Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Bionic Bigfoot

Sasquatch sighting in Nunavik

138 posts in this topic

I'm not sure if anyone has posted about this yet or not. I always find it more credible when these sightings take place in remote areas by the local native people. I highly doubt the size of the bigfoot as estimated by the women, but I tend to believe their story. This sighting just happened recently.

Good Post Bionic Bigfoot. And welcome to these forums!

I saw this article the other day and was going to post it, but never go around to it and then was out all weekend. Thanks!

This is what I TOTALLY believe Hasina. Sasquatch are extremely intelligent hominids! Personally, I believe they are the missing link (more or less). I do believe they bury their dead and from all I've read, seen and learned about them over the many, many years is that they are more 'human' than animal.

They would have to be very intellegent, if they are real. I can't say that I would believe they are the missing link. I would agree with Hasina that they are more probably another species of the Homo genus. I also believe (Given Bigfoot is real) that they could have come over much earlier then the first homo sapiens. As Homo Erectus was in northern China almost a million years ago. And there have been like 4 or 5 glaciations since then, so there was 3 or 4 times before the Native Americans traveled to North America for bigfoot to migrate there first. The only real killer with the migration and other homo species is the lack of fossil bones.

( I do think it is funny you took the name Bionic Bigfoot and use the Six Million Dollar Man version of Bigfoot for your avatar. As that particular bigfoot was an Android, not a cyborg (bionic), and... that you are saying old BF is a missing link.) (You do see the slight irony, right?

Again.... Welcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they're just humans who long ago were kicked out of their clans/tribes for being different (suffering from Hypertrichosis) and then continued to live (forming their own small clans, etc), and still live their stone-age existence to this very day. It would explain the sightings, the legends, the whole wife snatching/children snatching incidents, etc. It explains why the bones, hair, etc, turns out to be "human". Because they are humans - just humans that have been living primitively and suffering from Hypertrichosis. It explains the whole legend (and both sides of the argument would be right for once). Thats my theory anyways - what do you guys think? Anyways, cheers.

That is an idea that I often suggest in various bigfoot threads here. That bigfoot is actually a genetic condition, a very recessive defect. And it would thus show hair and bones as human. Very cool idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I believe too, Hasina. That costume and if it was a 'costume' was just too good and realistic for that time. I've seen attempts to duplicate it and even today, they fall way short of creating such a realistic looking creature. The musculature seen, the breasts that were visible, the walk and fluidity of motion...all just way too good for the 1960's and to be hoaxed.

I have to disagree. Though I am a proponent of the possibility of bigfoot, I'm very convinced that the Patterson Film was a hoax. Too many data points all fall on the hoax side of the equation for my liking.

Bob Heronomus was known to own and wear a suit to scare people. Patterson had all his money and reputation invested in that adventure. And he happened upon that BF within minutes of starting his trip into the woods. Also there are dozens of scientific and forensic investigations/videos out there showing that the footprints were faked, and showing inconsistancies with the film and what was claimed.

Sorry....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, this part of Canada is pretty remote Hasina, not really a large population at all.

Actually I believe the article said this is the northern most (Or second northern most?) report of a bigfoot ever. So I agree it was pretty remote.

As to food, did not the article say that the observers were there because the Caribou were coming through there? That is food right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not stupidity that is at play here, at least as I see it. Its the power of the human mind to respond to suggestive situations and interpret sensory information based on our hopes, fear, biases - etc...

Don't forget though that many of the people who've claimed to see a bigfoot have held no preconceptions or expectations. In fact, many of the people who've had a sasquatch encounter have often been non believers. The last thing thing many witnesses expected to see what a large, hairy, bi-pedal creature. There have been quite a few witnesses who've stated that seeing such a creature disturbed them immensly and the encounters have completely rocked the foundation of their belief system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An animal cannot simultaneously be so incredibly smart that nobody can reliably find it and also so fantastically stupid that so many people manage to allegedly capture substandard photos and/or video of them. You can't have the argument both ways.

Why not? Think of a super smart snow lepard. If they had human intellegence would we see them at all? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Most of the pictures out there are Known fakes. Most of the videos too. Most of the encounters are probably fakes too. Just as the Unicorn was probably derived from the Rhinoceros, but did not actually exist in Europe, yet it was reported seen all over Europe for centurys.

Why do sasquatches make no impact on their environment? There is no irrefutable evidence of their feeding, breeding, dying, habitaton, or migration. All other living creatures leave behind evidence that they are doing these things.

Population Density and mathmatical error.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not stupidity that is at play here, at least as I see it. Its the power of the human mind to respond to suggestive situations and interpret sensory information based on our hopes, fear, biases - etc...

I actually totally agee. I think this is the same phenomena that we see associated with aliens, ghosts, faeries, chupacabras and even angels. People see something briefly and fill in the missing data with what they want to be there.

I'm just not convinced this is the Exclusive reason people report seeing bigfoot.

Edited by DieChecker
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Diechecker,

Actually in the article, the crptozoologist, Loren Coleman was concluding that sasquatch like any other omnivore might be feeding on caribou, like many other predators in that area. With the harsh winters in Canada and the northern USA, it's pretty safe to assume that if sasquatch is real, the only way it could survive would to be an opportunistic omnivore. Just like bears, it's feasible to think that they eat plant and animal matter when it's available. There is plenty of deer, elk, caribou and other animals in the boreal forested areas of North America.

Edited by Bionic Bigfoot
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Post Bionic Bigfoot. And welcome to these forums!

( I do think it is funny you took the name Bionic Bigfoot and use the Six Million Dollar Man version of Bigfoot for your avatar. As that particular bigfoot was an Android, not a cyborg (bionic), and... that you are saying old BF is a missing link.) (You do see the slight irony, right?

