documentaries about Native Americans? If so then you have probably seen that many tribes or bands wore animal skins. For example, the movie Jeremiah Johnson, he is a mountain man that gets a Native American woman as a gift in return for his gifts to the Flathead Chief. Right away the woman makes an animal skin outfit for Jeremiah that when completed covered him from head to toe. Several scenes of the movie after that showing Robert Redford wearing the outfit looks like Bigfoot videos. Wearing such things was not an uncommon practice among Native Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Johnson_%28film%29 Knowing how Native Americans were treated and their lifestyle it does not seem to far fetched to think a few tribes or bands went off the grid and avoid contact with the “civilized world”. Again, I will reference a movie, Last of the Dogmen where the story involves a tribe of Cheyenne living in a remote area of northwest Montana. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_of_the_Dogmen Thinking about the “evidence” people collect around sightings usually turns out to be a common animal to the area or human, if it was a man wearing the skin of a common animal, the test results would make sense and people might actually be seeing a bipedal creature in the wild. Considering that the populations of such tribes or bands would have to be dwindling, the sightings and reports would be also. With the exception of hoaxes, the actual encounters will (if not already) fade away. Footprints, only large footprints seem to draw attention. If they are normal sized they are not even considered as evidence. I know a couple of people that wear size 16 shoes and the shoe stores stock larger and can special order much larger. Many “credible reports” show 14 and 15 inch footprints as being spectacular evidence. Having seen many cast prints people show, some look human while others look ape’ish. The ape looking prints usually look faked (to me). Bones, if you find a grave out in the wilderness with human bones, its just human remains. Human bones are found in the woods all the time. Unidentified human remains get a police investigation, not a crypto zoology report. Abductions, it would not be an uncommon thing for old school Native Americans to grab someone off and on to expand their gene pool. Old school Native Americans had all the right skills to survive under any conditions and could be Ninja enough to be the reason people are seeing something. Just my crazy theory. Been a while since I have posted, been busy with life, looking forward to seeing other people’s replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted March 10, 2015 #2 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I've thought all along that Sasquatch is a human. Perhaps a primitive human relic? Outcast from a primitive society long before modern man stepped onto the continent. Perhaps a being that had afflictions such as Gigantism or Agromegely, and managed to propogate and become a very small race of reclusive gentile giants. I believe their bones have been found and are in plain site. This idea mixed with Native American culture and modern man's obsession with the unknown is why Sasquatch could be a reality. It's actually quite simple and not far fetched at all. At this point maybe they are extinct and gone forever, but I believe they were here and still could be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisperer Posted March 10, 2015 #3 Share Posted March 10, 2015 It would be interesting to map out where any and all sightings have been consistently reported the most then draw an area that would encompass a probable habitat zone then seek to determine if there is something there that could give cause to scare off travelers in order to keep them out of said zones...its an idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted March 10, 2015 #4 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) It would be interesting to map out where any and all sightings have been consistently reported the most then draw an area that would encompass a probable habitat zone then seek to determine if there is something there that could give cause to scare off travelers in order to keep them out of said zones...its an idea... It has been done many times over. Of course PNW is the hotspot, with green spaces and coridors in between...stretching through the Appalacians. Edited March 10, 2015 by Atuke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted March 10, 2015 #5 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) Edited March 10, 2015 by Atuke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinP Posted March 10, 2015 #6 Share Posted March 10, 2015 A case could be made for that, however the length of arms and legs seems a bit out of proportion, and then there is that foot size and being covered with long hair. There could be a couple different possibilities, but who knows without actually having one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PersonFromPorlock Posted March 11, 2015 #7 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Geez, how about were-bigfoots? Who knows what those country-club Republicans get up to at night? Solves the DNA and missing-body problem all in one go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted March 11, 2015 #8 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I'm convinced any living bigfoot is a hundred percent homo sapien and pays taxes like everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted March 11, 2015 #9 Share Posted March 11, 2015 ...and pays taxes like everyone else. or their parents do 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podo Posted March 11, 2015 #10 Share Posted March 11, 2015 It's an interesting theory, and I'm sure at least some sightings have been attributed to humans wearing big coats, suits, or other disguising clothing. I think it is important to draw the distinction between hoaxers and people being wrong, however. If someone gets into a costume and lurks around in the woods, is seen briefly by someone, that someone DID see something. They're not lying, they're just wrong about what they saw. I think the vast majority of sightings are real things, I just don't think that thing is a Sasquatch. Now, I personally do think that a Sasquatch-like critter could have existed at one time, been entered into native mythology, been passed down, and then eventually adopted by Europeans. That seems possible. Are they still around? I doubt it. I suppose a relic population of something is possible, but I'm not holding my breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lismore Posted March 11, 2015 #11 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Been a while since I have posted, been busy with life, looking forward to seeing other people’s replies. Very interesting post! What about pre-native American humans, driven out of their lands by native Americans and have been hiding off the grid for an extremely long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lismore Posted March 11, 2015 #12 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Perhaps a primitive human relic? The book of Job references people forced to be living 'wild' at the same time as civilisations like Egypt: They were banished from human society, shouted at as if they were thieves. They were forced to live in the dry stream beds, among the rocks and in holes in the ground. They brayed among the bushes and huddled in the undergrowth. What would the descendants of these people be like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenceMinisterMishkin Posted March 12, 2015 #13 Share Posted March 12, 2015 A human in a monkey suit! Yea probably.