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 3
Tizqar

[Merged]Sasquatch in Siberia? Possible Evidence found

52 posts in this topic

A 5-year old human child running around in a dense forest without shoes doesn't make any sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the "family"

Surely they do not self-propagate.

Why are they no "little" bigfoot prints?

They do not live here....Just visiting...Leave the family at home.

Bigfoot+%26+Saucer+(2).jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 5-year old human child running around in a dense forest without shoes doesn't make any sense to me.

My dear fellow, when I was a child I never wore shoes in the Summer time and was always running in the woods. My feet would be so tough I could walk across hot pavement barefoot with no ill effects, briars, thistles and thorns were no problem. So seeing small barefoot tracks in the woodlands just wouldn't pique my curiosity at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 5-year old human child running around in a dense forest without shoes doesn't make any sense to me.

Unless it lines a housing development, or is in a Park.....Even then, doubt it is a thing done very often....Out in the boonies, doubt it.....Wait, unlesss your this guys kid...

lundin01.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the "family"

Surely they do not self-propagate.

Why are they no "little" bigfoot prints?

Mama carries them on her back. They swing in the trees. I won't name the videos. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is somewhere between highly unlkely and no friggin way. Say what you want about this particular study but there is no denying that the study is done by highly accredited scientists who are not likely to risk ruining thier reputations in thier real jobs as university proffessors by submitting false evidence.

Is that a joke?

I'll give no study any credence that appears in the Daily Mail and not in a peer reviewed journal. The journal Nature would be a start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am awaiting the peer-reviewed journal entry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am awaiting the peer-reviewed journal entry.

Wait.....I'm looking for the link to one. Oh silly me...I can't find it BECAUSE THERE ISN"T ONE! Nor will there ever be.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigfoot Golden Rule #1: If it can be faked then it will be faked.

The hairs, whatever they may actually prove to be, could well have been planted:

It was at this point that Meldrum said he realized that everything that happened in the alleged Yeti lair was likely completely staged for his and the media's benefit. The publicity certainly wouldn't hurt Kemerovo's skiing tourism activities.

"These prints were too odd-looking and I said to everyone that if something was sleeping in here, this nest would be compacted and pressed down," Meldrum said. "We should be able to quickly find hair among the things here, and I can't see anything."

Meldrum added that Burtsev then dove onto the ferns in front of the cameras. "And I thought, 'Well, that's very scientific, Igor, you've just contaminated the whole scene.'"

http://www.huffingto....html#undefined

The 'tests' were conducted on samples of hair found in a Siberian cave during an international expedition last year.

http://www.dailymail...ike-mammal.html

russiansn.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the fact that the Daily Mail is the source is the first red flag for me.

The second flag is that evidence that proves a species that we've been trying to prove for decades has been discovered and it's not a big deal. Where are the floods of articles and news stories reporting on this?

Thumbs down on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the fact that the Daily Mail is the source is the first red flag for me.

The second flag is that evidence that proves a species that we've been trying to prove for decades has been discovered and it's not a big deal. Where are the floods of articles and news stories reporting on this?

Thumbs down on this one.

Agreed. That would be Bigfoot Golden Rule #2: Why risk faking it when you can just make it up? (Would have been a better candidate for #1, though - damn it!)

The game of "chinese whispers" demonstrates how slight variations in the retelling can result in a tale significantly removed from its original. When it comes to Bigfoot this process is greatly amplified by 1) the sensationised nature of the topic, 2) the opportunistic nature of the media, and 3) the sensationalist and opportunistic nature of the key players. In effect, this has all the signs of becoming The Perfect Bigfoot Storm in a Tea Cup (once again). Things which are made up leave no trail which makes the task of invetigating it very difficult and if it cannot be disproved then it could well be true... <cue spooky music>

Back to Sapunov. The following letter is insightful:

January 24, 2002

This year at minimum we shall work at ecological expedition this summer at boundary Leningrad-Vologda districts for restoration of Tichvin water system, collecting data on hidden animals too. If we receive supernumerary money - the program will be bigger.

Now I work with strange material. One painter - Nilolai Terechov -(former member of Soviet city of Petersburg) in 1995 saw Bigfoot at elevator of his home in Petersburg. There are 2 witnesses other. At last BF disappeared. This painter is well-known and normal man who doesn't use Vodka. He had no special information on Bigfoot, but all testimony is accorded to scientific data. I asked him to make a picture, copy will send. Considering this case, I decided:

1. Miracles are absent.

2. Bigfoot can't be in elevator.

3. Testimony is significant.

Sapunov's Bigfoot research efforts would seem to be separate from his actual paid employment - nothing wrong with that - and you can't argue with his conclusions on the case thus far. Continue:

I think that explanation may be connected not with zoology, but with psychology. Image of wildman is coded in our brain as ultra understanding level. Trogloditofobia - terrible of BF is character of our intellect. This character is used in film production (e.g. King Kong) for images having effect on our psyche.

