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 -

Guy Chases Bigfoot in the woods


Farmer77

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, back to earth said:

 

Pffft .... I been reading along - and you clearly fudged it and misquoted . 

So do you think the fossil record is 100% complete? I maybe fudged what he said, but what I said was entirely in the spirit of what Psyche was getting at.

Psyche said it isn't in the fossil record, and implied it therefore didn't exist. i simply pointed out that the fossil record isn't anywhere close to 100%. Thus a hole in the fossil record isn't exactly proof of non-existence. Only lack of current physical DNA proof is reason for belief in BF non-existence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
12 hours ago, Paranormal Gal said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

The flat Earth model is an archaic conception of the Earth's shape as a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures subscribed to a flat Earth cosmography, including Greece until the classical period, the Bronze Age and Iron Age civilizations of the Near East until the Hellenistic period, India until the Gupta period (early centuries AD), and China until the 17th century. That paradigm was also typically held in the aboriginal cultures of the Americas, and the notion of a flat Earth domed by the firmament in the shape of an inverted bowl was common in pre-scientific societies.[1]

The idea of a spherical Earth appeared in Greek philosophy with Pythagoras (6th century BC), although most pre-Socratics (6th – 5th century BC) retained the flat Earth model. Aristotle provided evidence for the spherical shape of the Earth on empirical grounds by around 330 BC. Knowledge of the spherical Earth gradually began to spread beyond the Hellenistic world from then on.[2][3][4][5]

Modern flat Earth theories, such as those espoused by modern flat Earth societies, are commonly labelled pseudoscience.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

 

The myth of the flat Earth is the modern misconception that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages in Europe saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical.[1][2]

During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. From at least the 14th century, belief in a flat Earth among the educated was almost nonexistent, despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.[3]

According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars (regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[4] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[5]

Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-Earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over biological evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the Earth was flat", and ascribes popularization of the flat-Earth myth to histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving.[6][7][2]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the fossil record may not be 100% complete, the closer to the present it is the more well-known it is. There should be some sort of fossil lineage for a large bipedal ape from Pliocene and Pleistocene sediments, which are very common and well-surveyed in North America. However, there are no remains from any sort of ape besides humans. If Bigfoot did exist, the most likely possibility is that it would be some species of human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Carnivorfox said:

While the fossil record may not be 100% complete, the closer to the present it is the more well-known it is. There should be some sort of fossil lineage for a large bipedal ape from Pliocene and Pleistocene sediments, which are very common and well-surveyed in North America. However, there are no remains from any sort of ape besides humans. If Bigfoot did exist, the most likely possibility is that it would be some species of human.

Yeah. I'm not disputing modern lack of findings. I was disputing the fossil record. There should be a fossil lineage, but lack of a lineage currently doesn't mean it won't eventually be found.

I'd agree that Bigfoot, assuming it exists, would have to be "human". Maybe decended from Homo Erectus, but much more likely, IMHO, to be a genetic disease that perhaps is extremely recessive in some Native populations, and not talked about. 

How long does something have to be buried to be counted as part of the fossil record? Seriously. Because I don't know.....:mellow:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2017 at 4:33 PM, DieChecker said:

So do you think the fossil record is 100% complete?

Nope !    That would be a rather silly  thought  . 

On 3/17/2017 at 4:33 PM, DieChecker said:

 

I maybe fudged what he said, but what I said was entirely in the spirit of what Psyche was getting at.

I was only complaining about the fudge .  

If we talking about the spirit of things  .... yuo\ou could have at least made rum fudge . 

On 3/17/2017 at 4:33 PM, DieChecker said:

Psyche said it isn't in the fossil record, and implied it therefore didn't exist.

I think the implication is on the reader's part .  It was on my part when I first read it, as  I thought similar ... and then  thought 'Huh ?  That isnt like him. ' So I went back and read it closely . 

On 3/17/2017 at 4:33 PM, DieChecker said:

 

i simply pointed out that the fossil record isn't anywhere close to 100%.

Of course not, how could we ever know if it was ? 

