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

What kind of berries were they? Where can I get some?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to mention, if these things were human, they would be more easily found, not less.

How so?

Someone that knows the terrain and how to move and live in the woods, would be very - very - hard to catch. History has proven this point time and time again...

To have stable breeding populations in all of these locations, there would need to be thousands of them

Who said the population is stable? They could be in a free-fall spiral towards 'extinction' - with only a hundred or two, or possibly a lot less left, in isolated pockets.

I'm reminded of the Russian wild woman tale from the early part of the twentieth century - where the locals managed to capture a wild, totally hair covered woman and kept her hostage - and had children by her. Children who looked almost normal (hairier then normal), and were human (I believe DNA tests were done on one of the kids bones). Again, it would probably explain a few of the "abducted by wild humanish looking creature" tales that have circulated around...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's actually a pretty great track for the kind of terrain we're talking about here. It also looks a lot like the four-toed track pattern attributed to the "True Giant" in Coleman's Field Guide To Bigfoot And Other Unknown Primates. The other thing that I think bears mentioning is that David Paulides connected a number of unexplained missing persons cases to berry patches in Missing 411. He never explicitly states that he believes there's a connection with Bigfoot and these disappearances (and it wouldn't make much sense for some of them), but it's heavily implied. If what these two women saw was a sasquatch, I'd say they're lucky it wasn't hungry.

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!

We won't ever get that good photographic proof because bigfoot secretes a substance that causes photos and video to be blurry (Japanese genitalia also secrete this substance).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

That all depends on what reports you read. A man named Albert Ostman claims to have been abducted by a family of them, and the last person to see Theresa Ann Bier claims she was taken by a group of Bigfeet as well. Very strange cases, both of them. Bier has never been found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

If, if, if...if pigs had wings they might likely be able to fly.

Irrelevant. We can't assume that Bigfoot has human intelligence, because we can't even prove there is such a thing as a bigfoot. And despite the scarcity of snow leopards, we have definitive evidence that they exist. That is to say that they do all the things that real animals do and leave behind telltale mementos of their actual real-life existence. Exactly what Bigfoot does not do. Real things leave behind real traces of their real-ness. All the theories about bigfoot being super-smart, super elusive, burying their dead, etc.......all of these are merely constructions to explain away the inconvenient truth that there is no evidence for their reality.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, if, if...if pigs had wings they might likely be able to fly.

Irrelevant. We can't assume that Bigfoot has human intelligence, because we can't even prove there is such a thing as a bigfoot. And despite the scarcity of snow leopards, we have definitive evidence that they exist. That is to say that they do all the things that real animals do and leave behind telltale mementos of their actual real-life existence. Exactly what Bigfoot does not do. Real things leave behind real traces of their real-ness. All the theories about bigfoot being super-smart, super elusive, burying their dead, etc.......all of these are merely constructions to explain away the inconvenient truth that there is no evidence for their reality.

I have to agree with Orange here. The existance of Bigfoot or a Bigfoot-like creature has yet to be established. What we have is a bunch of footprint casts, some sightings, a ton of fuzzy "blobsqutch" photos and videos and some other unsubstainciated stories which are proof of nothing, Yeah, they make for great campfire stories, but other than that they really don't amount to a pee hole in the snow. Speculating on what they do, how smart they are or any of that leads to the stories of Bigfoot being inter-dimensional creatures or aliens from God knows where or some sort of spirit things. Bodies, bones, or one gets caught alive is the only thing that will stand as proof. Footprints can and have been faked, some guys never came forward they were found out after they're deaths by family members, then when they asked a surviving spouse they said, "Yeah, he used to get a big kick out of doing that."

All this sort of stuff just leads to more rumors.......speculation......which is nothing more but gossip told by someone who tries to make themselves out to be someone with some sort of insight. "I'm a cryptozoologist! I've been studying Bigfoot for the last twenty years." Ok, so what has he just said, let's take that apart for a minute. First off, there is no accredited college or university that offers a degree, advanced or undergraduate, in cryptozoology. It doesn't exist as a legitimate scientific field of study. I can claim to be a crypotzoologist, my actual degree is in Mechanical Engineering, but what the hey, Matt Moneymaker is a fricking lawyer, he doesn't know a damn thing but the law and as I recall I haven't seen a Biggy in court.

Ok, second part of that statement, what have been studying exactly? We don't have clusters of them like Jane Goodall studied in Africa, there's nothing to study.....ok, a cast or two but which is real and which is not? I keep hearing about these newly discovered "dermal ridges"; how do we know they ain't just a crumpling of a fake rubber foot? .......and since it's rubber, guess what? You can add those puppies really easily. Hell, "Monsterquest" actually showed how to make ones with dermal ridges, meaning the fakers just got schooled on what to do to make them even more convincing to novice idiots. I don't know about anyone else, but I've seen a lot of different tracks made by soft footed creatures, I have yet to see one with dermal ridges. I've never seen any human footprints with dermal ridges. Yet, suddenly, we have this new detail associated with a Bigfoot.

Dermal ridges is another big old hunk-a-hunk of flying funk, pulled out of a body cavity to impress someone and make it sound like someone knows what the heck they're talking about. So please let's knock off the BS about super smart what ever the heck it was when it's all a load.

Now, having said all that, I have to admit I'm intrigued if not fascinated with the possibility that the creature might exist. However, I have a very skeptical eye and try to maintain my objectivity......I do on occasion need a good B-slap just to keep me grounded. Which is one of the reasons I come here.

Edited by keninsc

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.

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.

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

I'll work on this, if you can define how a bigfoot created fire would differ from a human made fire.

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.

What percentage of bones would you say get fossilized?

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

Otherwise your statement is completely true. :tu:

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

That is assuming a culture similar to our own. We know that whales have culture, but they don't make art, or tools, or anything lasting.

All this sort of stuff just leads to more rumors.......speculation......which is nothing more but gossip told by someone who tries to make themselves out to be someone with some sort of insight.

Isn't Speculation what goes on in this Forum? This is the Crypto forum right? Very few of the threads will actually be based on anything other then speculation.

Edited by DieChecker
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hunk-a-hunk of flying funk

Hey, that was our Cryptozoology motto Class of 1985!!!

I thought you looked familiar, keninsc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :alien:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :)

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

[/quote']

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

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?

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.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
these things seems to constitute more proof than not.

Not if you are open minded.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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.

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.