He displays great insight into the deeper nature of the phenomenon. This is the area with the potential to deliver the greatest level of understanding of what the Bigfoot experience reveals about us as a unique species. Yet the very next sentence he goes off on a tangent:

Telepathy as variant of extrasensory perception is real despite the absence of theory about it. Suggestion as phenomena of psychic is real and much data suggest that wildman has such character of brain. We have this character of rudiment. I think that story like such with painter may be result of extrasensory contact between man and BF. I have data that at 1995 BF migrate close to Petersburg.

This case will be analyzed together with psychologists.

Best regards

Valentin Sapunov

St. Petersburg, Russia

http://www.mid-ameri...php?f=47&t=6741

I am at a loss to follow his reasoning here - can anyone perhaps enlighten me?

I have heard of some Russian cryptozoologist claiming to have psychically communicated with a female abominable snow-woman but have yet to find anything specific about it? Could it be Sapunov? Does anyone know?

Ultimately, it is the people that make Bigfoot so damn interesting...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sapunov also appears to be one of the pioneers of using pheromones to attract Bigfoot:

Results of Chimpanzee Pheromone Use in Snowman (Wildman) Field Investigations

It all sounds so promising yet that was from back in 1989...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of sounding a bit cynical again, a lot of stuff that comes out of Russia is suspect to me. There's been a lot of hoaxer on UFO's, alien abductions, and very likely Bigfoot/Yeti's as well. I know I sound like a broken record but finding real evidence of such a creature would be.......in the words of our Vice President....a big Effen deal. One guy from Russia makes mention of it to a local paper and that gets picked up by a larger media organization isn't how something like this would be done and certainly not without all parties present for the big reveal.

So, yeah, my cynical old bast. reflex is kicking in........COB Reflex, that's what I'll call it.

Note! "COB Reflex" is the intellectual property of keninsc and can only be reused with permission.

:w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop arguing you big babies and accept that Big Foot can exist, just like Bed Bugs, I've never seen a bed bug, but yet I know they exist. Why? because people say so. Silly reason right? Maybe, maybe not. Open your eyes, as my old Japanese boss used to say..... "OPEN EYE" !

Edited by ufonuts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop arguing you big babies and accept that Big Foot can exist, just like Bed Bugs, I've never seen a bed bug, but yet I know they exist. Why? because people say so. Silly reason right? Maybe, maybe not. Open your eyes, as my old Japanese boss used to say..... "OPEN EYE" !

Just out of curiosity, who's arguing?

Bedbugs are real because you can look them up, see them.....real ones and know that they are real complete with DNA, fecal residue and even see how they are put together. You can't do that with a Bigfoot, no bodies, no bones, no solid DNA all we have are foot prints which may or may not be made by a hoaxer or hoaxers and some really bad pictures and videos. Which can be a guy in a costume and you couldn't tell because the video is so bad.

Just because someone says it's real doesn't make it real, much as you might want it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop arguing you big babies and accept that Big Foot can exist, just like Bed Bugs, I've never seen a bed bug, but yet I know they exist. Why? because people say so. Silly reason right? Maybe, maybe not. Open your eyes, as my old Japanese boss used to say..... "OPEN EYE" !

Bed bugs.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lvdCncKXtQ

Bigfoot....

You tell me......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Astonishing claims were made in Russia today that DNA tests on suspected 'Yeti hair' reveals the existence of 'an unknown mammal closely related to man'.

The 'tests' were conducted on samples of hair found in a Siberian cave during an international expedition last year.

'We had ten samples of hair to study, and have concluded that they belong to mammal, but not a human,' said Professor Valentin Sapunov, of the Russian State Hydrometeorological Institute.

Nor did the hair belong to any known animal from the region such as a bear, wolf, or goat, he claimed."

What if this turns out to be true? The impact could be huge!

Until there is a body (dead or alive) it will be disputed and skeptics will cry, hoax! A little bit of hair and done videos will never be satisfactory.

