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 1
Still Waters

Bigfoot believer shares hairs and skin

28 posts in this topic

Betty Klopp has been holding on to these strands of hair and bits of skin for nearly 45 years.

"Of course I've kept it," Klopp told KPIC News. "I wouldn't give it up for anything."

She believes the clumps came from a bigfoot.

http://www.katu.com/.../199195241.html

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her sasquatch keepsake comes from her parents. Klopp said her parents were driving along in the 1960s, towing a small trailer, when they swerved off the road to avoid hitting what they believed was a man.

Klopp said her parents stopped at the Porter Creek Store to assess what had happened. They got out of the car and searched the area, but they found nothing.

The next day, her parents discovered pieces of skin and hair snagged on the trailer.

============================

Surely if you swerve to avoid something you would know if you hit it or not if its the size of a man considering they thought the hair and skin came from it? What I believe they found was a piece of roadkill, not unusual but makes a fine story for the kids!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Klopp still believes. She decided to share her story after hearing reports that someone in Texas had killed a bigfoot.

"There are reports that someone has one and has shot it and is storing it in his freezer," Klopp said. "I would like to know for sure."

Betty, Betty... keep hold of your belief (and hair and skin), but don't go looking in any freezers for him. :no:

Edited by QuiteContrary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone should tell her that freezer Bigfoot was a hoax by a couple of knuckle head sheriffs deputies.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it sounds illogical then it's usually because its nonsense and this qualifies for me as the latter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She said the material was sent to the University of Montana for testing about 3 years ago. The results showed the DNA was too deteriorated and the hair too degraded to make any identification.

Find that a bi weird, is that true? Maybe they got results confirming it was some normal animal and didn't want to ruin her "magic".

I expected DNA to last longer.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting forty five years to test a sample is too long. They should have been tested as soon a possible or stored in a good freezer if they were going to delay studing these samples for so long.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else wonder that even if samples found were tested and were found to be of a new bipedal creature, that they would release it to the public?

There are a lot of reasons I can think of that they would leave all of us still pondering over bigfoot. What if this creature is a horrible experiment gone wrong or they wish it to be left alone for conservational reasons? Imagine how many people would go and try to hunt bigfoot for a trophy mount.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else wonder that even if samples found were tested and were found to be of a new bipedal creature, that they would release it to the public?

Of course " they " would......And, legitimate research would be done on them, first to find one, second to protect them, third to learn about them.

There are a lot of reasons I can think of that they would leave all of us still pondering over bigfoot.

First, who are " they " ? Second, I had posted a few copies of emails from Department of Wildlife officials emails I had received. Just to stop this madness. I see they did not help.

What if this creature is a horrible experiment gone wrong or they wish it to be left alone for conservational reasons?

What?........

Imagine how many people would go and try to hunt bigfoot for a trophy mount.

None would. If something were found to be real such as this, it would be protected. Right as of now, i " it " is not protected, and not one has been shot...... :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so nothing has turned up yet then?i mean come on is it that hard to examine one piece of DNA .almost everything in the bodies can be used for DNA.EVEN ONE piece of hair.more conventional scientist and science should be doing this as well imagine what we could accomplish and one thing is lets leave out government out of these researches and DNA testing for various obvious reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting forty five years to test a sample is too long. They should have been tested as soon a possible or stored in a good freezer if they were going to delay studing these samples for so long.

I don't belive DNA testing was an option 40 years before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sort of hard to answer you, Sakari, when you have left all of it in quote form..

I didn't know that I couldn't use "they" but when I said it in that message, I meant it as the officials. I guess I need to be more aware of the details.

As for bigfoot being a mutation, that was part of my sense of humor.. :unsure2: If bigfoot were real, of course they would be a sort of animal.

As for your copies of the emails, my bad for my ignorance and lack of time spent here over the past few months. I guess I should've followed it on twitter...oh wait, don't have it.

