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 4
Bigfoot_Is_Real

Info on BIGFOOT!

429 posts in this topic

Bigfoot you all know his name and what he is but do you know anything else here is some info on this mighty animal :geek:

( all info obtain from BFRO anything in brown is from ths website )

The term sasquatch, for the North American primate under consideration in this website, is an anglicized derivative of the word "Sésquac", meaning "wild man". The original word, in the Stó:lõ dialect of the Halkomelem language, is used by the Coast Salish Indians of the Fraser Valley and parts of Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Indian tribes across North America have a total of more than sixty different terms for the sasquatch.

Bigfoot was a journalistic term generated in the middle of the last century during a rash of sightings in Northern California; its use is not unreasonable since the species has proportionally much bigger feet than those of human beings and, furthermore, the word has come to be recognized widely. A goodly selection of fanciful terms have been used by pioneers and later non-native inhabitants of North America for the occasional published and repeated encounters with sasquatches.

The description given here is derived from a compilation of thousands of eye witness reports from the entire continent, some of astounding length, detail, and corroborative evidence; the Patterson movie, taken in 1967, and a recent computer-based image analysis of it; and statistical analysis of a large database accumulated over the last fifty years, primarily by John Green. For the sake of brevity, the description will not be couched in the customary cautionary terminology with the usual “weasel words”. Hence, the seemingly dogmatic style of the text is used only in the interest of terseness and it should be leavened by reference to the literature cited at the end of this article. This discussion refers to the state of knowledge as of February 2002.

The sasquatch is a large, hairy, bipedal non-human primate (Fig. 1) that is distributed over the North American continent to varying degrees of concentration. Its massiveness, deviation from human bearing and different gait leave no doubt in the mind of observers that they have seen a creature different from man or known animals.

Skin

Skin color ranges from the deepest black or charcoal to deep brown, "sunburned" reddish brown, and gray. Some areas, like the nose, appear at times in a shiny, oily black color. The palms are lighter in color, and the soles of the feet quite light, presumably as a result of thick sole pads composed, as in other primates, of fat and connective tissue. A few albinistic sasquatches have been seen, whose skin color was pink.

Hair

The sasquatch is covered with hair, not fur. Fur has guard hairs and an undercoat, while primate hair consists of one type of hair alone. The sasquatch, being a primate, does not molt its hair, but it is replaced one hair at a time, hence is not found in wooly batches.

Color of the hair ranges from black or dark (50%), through various shades of reddish-brown and gray to white. The body can have varicolored patches of hair. Older animals have increasingly grey hair, though color does not appear to change from childhood to adulthood. Hair is variously glossy clean and shiny, fluffy, or dirty, matted and unkempt ("angora goat dreadlocks"), probably a function of native curliness, age, or of recent immersion in water or lack thereof. Females have been reported to be cleaner than males.

Hair length ranges from 3" to around 2’ (15" longest measured in hand, longer observed in the wild). There is no taper or color banding other than graying with age. Long hair covers the head and, almost invariably, the ears; very short hair on the face; occasional reports of heavy hairiness in male faces ("mustache" and "beard") vs. no facial hair in females; long hair across the top of the shoulders (once described as "bouncing like a cape" ); long hair on the forearms ("like a spaniel"); different orientations of hair on back; breasts in females hair covered (contrary to a mistaken claim in the literature); long hair on buttocks, sometimes overhanging them; groin with enough hair to obscure genitalia; and long hair on the calves (like "bellbottom pants" in a sasquatch observed standing in snow). The hair stood visibly on end in situations where the sasquatch appeared frightened.

Under the microscope (Fig. 2), the average diameter of hair is 65 µm (40-90 µm), these values derived from 15 separately collected samples in four States. The cortex has a uniform reddish tinge plus fine pigment granule distribution, whereas the medulla is absent. Intense efforts at DNA analysis of the hair have been uniformly negative, possibly a function of the lacking medulla. Most human hair (Fig. 3) has a medulla, if only fragmentary, but fine blond hair occasionally looks similar to sasquatch hair. Hence, there is no absolute distinction that can be made. Hair from other forest species, like rodents, carnivores, and ungulates can be differentiated without question.

Odor

About 10-15% of close encounters are connected with an intense, disagreeable stench, comparable to the odor of smegma. Gorillas under conditions of distress exude a gagging, overpowering aroma, the origin of which is the axillary organ, i.e., the armpit with its apocrine sweat glands. The same anatomy probably pertains to the sasquatch.

Many reports refer to uneasiness of man or animals ("being watched") well ahead of any subsequent encounter. A pheromone effect has been suggested, meaning the release of a behavior pattern, "fight or flight", by an airborne molecule. Although this substance might originate from the same anatomical location as the odor, the two are not equivalent and should not be confused.