On 3/17/2017 at 4:33 PM, DieChecker said:

 

Thus a hole in the fossil record isn't exactly proof of non-existence. Only lack of current physical DNA proof is reason for belief in BF non-existence.

I think there are a wide range of reasons,  not only that . 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Daughter of the Nine Moons said:

Let's get back on to the topic of Bigfoot.

Yes.    

 I believe his feet are round on the bottom, and not flat .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Fossil Record; It could be that there's more that hasn't been found than we can imagine.  Maybe some areas were not covered quickly with mud, or ash, or the pure acid ground and extreme humidity played a role like in the Northwestern U.S. today.  Lets say some arid areas have some fossils but would be minus the era of extreme wetness.  Could be mistaken but many monkeys and unknown Apes and Chimpanzees have never been found but we are certain they existed and of course that's just a trace of what would have been living with them around and next to them in those climes at the time.

Edited by MWoo7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Yeah. I'm not disputing modern lack of findings. I was disputing the fossil record. There should be a fossil lineage, but lack of a lineage currently doesn't mean it won't eventually be found.

I'd agree that Bigfoot, assuming it exists, would have to be "human". Maybe decended from Homo Erectus, but much more likely, IMHO, to be a genetic disease that perhaps is extremely recessive in some Native populations, and not talked about. 

How long does something have to be buried to be counted as part of the fossil record? Seriously. Because I don't know.....:mellow:

There's not a set age to be considered part of the fossil record. The bone just has to have undergone mineralization to be considered a fossil.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the fossil record. Here is a interesting article...

http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/2012/11/29/why-did-horses-die-out-in-north-america/#axzz4bfrpQNvG

Basically the fossil record showed horses going extinct in North America around 15000 years ago. Then a frozen remains located on the tundra of Alaska suggested they might have held out another 5000 years and the scientists suggest they still might have been spread out across North America at that time. They do admit that the one they found might have been one of the last, but it might also have been one out of a million existing at the time. AND the only reason they know this is because they found a body frozen in the tundra. Maybe a BF will be found frozen in the tundra some day. :tu:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Daughter of the Nine Moons said:

Let's get back on to the topic of Bigfoot.

If it looks like a Bigfoot and smells like a Bigfoot then it must be a .... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2017 at 5:25 PM, papageorge1 said:

I watched it all. It seems like the analysis guy was leaning towards 'real'. I would like to see an interview with the cameraman and any witnesses which the camera guy told to go into the house at the beginning. And to hear if there were any other people in the area with stories.

Unexplained Mysteries needs to give me a grant to do some real research for them.

Although I admire your enthusiasm, papageorge1, I believe that it's never a good idea to give a self-proclaimed "cryptozoologist" money for funding an expedition. Take Melba T. Ketchum, for example, who's claimed to have found DNA evidence of Bigfoot. Her report isn't peer-reviewed nor does she agree to say where she got the DNA sample in the first place. There's a lot of gullible in the cryptozoology / paranormal community and these frauds know that. There are plenty of non-profit organizations out there like the BFRO whose members do the research in their own spare time. Not saying that you're a con, but you don't really much need money to go around and look for evidence. As long as if you have enough money for gas and food, you're golden.

I feel like money brings corruption to the subjects of bigfoot and other cryptids, and the only worse than no evidence is FALSE evidence!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
6 minutes ago, Hi-NRG Eurobeat Man said:

Although I admire your enthusiasm, papageorge1, I believe that it's never a good idea to give a self-proclaimed "cryptozoologist" money for funding an expedition. Take Melba T. Ketchum, for example, who's claimed to have found DNA evidence of Bigfoot. Her report isn't peer-reviewed nor does she agree to say where she got the DNA sample in the first place. There's a lot of gullible in the cryptozoology / paranormal community and these frauds know that. There are plenty of non-profit organizations out there like the BFRO whose members do the research in their own spare time. Not saying that you're a con, but you don't really much need money to go around and look for evidence. As long as if you have enough money for gas and food, you're golden.

I feel like money brings corruption to the subjects of bigfoot and other cryptids, and the only worse than no evidence is FALSE evidence!