As for me, I'm enjoying the mystery. I love seeing the new "evidence" that comes up and I love hearing what the debunkers have to say. The balance keeps the issue interesting! :)

Thanks for posting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until there is a body (dead or alive) it will be disputed and skeptics will cry, hoax! A little bit of hair and done videos will never be satisfactory.

As for me, I'm enjoying the mystery. I love seeing the new "evidence" that comes up and I love hearing what the debunkers have to say. The balance keeps the issue interesting! :)

Thanks for posting!

Can I ask, after reading NightWalkers replies and links ( a few back ) do you see any reason why this should not be " cried " hoax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask, after reading NightWalkers replies and links ( a few back ) do you see any reason why this should not be " cried " hoax?

I no reason why it shouldn't be called hoax or anything otherwise. I simply enjoy reading both sides. I find it entertaining. Is that ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'They have an acute sense of danger': Yeti expert defends lack of sasquatch sightings as row erupts over his claims that 200 live in Siberia

...

Far from finding the Abonimable Snowman, his scientific claims on the subject amount to abominable lies, Oleg Pugachev, director of the Zoological Institute of Russian Academy of Science, told state-run newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta.

This institute was one of three where Professor Sapunov claimed the 'Yeti hair' - found a year ago - was tested.

Mr Pugachev said: 'Let me make it clear - Sapunov is blatantly lying.

'He came with some bits of hair to the Institute, and spent a lot of time in my office complaining that official science want nothing to do with it and no-one wants to test them.

'He asked me to help. I took a pity on him and ordered our DNA specialists to carry out a test.

'They did not manage to extract any genealogical material because there were no hair bulbs.

'The structure of the hair showed that they could have belonged to a goat, and a bear, and to other animals.

'That's the end of it. What Snowman is he talking about? If he ever appears close to our Institute I will not let him anywhere near the doorstep.

'I don't know how to stop the rubbish he is spreading in the media.'

Svetlana Borinskaya, a doctor of Biological Sciences at the Institute of General Genetics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said: 'I know Sapunov personally. He never worked with DNA - or if he did, I've never heard of such works.

'But I do know that he is obsessed with the Yeti since his early years.'

If he had done serious work, he should have published it in a scientific journal, she added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop arguing you big babies and accept that Big Foot can exist, just like Bed Bugs, I've never seen a bed bug, but yet I know they exist. Why? because people say so. Silly reason right? Maybe, maybe not. Open your eyes, as my old Japanese boss used to say..... "OPEN EYE" !

I do not understand this post.

First off, "you big babies"? Why must you resort to insults and names? Why did you deem it necessary? How does not believing in Bigfoot make us babies?

Instead of using names, use more mature ways to explain your opinion to others. Thanks.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More insight on Sapunov from 2006:

My student from the North Urals got me a photo of Bigfoot. Reserve Jugyd-Va, nearest big city – Inta. Photo was made by electronic camera at the end of September 2006. Author anonymous, a hunter having no interest in BF (Bigfoot), made a landscape photo. He got strange figure. Legends and tales on BF (Bigfoot) in this region exist. Me and my student in – Inna Leontyeva – are sure, that nobody has much interest except to joke and falsification, nobody got glory or money by this photo. As for me, figure is more close to Homo erectus or Australopitecus. [source]

sapunovyeti.jpg

Well, a short time later an independent investigator found "it is became known that guys made a joke. But half of the town was very shocked." [source]

Sapunov may have also been the unwitting dupe in this latest drama. The combination of his academic qualifications, eccentricity, and the sensational nature of Bigfoot makes a person like Sapunov a virtual walking headline. If Sapunov did find some suspicious hairs in that blatant tourist promo's "yeti cave" then it could well have been planted specifically for him to find. That Sapunov is so single-minded in his approach to prove the existence of Bigfoot (ie he knows Bigfoot is real because he has seen it and communicated with it telepathically) makes him particularly vulnerable to fakery which fits his notion of what Bigfoot evidence should be. And the rest will soon be history...

Happy Yeti Day 2012! (Nov 11)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they do exist, I applaud them for being able to elude humans so well.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I no reason why it shouldn't be called hoax or anything otherwise. I simply enjoy reading both sides. I find it entertaining. Is that ok?

Yes, is it ok that I asked a question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop arguing you big babies and accept that Big Foot can exist, just like Bed Bugs, I've never seen a bed bug, but yet I know they exist. Why? because people say so. Silly reason right? Maybe, maybe not. Open your eyes, as my old Japanese boss used to say..... "OPEN EYE" !

post-124811-0-28154900-1351952284_thumb.

1 person likes this

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 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.