Head and Neck

The head, though massive by direct comparison to that of man, has been described as "relatively" small for an animal of that size, indicative of a rather small brain. The head develops a sagittal crest in adult males as well as in females, probably bony, which sometimes produces the effect of a person wearing a hooded sweatshirt. Some animals, possibly younger, have a round head. Brain volume is probably close to or slightly above that of the gorilla.

There is a conspicuous brow ridge with a receding forehead, giving the eyes a deep-set look. The face (Fig. 4) is rather flat with prominent cheekbones, a square jaw, and the mouth region is only slightly protuberant. Deep brown eye color predominates, with a "red" component common (probably a bloodshot sclera). A white sasquatch was reported to have blue eyes. Night reflection from eyes varies most commonly between red and yellow and is probably dependent on pupillary size rather than true reflectivity.

The nose is near human in shape, though "pug" or flat, sometimes with forward directed nostrils. The mouth is often reported to be thin-lipped, with yellowish, square teeth with human appearance. When larger canines have been seen, they did not project substantially beyond the plane of the other teeth and would be subject to wear with time. Ears are almost invariably hidden under hair and have been reported to be either rounded or pointed.

Muscles from the back of the head flare out to the shoulders to obscure the neck. A result is that, as in weight lifters, the body is usually turned with the head when a rearward view is desired.

Overall, sasquatches seem to exhibit as much individual diversity in looks as do people, ranging from a typical ape appearance to one described as "an old Indian". The cause may well be the result of the animal not being subject to predation, its young being nurtured and protected into near adulthood, and differences in appearance not being a selective handicap. The same considerations apply to the diversity of coat colors.

Trunk

The trunk is generally carried at a forward angle of about 15° ("hunched over"). This means that the species has not achieved a full upright stance, a difference from human beings, although at times the animals stand up straight. When ultimately a specimen comes to hand, the hip anatomy will be of telling importance to the evolution of an upright stance.

The shoulders are proportionately wider than those of man, measuring about 40% of the height in a sasquatch compared to 25-30% in man. Large sasquatches have been described as having four to five foot wide shoulders. They are barrel-chested, with a large respiratory tidal volume, often commented upon when their stertorous breathing has been heard. The Patterson sasquatch (filmed in the famous 1967 movie), a female slightly below the mean height of the population, has a chest circumference of about 60" (a value calculated from available images). This circumference would be about 65" for the average-sized animal and well above 75" for the largest individuals that have been seen.

Females have breasts, small and conical near puberty (10-12 years, see data below), rather heavy and pendulous during reproductive years (see Fig. 1) and shrunken in old age. They are hair-covered except for the nipples and areolae.

The arms are massive and might exceed human length somewhat, frequently reported as hanging close to their knees, though accentuated by the slouching stance of the animals. They are particularly hairy along the forearms and end in very large and massive hands (once described as "the size of paddles").

The hand deviates in slight but significant ways from the human model (as derived from hand and knuckle prints, Figs. 5). Fingers are generally shorter, especially the thumb, and the latter is carried "farther toward the wrist" as compared to the position in man. The hand largely lacks the thenar pad (the mounded muscle at the base of the thumb), a corollary of the lowest opposability found in the higher primates (Fig. 6). The hand is proportionately broader than that of man, palm width in adults measuring up to 8". Both finger and toe nails are deeply colored ("nicotine stained"), presumably a combination of dirt and thick keratin, though fingernails are light colored in some. There are no claws.

Young males have a V-shaped trunk, tapering from a wide chest to a narrower waist, whereas the female trunk has an overall barrel shape. Female hips seem to be broader than those of the male. Either sex rarely has a protruding abdomen (other than during pregnancy in the female). Genitalia in the female are hidden by hair, as are generally those of the male. The massive sexual swelling, observed in some female apes, has not been seen in the sasquatch.

Legs and Feet

The legs are massive, especially the thighs, in one case reported to be the diameter of a "garbage can" (about 20"), but even in the (female) Patterson sasquatch about 15" thick. The calves are also unusually muscular, the gastrocnemius (calf) muscle being particularly prominent in rear views of the Patterson sasquatch.

