Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

So, where do Bigfoot sleep/settle?


Dunbaraj

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Talus said:

Thorvir is right; we have no proof on the subject, but that should not dissuade us. I'm sure you've heard the argument but it is a good one so I will paraphrase. We know bears exist; we have species cadaver samples; by hunters/trapping/etc. However, finding bear remains (skeletons) are very rarely found; and bears have animal intelligence with dens; so if bear remains are hard to find, why is it so hard to believe an elusive species of primate with higher than ape intelligence wouldn't hide or bury their remains like our primitive ancestors did; thus making their remains nearly impossible to find? If small groups of 20 - 30 members which buried their remains or disassembled their camps while they moved nomadically throughout the remote high altitude forests of the western and eastern mountains any sign of passage would be very hard to detect; especially if their species has had 15 - 20,000 years to adapt and pass on survival genes which promote elusiveness and evasion of mankind.

 

Is there a problem you are having making paragraphs?   Some posters have had a problem in the past and a wall of words is painful to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Merc 14; I don't quite understand your question? Is there a problem I am having writing paragraphs? How so? I'm new to blogging so perhpas I just don't understand the platform?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Talus said:

Thorvir is right; we have no proof on the subject, but that should not dissuade us. I'm sure you've heard the argument but it is a good one so I will paraphrase. We know bears exist; we have species cadaver samples; by hunters/trapping/etc. However, finding bear remains (skeletons) are very rarely found; and bears have animal intelligence with dens; so if bear remains are hard to find, why is it so hard to believe an elusive species of primate with higher than ape intelligence wouldn't hide or bury their remains like our primitive ancestors did; thus making their remains nearly impossible to find? If small groups of 20 - 30 members which buried their remains or disassembled their camps while they moved nomadically throughout the remote high altitude forests of the western and eastern mountains any sign of passage would be very hard to detect; especially if their species has had 15 - 20,000 years to adapt and pass on survival genes which promote elusiveness and evasion of mankind.

 

That would hold water if we had found Bears but no remains. We do, not sure why you think they are rare they are not. 

Want photos? Look no further than UM

LINK

Edited by psyche101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shouldthisexist said:

The "mockumentaries" that discovery channel creates are absolutely horrendous.

Indeed, UFO's and aliens, even Werewolves! 

An embarrassment. Should be tarred and feathered. 

1 hour ago, Shouldthisexist said:

That being said, if said yeti did exist maybe it was a rare attack, starvation, protection etc. Just a humble non fact based theory.

In the middle of a Blizzard in an isolated tent that was ripped from within? Does not add up, hypothermia does though.

I reckon if a Yeti did exist, we would have found that via the alleged remains from the Pangboche Monastery, when they were tested and shown to be regular animal remains, I think that was my last shred of possibility gone for a Bigfoot/Yeti/Yowie creature. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talus tells us these nests will be hard to find yet in post #833 we get a long story about exploring a nest.  :blink:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Talus said:

Thorvir is right; we have no proof on the subject, but that should not dissuade us. I'm sure you've heard the argument but it is a good one so I will paraphrase. We know bears exist; we have species cadaver samples; by hunters/trapping/etc. However, finding bear remains (skeletons) are very rarely found; and bears have animal intelligence with dens; so if bear remains are hard to find, why is it so hard to believe an elusive species of primate with higher than ape intelligence wouldn't hide or bury their remains like our primitive ancestors did; thus making their remains nearly impossible to find? If small groups of 20 - 30 members which buried their remains or disassembled their camps while they moved nomadically throughout the remote high altitude forests of the western and eastern mountains any sign of passage would be very hard to detect; especially if their species has had 15 - 20,000 years to adapt and pass on survival genes which promote elusiveness and evasion of mankind.

Excellent question.

Bears are well known. They are actually fairly common. We find all sorts of remains from bears. Their prints and scat are easy to find. There are lots of high quality photos of bears as well. I've seen bears throughout Canada and the US, and in India as well. People do find the remains of dead bears. A rotted bear paw has been confused with human remains on a number of occasions. The remains are brought to the attention of the local police. An incident like that happened not long ago in Massachusetts.

http://www.isciencetimes.com/articles/4979/20130422/bigfoot-foot-found-mysterious-limb-baffles-massachusetts.htm

Bears are also identified without being seen. Researchers string barbed wire to collect hair samples from passing bears. This is used to characterize the population through DNA studies.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/279805855_fig1_Fig-41-A-barbed-wire-hair-snag-capturing-black-bear-hair-for-later-DNA-analysis-As

Bigfoot on the other hand is never seen in trail cam photos. There are unidentifiable photos. One of my favorites was the blurry motions of a proposed bigfoot that turned out to be two teenagers getting stoned in the woods. There are no BF DNA finds on any researcher barbed wire. There are no sightings in binoculars or spotting scopes.

There are all sorts of elusive animals that are seen in the mountains. These range from leopards to bears to deer to sheep. But no bigfoot.

