SHUT UP.

scientists INDEED dismissed gorilla sightings as delusions, but looking their lead us to conclude the "dumb natives" were right!

why not for 1000's of reliable people who see these things mostly in remote areas. far from civilization

saying the pacific nw is searched is bs. most scientists are armchair, look at shermer, daegling, and other skeptoids

bc the athlete couldnt duplicate the patty walk at a respected university, u refuse to accept it

Who the hell are you to dare say that! You arrogant little idiot. You know nothing about scientific study to make that comment you uneducated fool. Did I not show enough scientific papers which required years of field study? Or is that too difficult for you undeveloped brain to remember?

come say that to my face, buddy!

i know more about great apes than you.

what do u know about? stupid sharks, that we know alot about

i hope a shark snaps at you

You think sharks are well studied? You fool, we know next to nothing about sharks.
I seriously doubt you know more about anything than me.

Im not saying any such thing, what im saying if I made a post saying "that studies or records have shown that their is an impact", im sure you would ask me to quote my sources and what studies where done, right ? After all I could just be making things up or mis understanding the content of those records.





Im not in the USA so I dont know what you mean by DEM and local university's would be pointless for me to look up. I dont disagree with what you say at all, im just curious if any true scientific bodys has researched this point as it would be the final nail in Bigfoots coffin (to me anyways).

I know that impact studies are done on many animals, has any been done in purported areas for Bigfoot with Bigfoot in mind ? I really would like to see them if it has been done.

And you wonder why no one takes you seriously, please if you cant contribute in an adult and respectful manor don't contribute at all. Your just making yourself look even worse and not helping your cause in anyway.

This is why I am getting annoyed and would like to see Makaya shut up. Between Mattshark and I we have shown extensive studies carried out on the species in the PNW. According to Makaya, the entire PNW is a purported area.

So, once again


Adaptive Ecosystem Management in the Pacific Northwest

Herrera biologists perform a wide variety of wildlife surveys, habitat studies, analysis and design of wildlife crossings, and wildlife habitat restoration throughout the Pacific Northwest.]

Link to flora studies carried out in the Pacific Northwest scince 1909.

Road Removal Studies

Impact of global warming on the wildlife in the Pacific Northwest

And here is a book that details the extensive studies done on mammals in the PNW.

Surely that will suffice for a start. None of the above studies show any anomalies for natural life cycles in the above extensive studies, everything "is as it should be. No doubt Mattshark can offer more.
I am sure you will find them all excellent Incorrigible1.

What is worse, is the studies have been carried out in the area scince 1909. A great deal many animals down to the plant life have been catalogued, but no surviving Gigantopethicus. Heck, we know what snails crawl the floor and what weevils eat the plants, but no food source is disappearing mysteriously.

In fact.... being a gardener somewhat, I noticed my wifes page on carniverous plants. This site does not describe soil in the PNW as clay or acidic.

And the person who this post was aimed at has had all this information presented many times, I only posted them again so you could read them, the person in question does not read them, or offer comment, in fact the very next post by this person is likely to say
ur wrong.
And that's it. Maybe followed by the pnw eats bones and hundres are there i know it the government wot look scentists sit in a corner yure too lazy to look listen to fahrenbach ur wrong.
Posting like that should not be allowed.

Now that I have presented som real studies Makaya.....................ahhh forget it. Just wasting breath aren't I. None say Biff is real.

Ahh, but many show what is happening - and there are no anomolies.

Man, I'd go on anything you are putting together. If no Biff shows up, it sounds impossible to not have a good time regardless.

If several thousand 8 foot apes were roaming North America, how could an impact study not show this?
Even if they only ate 10 pounds a day, that's a major impact!

1st, u guys called me ignorant. y, bc im not gonna believe some arm chaired skeptic who believes hes a " outsdoorsman"

if their was nothing there, the phenomona would be dead

You mean Neogenesis? Or Me? I Assure you I am an armchair nothing. I am as aggressive in attacking theories with practise as I am in theory. It sounds like Neogenesis does quite some outdoor activity. He is just sharing real world experience, he is trying to help you.
You do realise that if you take on board what Neogenesis and I have been blabbering about, that you can study it all for yourself, decide if valid or not, and be ready for the next person to challenge your theories. Or, you can come back a couple days later and go
ur worng
but follow it up with
because.................
and you will get a great deal more interatction. Skeptics should be gold to you, they are showing you what bases to cover, what challenges to tackle to make the theory work. Think man.
Make sure your powder is dry boy.

Nessie, Faries, Merpeople, People eating tree's, vampires, Chuppacubra heck some people believe in reptiod humaniods. Some in Santa. People believe in some strange crap. We don't need a creature for a phenomena. Just an imagination.

You called ignorant, I called it back. If you consider the evidence and counter with reasoning, that would be great. Repeating the same line over and again is a waste of everybodies time. Including yours.