Feet are most amply recorded by way of innumerable measured footprints. They range in recorded length from barely walking infants at 4"-5" (Fig. 7) to known female prints and very large presumptive male footprints (Fig. 8). The mean length of 702 prints (collected over nearly 50 years) is 15.6" (Fig. 9) with a range of 4" to 27", and a mean width of about 0.45 times that of the length. This proportion remains about the same with increasing length of the feet. Feet grow in excess of gain in height of the animals to compensate for the exponential increase in weight with linear dimensions. The foot does not have an arch, but retains the primitive primate midsole flexure of apes, called a metatarsal hinge. During running, often only the anterior half of the foot (anterior to the metatarsal hinge) contacts the ground (Fig. 10). The toes are capable of substantial splaying in slippery terrain, especially abduction of the big toe. The sole is very thick and indents deeply over uneven terrain without harm to the animal (Fig. 11).

Body Size and Weight

The height average for the sampled population is 7’ 10", derived from a combination of eye witness estimates and scaling from footprints. Babies shortly after birth are small (and "ugly", as one eye witness commented) by human standards, but grow rapidly and evidently walk at an early age. Aside from infants being carried, small walking sasquatches, 3-4’ tall, have been seen. The animals reach maturity at a height of 6’-7’ and the largest, reliably estimated individuals exceed 10’. Males are taller than females, but seemingly by no more than about a foot at the median of the population.

Weight is difficult to estimate on sight and seems to vary from animal to animal as much as in people, but a tight, established relationship exists in primates between chest circumference and weight. Applying this formula, the average sasquatch can be estimated to weigh 650 lbs (Fig. 12), the Patterson sasquatch 540 lbs, and the maximum (for a 24" or larger footprint) probably to exceed 1,000 lbs.

Vision

The sasquatch is a predominantly nocturnal animal and its night vision exceeds that of man substantially. It is probable that this increase in night vision is a function of a larger eye and pupillary size rather than a reflecting layer. The animals walk with ease in seeming total darkness, but forage during the day. An indication of their nighttime activity is the fact that they are seen as frequently during the night, if not more often, than during the day, despite the limited sight distance and detection by nocturnal observers.

Other Senses

In parallel with other large primates, sasquatch senses are acute but probably not more so than those of a human aborigine, e.g., American Indians before the deterioration of their senses by pollution and noise. They detect the approach of man by simply remaining still in forested environment, but there have been many occasions where a sasquatch failed to detect a resting person in full view, simply because the animal was preoccupied and the person did not move or make a sound.

The sasquatch seems hardened to pain and discomfort, living in, to our perception, disagreeable climates and walking through blackberry thickets, Devil’s Club, icy streams, and sharp rocks without deviation, though they seem to value on occasion the soft comfort of mole hills, moss or a freshly graded berm of a forest road, as their footprints testify.

Diet and Digestion

The sasquatch is an omnivore with a substantial carnivorous component to its diet. They have been observed directly to eat leaves, berries, fruits, roots, aquatic plants and other vegetable matter, catch fish, dig up clams or ground squirrels, and prey on poultry, deer, elk and bear. In addition, they eat other odd items, such as young evergreen shoots, crayfish, road kill, meat or fish from human storage sites, hunter-killed game animals (these sometimes snatched in front of the hunter), and occasional garbage. They take an occasional livestock animal, but not with sufficient frequency as to produce organized persecution.

They appear to kill large prey animals by a blow with the fist, rock or stick or by twisting their necks, sometimes to the point of decapitation. Liver and other internal organs are their first targets. The remaining meat is sometimes stored on the ground under a haphazard shelter of sticks or lifted into tree forks above ground. No compelling evidence exists that they store food in any substantial way beyond this; only rarely has a sasquatch been observed carrying a fish some distance from its origin, or a deer, presumably into hiding.

Caloric requirements per gram of living matter decrease as a function of total mass of the animal. Nonetheless, the nutritional needs of an average sasquatch can be calculated to amount to about 5,000 calories per day. This amount can only be fulfilled by rather constant searching for food and especially by intermittent predation. Sasquatches have been seen both with substantial girth as well as looking decidedly skinny.

Drinking has been observed by small animals dipping their faces into the water, while adults commonly drink out of a cupped hand, or resort to a cupped leaf or a dry, hollow stem of a weed.

Their feces are sausage-shaped, up to 4" inches in diameter and up to three feet long, forming a folded heap. They are replete with numerous intestinal parasites, including hook worms, as well as small bones, hair of prey and ample vegetal matter. A sasquatch has been observed to wipe itself with its hand and lick its fingers briefly, a decidedly simian gesture.

Growth and Reproduction

Through several longitudinal studies and incidental observations of footprints of family groups, an approximate growth scale has been constructed (Fig. 13). Sasquatch infants are born small ("like a 4 lb. preemie"), but are very fleet-footed at just a few years of age. The infant stays with the mother until puberty at age 10 or so, measuring about 6’ in height by then. Offspring seem to be spaced about 5 years apart, as judged by the admittedly small sample of grouped footprints; thus, a smaller infant will have the company of an older sibling for some years. A young male and one barely maturing female, as evidenced by immature breasts, about 7’ and 6’ tall, respectively, were seen keeping solicitous company.