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted March 12, 2015 #14 Share Posted March 12, 2015 My crazy theory: The North American Bigfoot is 100% human. Hear me out before you pass judgment on my sanity, humans can have really big feet and can be tall, will explain more as I go along. Bigfoot is genetically a human? Sure, I think that is a very real possibility. Maybe the most likely, if we assume BF is real. I've suggested it several times over the years here on UM myself. It could explain why no BF bones are found, since testing and morphology would indicate they are human. It would also explain why there does not appear to be a breeding population. Because they would be breeding with humans. It would explain why they are smart and seem to understand human nature to a large degree. It would also explain the wide range of places that BF has been seen. But, we'd need a real BF corpse or capture in order to prove or disprove this theory. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted March 12, 2015 #15 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Bigfoot is genetically a human? Sure, I think that is a very real possibility. Maybe the most likely, if we assume BF is real. I've suggested it several times over the years here on UM myself. It could explain why no BF bones are found, since testing and morphology would indicate they are human. It would also explain why there does not appear to be a breeding population. Because they would be breeding with humans. It would explain why they are smart and seem to understand human nature to a large degree. It would also explain the wide range of places that BF has been seen. But, we'd need a real BF corpse or capture in order to prove or disprove this theory. Well said. I like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightroamer12 Posted March 12, 2015 #16 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I've often thought that bigfoot is an Native American tribe. If you read the journals of Lewis and Clark the explores, most Indian tribes where not very hairy but some of the wilder tribes had more hair. Take for instance the Cherokee tribe they had very little facial hair, bare chested, but then again the ones Lewis called flat faced Indians where hairy and a little bigger then the Cherokees, combine that with wearing animal skins and maybe you'd have a Sasquatch. Just a theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted March 12, 2015 #17 Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) Bigfoot as human? Hasn't that always been one of the skeptic's arguments? And yes, even confirmed by some Native Americans? What the Yurok/Klamath River Indians called "Devil Indians" or Oh-ma-ha or uma'a were simply real live human Indians who chose to live away from the tribe, in remote seclusion. Occasionally kidnapping Indian women to be their wives, stealing from Indian graves, and practicing "black" magic. They are no more. And thus, possibly assimilated back into tribes or with the white people. Yet referred to as NA "Bigfoot" (haircovered giants) by more modern writers Edited March 12, 2015 by QuiteContrary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HMS Dreadnought Posted March 12, 2015 #18 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Humans in ape suits as deliberate hoaxers, bears as misidentified animals, problem solved 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted March 15, 2015 #19 Share Posted March 15, 2015 It would not shock me at all to know that BF was very closely related to other bipeds, mainly humans. American Indians have been here for 30,000 years. Some tribes have the oral tradition that BF was here before they were. Also, some AI tribes believe that BF is a human, yes. What can I say? American Indians should have much more knowledge on the subject matter than the Johnny-come-lately Euro settlers. They may very well be right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holographic60 Posted March 16, 2015 #20 Share Posted March 16, 2015 (edited) They also believe that he is interdimensional. Didn't get the website, but there was in the news yesterday this article about this guy who was arrested. He was caught pleasuring the local farm animals. To put it politely, if one could... In the article, a Farmer was reported to have stated that one of his Cows was pregnant, though it hadn't been bred with a Bull. Hey, just sayin with regard to the topic. Edited March 16, 2015 by Holographic60 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted March 16, 2015 #21 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted March 16, 2015 #22 Share Posted March 16, 2015 It would not shock me at all to know that BF was very closely related to other bipeds, mainly humans. American Indians have been here for 30,000 years. Some tribes have the oral tradition that BF was here before they were. Also, some AI tribes believe that BF is a human, yes. What can I say? American Indians should have much more knowledge on the subject matter than the Johnny-come-lately Euro settlers. They may very well be right Your sources? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imaginarynumber1 Posted March 16, 2015 #23 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Bigfoot would have to be a hominin based on it's non divergent big toe. All other extant.extinct apes have a divergent big toe. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted March 16, 2015 #24 Share Posted March 16, 2015 It would not shock me at all to know that BF was very closely related to other bipeds, mainly humans. American Indians have been here for 30,000 years. Some tribes have the oral tradition that BF was here before they were. Also, some AI tribes believe that BF is a human, yes. What can I say? American Indians should have much more knowledge on the subject matter than the Johnny-come-lately Euro settlers. They may very well be right Your sources? On which point, Sakari? I can tell you it is all memory for me, I've seen all that many moon ago. if you tell me which point, I will look it up maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted March 17, 2015 #25 Share Posted March 17, 2015 On which point, Sakari? I can tell you it is all memory for me, I've seen all that many moon ago. if you tell me which point, I will look it up maybe Source on the Indian legends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now