We can all imagine a person hiding out in the forests. Tales of Japanese soldiers that did not surrender after WWII come to mind. But are these viable populations? No. The problem for BF is that they have to exist in a breeding population. Such a population is much harder to hide which is why rare and elusive animals are found.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, Merc14 said:

Flu is surging big time Thorvir, take it serious and stay hydrated etc.

Not flu this time, just my normal meniere's disease.  Thanks though. :) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if Bigfoot buried their dead, there would still be a chance of accidentally stumbling upon one (if there was a breeding population). It seems like hikers have found buried murder victims in the woods on quite a few occasions.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds very sus to me ......   a polite arguer but  thats it . So I followed my hunch and checked up on this lack of bear skeletons thing . It seems it is easily debunked and is a  non factual statement made by  BF's friends that has crept into their 'tool kit' .

One started it , now many  repeat it as some adopted 'fact'  ,  all one has to do is enter  ' how hard is it to find a bear skeleton ?'

In google search 

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHBF_enAU699AU699&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=how+hard+is+it+to+find+a+bear+skeleton

He also says he does "hard science" for a living. ... there are never any bear corpses or bones found either, but we know they exist. ... In those three years I encountered four black bear skeletons and actually still have a bear skeleton .... "  

 

 and as far as using Schliemann and Troy as an example -  that comes as a pre-ackaged fail , an issue well dealt with here already - try the search function. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
On 1/30/2017 at 1:41 AM, Talus said:

In caves with small nesting shelters.

As a long time follower of all things Bigfoot on the UM site, and several other sites, I find it unlikely Bigfoot would use caves, or mines, to rest in. Almost all easily found caves have been explored, and as far as I know, zero evidence of bigfoots in them has been found. This may sound a lot like, "All lands have been explored", but I'd disagree with evidence in the forests not being found, as the same arguement. Caves are enclosed, and many times dry, such that evidence can stay a long time. And they are most often small in size. The entire forested lands (Such as Oregon, where I live), can not all be seen at the same time, so there can be doubt as to what is in the woods at any one time, and evidence does not last long.

To summarize, Caves = Most Likely Not, Woods = Too Big to Know.

15 hours ago, Talus said:

Perhaps I am not an avid hunter and don't know.. but everytime I have heard discussions regarding bear remains is that the skeletal remains are indeed hard to find in the wild. Less Straud confirmed that when speaking about the subject; and be careful if you want to dis Less..Less is the man! 

One thing to consider is that there are supposedly near on a million bears in North America, and from estimates of minimal breeding populations, maybe 2000 bigfoots. That is a ratio of 50 to 1. So for every 50 bears found, you should expect to find a bigfoot. I think if bigfoot is nominally a loner, then it is unlikely that it would have burial practices, and like I said above, wouldn't go into a cave. I've never found a bear skeleton, but I recognize that many people have. And thus a bigfoot skeleton should have been found by now. 

As to people being found dug up by animals. If, there are over 200 million people and 2000 bigfoot, I'd think finding a buried bigfoot would be exceedingly rare.

I did a math experiment once where I found out how many bears get hit in North America each year, and then used that 50 to 1 ratio to predict how many bigfoots should be killed by cars every year. That came out to one every three years. But, if we account for other variables, such as BF being faster to cross roads, and being more intelligent, a number of one every 20 years might not be out of the question. BF could have been hit several times, indeed some BF databases say BF has been hit numerous times (if not also killed), so that seems to line up in my thinking.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Thorvir said:

 

Not flu this time, just my normal meniere's disease.  Thanks though. :) 

Sorry to hear that! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Sorry to hear that! 

"Hear" that?  You trying to be funny or something?

:P

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nest type structures have been found throughout many areas. These nests often consist of sticks and branches with a soft lining of moss. It is thought that these structure could have been built by Bigfoot as a place to sleep or rest.

http://www.bigfoothunting.com/info/where_does_bigfoot_live.shtml

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Black Monk said:

Nest type structures have been found throughout many areas. These nests often consist of sticks and branches with a soft lining of moss. It is thought that these structure could have been built by Bigfoot as a place to sleep or rest.

http://www.bigfoothunting.com/info/where_does_bigfoot_live.shtml

Umm, it doesn't have any photos except that one of a tree with bushes near it, no locations, no studies or research etc.  Your link simply says, and I quote:

"Nest type structures have been found throughout many areas. These nests often consist of sticks and branches with a soft lining of moss. It is thought that these structure could have been built by Bigfoot as a place to sleep or rest."

Once again someone makes something up whole cloth and then the rest of Bigfootery treats it as settled science.  :rolleyes:

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Black Monk said:

Nest type structures have been found throughout many areas. These nests often consist of sticks and branches with a soft lining of moss. It is thought that these structure could have been built by Bigfoot as a place to sleep or rest.

http://www.bigfoothunting.com/info/where_does_bigfoot_live.shtml

Let's see the hair that was removed these so-called nests to see what sort of animal rested there.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.