Mating has been observed primarily between May and June, mostly between established pairs, and there is a suggestion of the birthing time lying between February and May. The duration of pregnancy (probably near 9 months) is partly related to the average weight of the species. Birth has been (very rarely) reported to occur in the squatting position, with other individuals nearby. The spacing of offspring is presumably governed by lowered fertility in consequence of demand feeding as well as infant mortality. On two occasions, females were observed carrying a dead infant.

A sasquatch can hypothetically be expected to have a mean life expectancy of about 35 years, a number derived from a relationship that exists in mammals between body mass and length of life. Old animals have been seen to show all the signs of wear, i.e., "snaggle teeth", "worn dreadlocks", as well as thinned hair, deeply wrinkled skin and open sores. A dead animal, if unattended, can be expected to be consumed rapidly by various carnivores, the bones by rodents, the hair by moths and any remainder would fall prey to the acidic environment of the forests with no remnant left visible under seasonal leaf and needle fall.

Physical Activities

Most sasquatches are observed walking, and the observer almost invariably comments on their smooth, long and fluent stride ("like cross country skiing" or "like riding a bicycle") with wide arm swings. This effect is produced by their so-called compliant gait, meaning that they do not lock their knees during a step but keep them bent and thereby suppress the up-and-down oscillations of the upper body that is so characteristic of the human gait. Part of the sasquatch gait is a high foot rise in back during the swing phase and a longer bipedal contact with the ground. Step length averages 5’ (Fig. 14), an interval that is uncomfortable or impossible to duplicate or sustain for any distance by a would-be hoaxer. The gait has very little straddle, i.e., feet are put in line.

Running sasquatches constitute about 10% of all sightings. From observed walking cadence, step length and reports of animals running alongside moving vehicles, their top speed probably rivals that of a running horse (near 40 mph). The step length (measured from heel to heel) changes little whether the animal walks on the level or uphill. When standing still, the sasquatch will often remain totally immovable to escape detection, or at best slowly sway from side to side. They have been seen to assume the same sitting, squatting or lying positions that people do, frequently shown by worn areas on their hair coat. Quadrupedal gait is seen rarely in juveniles, although adults, on ascending dense slopes, frequently pull themselves up on adjacent trees with alternating arms.

In contrast to other higher primates, they seem to be powerful swimmers, as seen by their sporadic presence on otherwise uninhabitable small islands of the British Columbia coast and direct observations of animals in or under water, doing a frog-kick.

They sleep in mostly temporary shelters, padded with available vegetation. Caves and natural shelters seem to be used rarely. Padding consists of ferns, moss, bear grass, soft evergreen or rhododendron branches and leaves. Occasionally partial roofs are fashioned over their resting places from broken boughs. Once discovered, a nest is generally abandoned.

Their strength, especially upper body, is legendary. They seem to take "pleasure" in exercising this strength, for example, lifting basketball-sized rocks and throwing them in arcs to scare off intruders, lifting the edges of mobile homes, cars or trailers, lifting and throwing full 50 gal. drums (450 lbs.) or 240 lb rocks (weighed later), and spirally twisting the trunks of small trees, possibly as territorial or way markers (Fig. 15).

Vocalization and Communication

On the whole, the sasquatch proceeds in silence. Patterned, repetitive knocking sounds, produced with rocks or thick branches hit against other rocks or dead trees, are apparently used as long distance communication or deterrence.

Since they are a nocturnal species, they seem to rely on vocalizations more than diurnal primates. They are capable of a complex collection of sounds, starting with whistling (produced in the throat), through moans, howls, hoots, grunts, extremely deep growls, roars ("like a lion from the bottom of a 50-gallon drum"), and chilling screams, rising from a low roar over several seconds. More rarely, they produce melodic and imitative sounds or complex vocalizations that give the impression of a primitive language, even of a "woman talking" without the "words" ever being intelligible.

The disturbing nature of the loud screams seems to lie in their perceived near human quality, though too loud, enduring and powerful to be attributed to any possible "real" person. Giggling, laughing and crying sounds have been heard, sometimes in response to appropriate events.

There has been little opportunity to study facial expressions of the sasquatch, which are apt to be different from human ones and might be misinterpreted. But very close observers reported a comical look of surprise, when a sasquatch was suddenly encountered at close range, evident curiosity, as well as a look of "sheer terror" of a sasquatch caught between traffic on a dark, rainy highway.