Protected or not, poachers still continue to hunt animals illegally. :-*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It's sort of hard to answer you, Sakari, when you have left all of it in quote form..

I didn't know that I couldn't use "they" but when I said it in that message, I meant it as the officials. I guess I need to be more aware of the details.

As for bigfoot being a mutation, that was part of my sense of humor.. :unsure2: If bigfoot were real, of course they would be a sort of animal.

As for your copies of the emails, my bad for my ignorance and lack of time spent here over the past few months. I guess I should've followed it on twitter...oh wait, don't have it.

Protected or not, poachers still continue to hunt animals illegally. :-*

Not very many. And even the poachers have not killed a Bigfoot.

Sorry I did not get the joke, you know how it can be around here, that can be a serious reply from some.

As for the emails, I do not expect anyone to see them. Every week a new bif topic is started, and any facts or debates on previous topics are buried, although they are a carbon copy of the new ones.

Edited by Sakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I doubt Bigfoot is real, but I wouldn't be surprised whatsoever if the CIA or the Military did some kind of experiment and made a creature. They've done a lot of unethical things that are worse. I doubt thye would ever let something escape though. And if it did then you have to use common sense to come to the conclusion they would have chipped it, I mean the general public can chip pets and have been able to do so for a while now, the Military etc would ahve had that technology years before the public. If he escaped they would have tracked it, then killed or taken back whatever. So would probably only cover 1 sighting in reality.

Edited by Coffey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so nothing has turned up yet then?i mean come on is it that hard to examine one piece of DNA .almost everything in the bodies can be used for DNA.EVEN ONE piece of hair.more conventional scientist and science should be doing this as well imagine what we could accomplish and one thing is lets leave out government out of these researches and DNA testing for various obvious reasons

Not to over emphasize anything, but for humans at least, in order for hair to be DNA tested, the hair folicle must be present(and is what is actually tested)

Shed hair does not always include the folicle. Some do, though, especially those hairs pulled from the skin while, say, runing through brush in the woods, or "matted" hair during brushing/combing.

Even still, as pointed-out by someone else, preservation is key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its all BS. No Bigfoot here again people. Stop the conspiracy theories. Did anyone ask that lady if she is religious? My money's on Christian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to do the same test as with this sample imo Sumatran Orang Pendek Hairs Match Rock Hyrax

Ah yes, the rock hyrax that is entirely something else than than a primate but that has evolved to make people think it was an orangutan like primate and which was to have been proven to the world a few months after you started that thread. Not that that makes any sense at all.

Species that evolve to look like something else either evolve to look like something poisonous or dangerous (like insects and snakes that have evolved similar colouration and shapes to wasps and venomous species of snakes) or to look like part of the scenery (fish that look like rocks and sand, animals with spot and stripe patterns that render them near invisible from a distance

Why would a large rodent evolve to be mistaken for a medium sized primate?

The hair evidence and forthcoming DNA evidence will dispell that kind of myth once and for all hopefully. Only a couple of months to wait and the whole world will be spellbound by the discovery of a new intelligent species.
What happened with that?

Are you still touting the underwater swimming giant owl that flies upside down with its head inverted 180 degrees and which can zap prey with its magnetic death vision? Is that also a hyrax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Lol. There's two main cryptids imo (i) the hyrax were-creatures who are adept at keeping humans in the dark (ii) less intelligent flying lizards which use their rib-extensions for flight. Both have keen abilities to directly interfere with the human brain, hence 'loss of time' etc.

P.S I assume you haven't actually compared the two hair samples given under magnification and specified in a scientific report.

Edited by Rewlahool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. There's two main cryptids imo (i) the hyrax were-creatures who are adept at keeping humans in the dark (ii) less intelligent flying lizards which use their rib-extensions for flight. Both have keen abilities to directly interfere with the human brain, hence 'loss of time' etc.

Be honest. There's more than just two creatures you have been promoting.