Nessie, Faries, Merpeople, People eating tree's, vampires, Chuppacubra heck some people believe in reptiod humaniods. Some in Santa. People believe in some strange crap. We don't need a creature for a phenomena. Just an imagination.

You called ignorant, I called it back. If you consider the evidence and counter with reasoning, that would be great. Repeating the same line over and again is a waste of everybodies time. Including yours.
[/quote]


That's the key line. Your evidence lies in the sightings only in the PNW. You pretend you don't read posts stating the sightings worldwide.

Thanks for the links psyche

I will have a read when I get some time as thats a lot of text to digest. I havent followed every thread and seen every reply so I have missed that.

Yes I can see your slightly ticked off with Makaya I can see why.

Just between you and me I would rather have some armchair skeptics on my team rather than blind believers

Everything I've always wanted to say.

I vote MattShark greatest UM forum member ever.



zing

i vote for myself

100's of bigfoot wouldnt have a comparable dent to the 10 million deer in the food system

100's of bigfoot wouldnt have a comparable dent to the 10 million deer in the food system

One more time... This time EVERYBODY say it together... real slow so Makaya can understand...ready? One, two, three...


HUNDREDS OF BIGFEET ARE TOO SMALL A POPULATION TO MAINTAIN A SPECIES, ESPECIALLY A LARGE MAMALIAN SPECIES WITHOUT SPECIAL HELP.

how many mountain gorillas are their? tell me, a couple hundred

some animals can have a population of 20 and not be in danger

an animal that is primate will live long, not short. and dense vegetation is hard to search,

Erm not a population of 20 is an animal on the brink of extinction.
Some primates have very short lives.

like what, 40 yrs? thats not that short

elephants are known to bury their own dead, so do humans, so an animal which had many yrs to adapt to this environment, could do the same. we are now finding out chimps use spears, so it should be expected from a great ape

read this

http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/papers/nasirpt.pdf

http://www.texasbigfoot.org/index.php/abou...fic%20Northwest?

They are not good sources of information. We have evidence of these other animals, we have founf rare animals in more remote places.
Some primates have far shorter lives than 40 years.

no

no they're not

from the Texas Bigfoot FAQ

It seems reasonable to propose that a couple thousand of the animals may exist in small population pockets spread across remote areas of North America. A conservative guesstimate for sasquatch population density in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana might be as few as 50 individuals.

Once I see "guesstimate" I just can't take them seriously.

1st off, i doubt "bigfoot" exist in the lower states like florida, and if they do though, they might be the same species, with different hair color, size, and behavior, due to different climates.

convergent evolution of an prehistoric ape makes sense.

question. wasnt a controversial homo erectus skull found in new mexico?

No worries m8, quite a read there

Hehe, yeah, it's the repeatetive stuff with makaya, I'd be quite happy to discuss a point, but the same claims keep popping up. The bury the dead thing is just not well thought through. What I like more than anything is someone to give me something than really makes me scratch my head. You are right, I am only slightly ticked off, I rant a bit sometimes, but I am about as tough as a junket sandwich
You're right on armchair skeptics too, a little reading can go a long way.

Maybe I'm just being a contrarian and maybe I'm just miffed because I didn't make your list of hardcore skeptics, but there are a lot fewer places for The Biff to hide in the Southeast, but over half as many reported sightings there as in the NW, according to BFRO:

Alabama 48
Arkansas 65
Florida 140
Georgia 58
Louisiana 32
Mississippi 18
Oklahoma 62
S. Carolina 39
Texas 163
----
625







Arizona 42
California 379
Idaho 53
Oregon 199
Montana 24
Washington 424
Wyoming 25
----
1093

the elephant part? (cause if so, youre somewhat wrong. they place leaves/branches over the dead carcass)
or the chimp part? cause i havent read alot about that.

I have not heard of this. Anyone got a link?

I this is true, it could swing the theoretical favour from Gigantopethicus to Meganthropous.

ditto
i just did a quick google search. couldnt find much...but im lazy
anyone else find a link or something

as of now, i consider giganto unlikely but possibe. my favorite theory is that bigfoot was a 2nd species of intelligent hominids, and if found ,could be a new species of elusive humans?

Congrats, Makaya, on softening your stance a little, and maybe opening to the possibility that if BF exists, we don't really have a clue at this time as to what it could possibly be.

No, there are not a "couple hundred." There are 600, and that is an extremely precarious number for a primate. Every time I read one of your posts, my office smells like farts, because you keep talking out your ass.




source:
http://www.cotf.edu/ete/modules/mgorilla/mgbiology.html

Let's quote for you, since I think you might be having trouble understanding:

....ON THE VERGE OF EXTINCTION. ONLY ABOUT SIX HUNDRED OF THESE MAGNIFICENT ANIMALS ARE LEFT IN THE WILD.