Social Behavior and Curiosity

Despite the rare observations of sasquatch groups, they appear to have more social cohesion than is generally assumed, moving at times in a group that suggests an extended family. Under undisturbed circumstances, the young play with each other and around and on the adults, and sometimes small groups forage together. Young ones are allowed to explore and be potentially visible in a context where the adults stay out of view. Adults seem remarkably indulgent of the infants, tolerating on one occasion an infant’s temper tantrum without intervention. In a totally relaxed setting, the adults spend substantial time grooming each other. On a few occasions, two or more sasquatches were observed wrestling with each other with intermissions for rest. It appears that older siblings, or at least juvenile animals, sometimes care for younger ones. The need for large amounts of food for any one animal may lead to a fusion - fission type of social organization, in which individuals separate to forage and come together for social activities.

The more frequent sightings of single males over females may be due to these animals probing the terrain for new niches, food sources or mates. They most probably form the majority of cases in which curiosity lures an animal into plain sight. Such curiosity-evoking events range from a lighted window in a secluded house to barns with animals in them, unusual animals in outside corrals, cars or equipment being repaired in a remote location, loud noises like chainsaws or explosions, and especially the screaming of children at play. Repeatedly, sasquatches have watched in these contexts, occasionally for hours, and even attempted interaction in the play of children. Sometimes, a sasquatch seen in the open, will retreat into cover, but remain to watch his observers from (incomplete) hiding.

Two noteworthy facets of sasquatch behavior have been observed repeatedly. They seem to be rather "orderly", stacking rocks in cairns during searching (Fig. 16) and not tearing human food caches or backpacks apart randomly in the manner of bears. Secondly, they have a tendency to leave "gifts" in the same location in which food was deposited for them. These can range from little piles of stones, a dog skull, handfuls of evergreen shoots, to small live animals, like a goat kid, several live kittens, a turtle, all taken from elsewhere, either as a "gift" or possibly as shared "food".

Aggressiveness and Displays

Their responses to people vary from immediate withdrawal, the most common response, to lengthy inspection if no threat is perceived. They seem to react in a more relaxed fashion to women and children and avoid men, even in an accustomed setting, possibly as a function of human body language. All told, they are unaggressive to a fault, often leisurely retreating while being shot at. There is no documented case in the past 100 years of a sasquatch doing deliberate harm to a person.

Sasquatches seem to be indulgent of human children and small animals, like puppies, goat kids, and kittens. Several reports suggest that they may opportunistically retain small animals to use as live toys or pets as has been observed in bonobos. On the other hand, they reserve a special distaste for aggressive dogs, as do gorillas. They deal with these by slapping them (causing a 75 lb. dog to fly 40’) or flailing them against trees.

While scaring people out of their territory, they often run alongside them, though out of sight, and only desist when the terrain would expose them to view. This effort is sometimes preceded or accompanied by tree shaking, pushing over of trees or snags with appropriate noise, or simply by repeatedly breaking large sticks or branches for the sound effect. The apparent sounds of chest thumping have been heard, but the behavior has not been seen. All these aggressive displays are also found in the great apes.

It would be ideal for a human observer, in an unanticipated encounter, not to stare at the animal, but to sit on the ground, scratch him or herself, "groom" a companion, or "eat" anything within reach in order to convey as benign an impression as possible. In one instance, in which this behavior was followed, the sasquatch tarried long enough to be "talked" to.

Tool Use

This trait of the human species is largely absent in the sasquatch. As mentioned above, they use branches and rocks to hit trees or other rocks and they throw rocks and other objects out of hiding to scare people out of their territory (as do chimpanzees). Only one case has come to my attention of a boy being inadvertently hit by such a thrown rock (though not seriously injured). Rare reports indicate the possibility of the sasquatch using sticks to kill birds or mammals or to dig in the ground with them.

On one occasion they were observed to fashion "straws" out of the stalks of dead weeds and to drink through them out of a metal tub. They are undoubtedly observant of human appurtenances, such as guns or obvious cameras, and may then take extra care to avoid exposure.

Injury, Disease and Death

Aside from eventual death after getting shot at or getting injured on highways, sasquatches probably die from dental disorders, infections, parasitic infestations and the rigors of exposure to the elements. From their prey, they would become parasitized with every type of intestinal worm as well as flukes. The absence of corpses is expected in the montane environment they inhabit, and it can profitably be compared to a similar absence of bears that died of natural causes. There are some minimal suggestions that sasquatches do not leave their dead unattended, a further factor that would confound such searches for a body.