Is the Rake dog-man (which looks like a hairless humanoid possibly with dog features and which is appearing in people's bedrooms because it's taking revenge of humanity for crimes against it's kind (I can barely type that without laughing)) you are talking about in the recent thread the same creature as the rock hyrax that has evolved to look like a woolly mammoth from a distance and which is the same creature as the rock hyrax in south east Asia which has evolved because it wants to be mistaken for an orangutan? Those are wildly different creatures and those

Is the underwater swimming owl the same thing as a glowbird and which are both "less intelligent flying lizard? I remember your sketch of the owl - it was clearly an actual owl type creature, not a type of flying lizard. You've talked about owls, geckos, archaeopteryx evolutionary offshoot etc. when describing this thing. Either you haven't a clue what this creature is (a modern bird like an owl, a lizard like a gecko or an offshoot of archaeosaur distinct from modern birds) or you are actually describing several different creatures.

Those are just off the top of my head. Regulars here will be familiar for all the other bizarre and fantastical creatures you have describe on these forums and how often you just dump one silly creature for a new one.

P.S I assume you haven't actually compared the two hair samples given under magnification and specified in a scientific report.

Have you? Do you have the expertise to make such a comparison yourself or are you just taking the word of those who claimed that orang pendak has the same hair as a rock hyrax? How did they conclude in the first place that the hair was from an orang pendak anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My money's on Christian!

What does that have to do with anything? Are you saying Christians are gullible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Be honest. There's more than just two creatures you have been promoting.

Is the Rake dog-man (which looks like a hairless humanoid possibly with dog features and which is appearing in people's bedrooms because it's taking revenge of humanity for crimes against it's kind (I can barely type that without laughing)) you are talking about in the recent thread the same creature as the rock hyrax that has evolved to look like a woolly mammoth from a distance and which is the same creature as the rock hyrax in south east Asia which has evolved because it wants to be mistaken for an orangutan? Those are wildly different creatures and those

Is the underwater swimming owl the same thing as a glowbird and which are both "less intelligent flying lizard? I remember your sketch of the owl - it was clearly an actual owl type creature, not a type of flying lizard. You've talked about owls, geckos, archaeopteryx evolutionary offshoot etc. when describing this thing. Either you haven't a clue what this creature is (a modern bird like an owl, a lizard like a gecko or an offshoot of archaeosaur distinct from modern birds) or you are actually describing several different creatures.

Those are just off the top of my head. Regulars here will be familiar for all the other bizarre and fantastical creatures you have describe on these forums and how often you just dump one silly creature for a new one.

Have you? Do you have the expertise to make such a comparison yourself or are you just taking the word of those who claimed that orang pendak has the same hair as a rock hyrax? How did they conclude in the first place that the hair was from an orang pendak anyway?

Lol!!!! .......

Extreme Expeditions was a scientifically respectable project to recover Orang Pendek hair, with local guides taking the party up into the jungled hills of Sumatra.

So you haven't compared the two images then!

Edited by Rewlahool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol!!!! .......

Extreme Expeditions was a scientifically respectable project to recover Orang Pendek hair, with local guides taking the party up into the jungled hills of Sumatra.

So you haven't compared the two images then!

Neither have you, you just made it up as usual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Extreme Expeditions was a scientifically respectable project to recover Orang Pendek hair, with local guides taking the party up into the jungled hills of Sumatra.
And how did they verify that it was a sample of orang pendak hair?
So you haven't compared the two images then!

Have you? I suspect that you and I both lack the zoological qualifications to make judgments on animal hair samples based upon visual examination.

There's no point in me examining the two images because I know nothing about how to identify or compare animal hair samples. I strongly suspect, based upon your history and your sub-hypothetical and sub-pseudoscientific theories about animal behaviour and evolution that you couldn't identify a photo of a dog if presented with one, nevermind be able to offer a judgment about animal hair samples.

Edited by Archimedes

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 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.