Actually my request for money back when this was written was meant to be humorous. I was goofing with my hecklers. On a serious note though, I am tired of the distorters on both sides and know I could remain serious and objective. I can still be funded through PayPal <joke>. First investment would be the safari outfit with matching hat and coordinated boots. I will need to look cool when I give my benefactors my YouTube updates.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Hi-NRG Eurobeat Man said:

Although I admire your enthusiasm, papageorge1, I believe that it's never a good idea to give a self-proclaimed "cryptozoologist" money for funding an expedition. Take Melba T. Ketchum, for example, who's claimed to have found DNA evidence of Bigfoot. Her report isn't peer-reviewed nor does she agree to say where she got the DNA sample in the first place. There's a lot of gullible in the cryptozoology / paranormal community and these frauds know that. There are plenty of non-profit organizations out there like the BFRO whose members do the research in their own spare time. Not saying that you're a con, but you don't really much need money to go around and look for evidence. As long as if you have enough money for gas and food, you're golden.

I feel like money brings corruption to the subjects of bigfoot and other cryptids, and the only worse than no evidence is FALSE evidence!

Welcome to the forum.   You seem to have a good grasp of the bigfoot business.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Actually my request for money back when this was written was meant to be humorous. I was goofing with my hecklers. On a serious note though, I am tired of the distorters on both sides and know I could remain serious and objective. I can still be funded through PayPal <joke>. First investment would be the safari outfit with matching hat and coordinated boots. I will need to look cool when I give my benefactors my YouTube updates.

Ahhh ... safari suits !    Where art thou ! 

 

safari+suit.PNG

 

Regarding funding Papa  ... we may have started something back then .  I see a recent  fringeyraver  has also jumped on this bandwagon (in the closed talking sasquatch thread ). he suggests that , for this site to fair, it should fund some people  ( just like him,  one supposes ) to get out in the field and do some 'research' and post it here .

I think it will spread .... before long a a fringe challenge might even be ;  'If you guys are not going to fund me to do research on it you are being biased ! 

Exaggeration ?     ..........   we'll see .  B)

 

meanwhile you can hum along to this   ... it is the safari suit theme song !  

 

 

Edited by back to earth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Myles said:

Welcome to the forum.   You seem to have a             good grasp of the bigfoot                business.

 

:D  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Actually my request for money back when this was written was meant to be humorous. I was goofing with my hecklers. On a serious note though, I am tired of the distorters on both sides and know I could remain serious and objective. I can still be funded through PayPal <joke>. First investment would be the safari outfit with matching hat and coordinated boots. I will need to look cool when I give my benefactors my YouTube updates.

Haha I had a feeling you were xD. I should've read farther into this thread before posting. And yes, the most important thing you need when looking for cryptids is STYLE!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hi-NRG Eurobeat Man said:

Haha I had a feeling you were xD. I should've read farther into this thread before posting. And yes, the most important thing you need when looking for cryptids is STYLE!!! :D

Next you guys might want to chip-in and get me that 4-wheel drive Jeep wth those monster wheels. Pretty, pretty please. Ketchum and I wii be stylin' on our squatching dates. I heard being out in nature gets her frisky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Next you guys might want to chip-in and get me that 4-wheel drive Jeep wth those monster wheels. Pretty, pretty please. Ketchum and I wii be stylin' on our squatching dates. I heard being out in nature gets her frisky.

Here you go... perfect :D

BF17.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Next you guys might want to chip-in and get me that 4-wheel drive Jeep wth those monster wheels. Pretty, pretty please. Ketchum and I wii be stylin' on our squatching dates. I heard being out in nature gets her frisky.

Nothing turns on Ketchum more than FAKE NEWS :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Myles said:

Welcome to the forum.   You seem to have a good grasp of the bigfoot business.

Thank you! I've been interested in cryptozoological topics for the past 1.5 years now, and just a few days ago I discovered this website. For the past few weeks I had been trying to find an active discussion board dedicated to discussing and analyzing cryptids, and it seems like I found one :)

  • Like 2
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.