Ecology

The sasquatch is distributed across the North American continent, from high northern latitudes in Alaska and the Yukon to occasional sightings near river courses and forests in New Mexico and Texas. Their highest concentration appears to lie in Washington, Oregon and northern California, although the chances of potentially more sightings in the wilds of Canada are lessened by the lower human population density. Total numbers for the species in North America have been estimated by various approaches to be from a few thousand up to 10,000. By comparison, black bears number between 650,000 and 700,000 in North America.

Distribution of the sasquatch is presumably heavily influenced by the availability of water, prey, and of dense cover as afforded by northwestern rain forests, Sierra chaparral or the riparian margins of any bodies or courses of water. Since the latter provide secluded avenues throughout the continent, occasional sightings are explicable in relatively arid regions, though even there generally in the vicinity of stands of forest. Similarly, swamps and marshes seem to afford them the desired seclusion. Migration patterns, if they exist at all, have not been established other than possible vertical movement to escape severe winter conditions at higher altitude.

Sightings largely parallel the density of the human population, within reasonable limits. Daytime and nighttime sightings are almost equal in number despite the severely limited sight distance and coverage for observers at night, an indication of the much greater nocturnal activity of the sasquatch. Most sightings consist of chance encounters with single individuals, mostly males by default (identification made difficult by the hairiness of the species). It appears that the animals can be to a considerable degree habituated to the presence of a person. They are more likely to become "tamer" with a woman, over a long period, provided they are fed and not bothered, such as being illuminated at night. Under such long established circumstances, they allow themselves to be seen during their normal activities, even during daylight hours, but mostly at dawn. They are reported substantially less frequently during the late winter, but outright hibernation is not known to occur in primates, though torpor is a possibility. It is probable that in the winter the animals adopt a retiring life style with little activity in some protected niche, surviving on predation and some available vegetation.

Sasquatches of the size mentioned in this article would be expected to roam over a substantial territory to support themselves, possibly hundreds of square miles. Twisting off of small trees, nocturnal screaming and defecation in conspicuous spots have been suggested as possible territorial devices, all of these known from other great apes. In the predominantly forested terrain that they inhabit, footprints are seen with difficulty at best, and it would, at first sight, seem unlikely that they deliberately post or hide them.

Evolution

Evolutionary discussion at this stage would consist of rather futile conjecture when a single good DNA analysis of a piece of skin or well-preserved blood could narrow the choices dramatically. The species is deviant from Homo sapiens by anatomy (crest, feet, musculature, body posture and gait), behavior (nocturnality, lack of compelling tool use, lack of language, lack of cultural traits) and sociology, traits that all argue against a close relationship to modern man. Its potential competitiveness for the same natural resources and space as that used by man may well have been contributory to the evolution of their nocturnal and elusive life style. The paleontological affiliation or identity with Gigantopithecus, as championed by the late Grover Krantz, has many aspects to recommend it.

Isn't this all just a hoaz

NO!!

The Patterson footage has never been debunked as a hoax. No one has ever demonstrated how it was done. Neither the original "costume," nor a matching costume, has ever been presented by honest skeptics, nor by various imposters who claim to have worn the costume.

Large amounts of money have been spent trying to make a matching costume. The best Hollywood costume design talents have been brought to the task, but have never succeeded. The British Broadcasting Corporation spent the most money so far. They failed miserably. The side-by-side results are shown below.

Every attempt and failure to make a similar costume strengthens the case for authenticity of the Patterson footage. Comparing a man in a costume side by side with the Patterson creature in motion helps highlight the striking anatomical peculiarities.

If you hear debunking claims in the future, be ready to ask the obvious questions:

Where is the costume?

If the original costume is gone, why can't they make an identical costume and do it again? Why is that so hard?

Why does the news media always trumpet every half-baked "man in the costume" story that comes along without asking for the obvious proof, which should be so simple to provide?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A History of the various News Stories and Television Programs Claiming the Patterson Footage was shown to be a Hoax.

TV Commercials for Tabloid Program Misinform Millions of Americans and Canadian about the Patterson Footage

In the late 1990's most television viewers in the United States were exposed to television commercials for a deceptive tabloid program claiming to hold the final resolution to the bigfoot mystery. The commercials had an authoritative sounding narrator calmly claiming the upcoming program was going to expose the bigfoot legend and the Patterson footage as a hoax.

Those commercials -- not the program itself -- served to announce that the Patterson footage was fake.

It was pure tabloid television. The program itself was a sham. Fortunately it was graphically obvious that it was a sham. But most people only saw the commercials and only remembered the deceptive message.

Those commercials, for a program produced by the BBC's own Natural History unit, called "X-Creatures," were in heavy rotation for weeks. Every family watching television in the late 1990's saw those commercials several times. They are the main reason many people will make the assertion that the Patterson footage was "shown to be a hoax".