SIX HUNDRED equates to the verge of extinction for a primate. Except for bigfoot. Yet another zoological principle that he's immune to. He magically can be even MORE scarce, yet still maintain his species.

Note that the western lowland gorilla, with FIFTY THOUSAND alive, are still considered endangered. Yet we are expected to accept that a few hundred bigfeet are keeping the species going.

Also, your main claim to bigfoot is your continued reliance on the validity of witness sightings. But with nearly half of all sightings being out of the PNW, how can you be so two faced as to claim that you think bigfoot probably doesn't exist in the lower states? Oh, I get it. You only believe witnesses that fit your preconceived notion.

I think that bigfoot's a hoax

Wonderful. Care to expound a little upon your opinion?

one in manitoba is a hoax
hilarious!
a lot of people on this forum have pondered why would anyone hoax such a thing
because it is funny that's why

Manitoba Mounties nab Whiteshell 'sasquatch'
Teen in gorilla mask frightened campers for two years

from
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/20.../sasquatch.html

Mounties in eastern Manitoba have nabbed a strange, hairy monster that has been stalking campgrounds in and around the Whiteshell Provincial Park for the past two summers.

Police received the call around midnight on July 30 from a woman who had been startled by the beastly creature while camping at Pinawa, about 90 kilometres east of Winnipeg.

"This was further to about 10 calls we had last year of the same incident in the Whiteshell Provincial Park, so the members were aware of the type of person we were looking for," Staff Sgt. Glen Reitlo told CBC News Wednesday.

"A couple of our members attended and ended up finding the sasquatch."

The creature turned out to be an 18-year-old Winnipeg man wearing a hairy gorilla mask, which Reitlo described as "ugly" and "scary."

"Something like that at midnight would scare someone," he said.
Continue Article

"When he was confronted by not only the police, but the person who he scared, he admitted that he was the person who had been responsible for the last year and a half," Reitlo said.

Reitlo said the man was not intoxicated when nabbed by officers; he apparently had been camping in the area over the past two summers and simply enjoyed the prank.

His victims were less impressed. The woman who complained gave the man quite a tongue-lashing, Reitlo said.

"He was pretty meek and mild at the end of it … he definitely learned his lesson, that's for sure."

No charges have been laid.

trying to seperate real sightings from fake ones is a good thing, so we can find the amount of legitimate sightings,

That's awesome!! He was having harmless fun. I'm torm on hoaxing. On the one hand, they are wasting peoples time and money who search for them. On the other, it keeps people interested in mythical creatures and i enjoy the TV shows.

Nobody is forcing anyone to spend time or money looking for bigfoot. If someone is going to ignore the biological and zoological imperatives that bigfoot breaks and go broke chasing him, well, they should have been more rooted in the real world and not in fantasy. I feel bad for them, but a fool and his money are soon parted.

bigfoot could be an elusive species of early man that is extremely hard to catch, but seen alot-

Now you must realize how ridiculous that sounds.

It is one thing to believe that Sasquatch exists but it is another to constantly deny the evidence to the contrary and try to give any explanation possible to the reason we have not found one.

If it is seen so often why would it be so hard to track/catch/find a corpse?

ok, out of all those witnesses, how many have guns? of those, how many have cameras? out of that, how many have video cameras and have enough time to unpack it without a shy animal running away. when people see this thing, they are in awe of an animal that isnt supposed to exist, but is there. some are shaken after their sighting that they avoid reporting it, and usually go as no-name

Maybe MR Foot is primarily a cave dweller and only comes out to forage a bit most early hominid remains such as gigantaopithicous and peking man have been found in cave systems?

primates live a pretty long life, around 30 to 50 yrs. a hominid species that has lived on the same soil as us, and likely has witnessed its species being killed by early man might have triggered fear into bigfoot. this is why they are so hard to find, in an area bigger than new york, penn, and maine combined.

bigfoot is likely closer to a human than a chimp, making it a hominid.

about the snelgrove dna, i read something about that 1 nucleotide it was missing meant if it was a human, the animal would look like what we looked like 150 thousand yrs ago. perhaps its a nomadic animal that has an unpredictable migration route, yet is still seen and described as "gorilla-like". most witnesses describe it as a"mountain gorilla like creature"

Isn't this thing like four time the size of an average human?

Why on earth would it fear us?

Because he's a gentle giant and he nurses raccoons and makes purring noises but in the end he dies but he teaches us stuff.

early man killed species many times bigger than it, and its likely if an early human killed a sasquatch, it would either eat ir (which idk why) or simply discard remains and the soil would decompose the skeletons. these slayings made this hominid fear us, and hides from us.

their are animals bigger than man, and surprisingly, they would not hurt man, and almost all species would fear a weapon-yielding human, i sure would if i was any other animal.

Rubbish.
Go tell that to a Silverback.

tell me psyche, how many fossils of neanderthals and giganto and meganthropus have we found? all together, very few, and these fossils were found in good fossilization places. tells you some animals are rare