Again.... Welcome

Thank you by the way and yes, the Bionic Bigfoot was allegedly an android. Life is full of ironies and strange happenstances. ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice avatar Bionic Bigfoot. Isn't that Andre the Giant when he appeared as bigfoot in the $6,000,000 man? Andre was lving proof of Bigfoot...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why you should always wear small bells on your shoes, so the bigfoot knows you're in the area and you don't sneak up and scare them. You can tell there are bigfoot in your area by their scat...it's it one with small bells in it. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Diechecker,

Actually in the article, the crptozoologist, Loren Coleman was concluding that sasquatch like any other omnivore might be feeding on caribou, like many other predators in that area. With the harsh winters in Canada and the northern USA, it's pretty safe to assume that if sasquatch is real, the only way it could survive would to be an opportunistic omnivore. Just like bears, it's feasible to think that they eat plant and animal matter when it's available. There is plenty of deer, elk, caribou and other animals in the boreal forested areas of North America.

Do you think bigfoot uses tools to catch the caribou? It is usually reported that it is a big lumbering animal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this day and age no one had a phone with a camera on it with them. I this this is a total hoax. Just foot again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its an interesting article, as usual more questions than answers...

The article mentions photos uploaded to a Facebook page. Is there a link for this or have I missed it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait for some really good photographic proof. I think it should be law to alwayws have a camera with you if you live in these areas of the US!

Nunavik is in the extreme North of Quebec, Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't personally believe that sasquatch are all that solitary creatures, I believe, like many, that they live and work in small groups and families. I also believe, like many others that they are well aware of others of their kind and in various ways. That they are cognitive of their species and knowledge and experiences is passed down from generation to generation and can span great distances.

That sounds an awful lot like CULTURE.

The problem is that culture leaves behind evidence.

Of which there is none.

And about this "missing link" theory, can you elaborate on that? The link between what?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you by the way and yes, the Bionic Bigfoot was allegedly an android. Life is full of ironies and strange happenstances. ;)

If memory serves the bionic bigfoot was found by aliens, nearly dead and then they rebuilt him much like Steve Austin, so not an android but a cyborg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait for some really good photographic proof. I think it should be law to alwayws have a camera with you if you live in these areas of the US!

Uh, everyone pretty much does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nunavik is in the extreme North of Quebec, Canada.

Oopsy sorry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds an awful lot like CULTURE.

The problem is that culture leaves behind evidence.

Of which there is none.

Well, going by my theory on what Sasquatches are (back on post 15 of this thread)... what evidence would we have not found?

Primitive stone tools. Check. Remains of fires. Check. Bones. Check. Sightings. Check. I spend a lot of time in the woods out here in British Columbia, a lot of it off trail prospecting and hiking. Almost every year I come across at least one falling apart 'bush' shelter that has been abandoned for some time. I've also found the old remains of a fire and mattress of boughs under an overhanging ledge, yet no signs of human "modern" garbage. etc. (I've also found plenty of camp remains from idiots who have left behind all sorts of garbage, etc) Heck, a friend I know found humans bones in the back country. The police were never able to identify the bones and/or link them to a missing hiker or murder victim (though i doubt anyone would hide a body a four day hike into the back country). All that being said, if my theory on Sasquatches are correct, the only way to actually verify it (sadly) would be to kill one or find one that had died within twenty-four to forty-eight hours (or before predators reached it).

Edited by Bavarian Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope this guy don't run across the road and get hit by teenage girls like the one in Montana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Primitive stone tools. Check. Remains of fires. Check. Bones. Check. Sightings. Check.

We have not found any stone tools made to bigfoot size that were made in the modern era.

We have not found the remains of any fires that were made by bigfeets.

We have not found a single bigfoot bone, nor bones that have been gnawed by a giant north american ape. None. not a single one. Ever.

We also have not found any of the other hallmarks of culture:

Art

evidence of language

storytelling

bead or ornamentation making

tools

Nothing.

We have evidence of cultures that have lived on this continent and then disappeared... but NOTHING, not a scrap, from a gang of giant apes that are still living here?

It is literally unbelievable.

Oh, also no currency or evidence of any kind of hierarchy or organization. Or evidence of their existence at all.

Edited by Neognosis
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have not found any stone tools made to bigfoot size that were made in the modern era.

We have not found the remains of any fires that were made by bigfeets.

We have not found a single bigfoot bone, nor bones that have been gnawed by a giant north american ape. None. not a single one. Ever.

We also have not found any of the other hallmarks of culture:

Art

evidence of language

storytelling

bead or ornamentation making

tools

Nothing.

We have evidence of cultures that have lived on this continent and then disappeared... but NOTHING, not a scrap, from a gang of giant apes that are still living here?

It is literally unbelievable.

Oh, also no currency or evidence of any kind of hierarchy or organization. Or evidence of their existence at all.

Did you even read post 15?? :unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasquatch sighting in Nunavik

Another Bigfoot sighting eh? Well this time I'm having Nunavik...

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they're just humans who long ago were kicked out of their clans/tribes for being different (suffering from Hypertrichosis) and then continued to live (forming their own small clans, etc), and still live their stone-age existence to this very day. It would explain the sightings, the legends, the whole wife snatching/children snatching incidents, etc. It explains why the bones, hair, etc, turns out to be "human". Because they are humans - just humans that have been living primitively and suffering from Hypertrichosis. It explains the whole legend (and both sides of the argument would be right for once). Thats my theory anyways - what do you guys think? Anyways, cheers.

I just went back and read this.

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.

Not to mention, if these things were human, they would be more easily found, not less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.