Many people were trained, in effect, to say this, and to think this about the Patterson footage, because some fraudulent TV commercials.

Curiously, many of the same people who accept what they heard on those commercials still believe bigfoots do exist, because they personally know some witnesses, or know people who know witnesses. It seems that people are able to separate the two ideas, bigfoots and the Patterson footage. But the Patterson footage has never been debunked, especially not by the fraudulent tabloid farce made by the BBC.

No scientists or qualified experts have ever debunked the Patterson footage. It has never been shown to be fake. On the contrary, every scientist who has studied the footage either says it shows a real, unclassified species, or that a conclusion cannot be made.

Close scrutiny and analysis of the Patterson footage almost always transforms scientific skeptics into supporters for more research into the subject.

Exploiting the Consistent Popularity of the Bigfoot Subject

The BBC knew the subject of bigfoot/sasquatch was reliable TV ratings gold in the U.S. and Canada.

From across the Atlantic it was assumed the consistent interest in the U.S. and Canada was due mainly to the Patterson footage.

They could not perceive the real reasons behind the interest.

Americans in rural regions have been telling and hearing encounter stories for hundreds of years. The stories generally never mention the Patterson footage at all. Respected elders in many rural communities are eyewitnesses. Their stories are taken very seriously. In vast regions, most people either know an eyewitness personally, or know someone who knows an eyewitness. That's the foundation for the consistent interest in the U.S. and Canada, not the Patterson footage.

For almost 40 years the bigfoot/sasquatch topic has remained near the top of the list of subjects people want to see programs about or read about. Recently, National Geographic Online said an article about recent developments in bigfoot research was the second most read article in 2003, second only to an article about sharks. A subject like this would not remain near the top of the ratings charts for more than 40 years if it was only driven by a 16 second long clip of shakey footage and some campfire stories.

The big problem for TV producers over the years was that there was nothing new to say about the subject, nor any new close range footage. There wasn't anything new to say about the Patterson footage either, unless you were claiming to debunk it ... That would give you something new to say about the footage, and give people a reason to watch the footage again.

The BBC program was directed by Chris Packham and Paul Appleby. Packham was the writer/narrator in the original program.

Packham's script in "X Creatures" goes immediately to work deceiving the audience. He explains that the subject really began with the Patterson footage. "It all goes back to the Patterson footage," says the authoritative sounding American narrator.

One of the big markets for the program was a relatively uninformed British and European audience -- an audience that wouldn't question the premise the the Bigfoot legend arose from the Patterson footage.

The Patterson "Costume" Could Not be Recreated in Hollywood

Packham tries to debunk the Patterson footage by showing how a skilled Hollywood makeup artist could assemble a matching costume, and how the footage can then be perfectly recreated at the actual location.

It sounds simple and logical. That's why they were given a lot of money to find and hire a leading Hollywood costume maker.

How could it go wrong if they had plenty of money to pay for the world's best fakers?

The images below show what Packham and Appleby delivered -- their "proof" that the Patterson footage is a hoax.

It is bizarre to watch this show. At one point there is a split-screen, with the two moving figures side by side. Chris Packham's narration proclaims that has has accurately recreated the hoax with this identical costume.

Are they dangerous?

There are literally thousands of credible eyewitness accounts of sasquatch sightings. Most are from the last hundred years, but some reports extend back several centuries. These reports describe either sightings from a distance or close range encounters. Many of the latter describe situations where backpackers and campers have been approached at night or followed (paralleled) along a trail.

Sasquatches have likely had many opportunities to attack humans. However, only two reports describe violent attacks on humans and just one describes the killing of a human -- the story told by President Teddy Roosevelt in his book, "The Wilderness Hunter" (1890).

A chapter in Roosevelt's book recounts the story of two trappers who were stalked by a sasquatch-like animal in a remote region believed to be in present day Wyoming or Montana. One of the trappers fired his rifle at the sasquatch during their first night in a new location, apparently missing, but the stalking continued. The trappers' camp was twice found ransacked, this occurring during the day while the trappers were out checking the beaver traps they had set.

After the second night, the trappers decided to vacate the area. Prior to their departure, while collecting their traps, the men split up. One was delayed for hours as he prepared beaver caught in the last of the traps, the other headed straight back to camp. His body was found by his partner later that day near the campfire. The dead man had a broken neck. The neck showed teeth or claw marks, but the body was not eaten.

There are no modern reports of humans being injured or killed by a sasquatch.

Although retreating appears to be the typical response of a sasquatch to the presence of humans, many credible reports describe after dark harassment of campers and rural property owners by animals believed to be sasquatches. The harassment activity is usually limited to screams, crashing and snapping of tree limbs and brush, and occasionally the throwing of rocks. There is no way of knowing the purpose for this, but perhaps the common reaction of humans provides a good clue -- people usually get frightened and vacate the area.

While the entire body of reports strongly suggests that sasquatches do not make a practice of harming humans, the same body of evidence suggests they do hunt other animals. Among the animals that appear to be prey are deer, elk, raccoons, beavers, ducks, and rodents.

Sasquatches are also known to kill dogs that chase or threaten them. Dogs often flee or cower in their presence, but some dogs are more aggressive and sometimes receive very brutal treatment as a result. Aggressive dogs have been found torn apart, with sasquatch tracks around the remains.

Witnesses often ask the BFRO if sasquatches are a threat to themselves, their families, or their property. The following opinions are based on behavior patterns that have been consistent for decades, if not centuries:

THREAT TO ADULTS: Sasquatches do not attack humans, but they may stalk or harass humans in a forested area, possibly the result of a territorial conflict. Many reports describe surprise confrontations between humans and sasquatches in various circumstances. Such confrontations may trigger intimidating displays, growling, etc., but not a physical attack. There aren't enough instances of humans attacking sasquatches to reliably indicate whether this provokes more aggressive behavior.

THREAT TO CHILDREN: Several reports describe easy opportunities to attack or grab children who were not closely attended. In all such situations the sasquatches merely observed the children until they themselves were noticed by someone. Then they simply walked or ran away.

THREAT TO PROPERTY: Sasquatches are known to raid chicken coops, rabbit hutches, hog pens, and fruit orchards from time to time. There are few reports of horses or cows being attacked or bothered, but these types of livestock do sometimes get very frightened when sasquatches are nearby, according to witnesses.

THREAT TO DOGS: Sasquatches may kill aggressive dogs that chase or threaten them. Dogs that cower or flee are left alone.

SELF-PROTECTION: A bright flashlight or spotlight seems to be the most effective way to make one or more sasquatches back off and leave an area. Even warning shots are apparently not as effective as bright spotlights, especially when carried by groups of people searching a wooded area after dark. This latter response by humans tends to quickly and permanently halt any recurring harassment behavior or theft of small livestock from rural properties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BFRO are a bunch of information thieves and the part about "threat to dogs" is not even a bit little true :hmm:

Lapi'che

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BFRO are a bunch of information thieves and the part about "threat to dogs" is not even a bit little true :hmm:

Lapi'che

Really :rolleyes: hmm i wonder then why do they find dogs ripped in half after a bigfoot sighting hmm :rolleyes: is not like a bigfoot isn't annoyed by a barking dog like most humans are nooo!! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BFRO are a bunch of information thieves and the part about "threat to dogs" is not even a bit little true :hmm:

Lapi'che

Thats what I was thinking too.. Lol most of this stuff sound like bull..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really :rolleyes: hmm i wonder then why do they find dogs ripped in half after a bigfoot sighting hmm :rolleyes: is not like a bigfoot isn't annoyed by a barking dog like most humans are nooo!! :rolleyes:

It said dogs that cower or flee are left alone. Not here they are half eaten nomatter how they react. :yes:

Lapi'che

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most TV programs try to swing opinion one way or another. The X-Creatures show tried to mainly debunk it, while a more recent show, Giganto:The Real King Kong, was completely supportive of sightings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you think you know everything there is to know about Sasquatch, someone makes a thread like this. :tu:

I can't imagine the amount of time spent on making this though. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with Piney. With everything that has happened internally within the organization over the last year I would take everything they say now with a grain of salt :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened in there orginization?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been getting tired of the BFRO lately, a lot fo their stuff doesn't quite "fit" if you know what I mean, they've got that really nice sightings database though, but I prefer to get my information through other sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the longest post I have seen in years!

P.S The Skunk Ape has been known to smell! :angry2: :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah there organization has been crippled by alot but there sightings are still pretty good and they do have alot of info which i agree with ( some is dumb ) :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I have had some doubts myself about that orgazition especialy the sightings in my area while two of the three do sound credible when you read them the region I'm just wouldn't support a bigfoot there isn't enough tree cover to keep them well hidden there should be more reports the woodland is all patchy not really any place to hide and also I believe a body would have been discovered by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah but what if it buries its dead? just a suggestion ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that would be one possible explanation for the dead but I have spent ton of time out in the woods never saw one or any tracks, also the woodland is very patchy by which I mean they would have to very regulary travel from section to section and I have no idea how it would hide during deer season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm good point maybe its a endargered species that with out proper protection could go exict

SAVE THE BIGFOOT!!! :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigfoot reminds me of Hagrid from Harry Potter...

Could there be a connection???

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah but what if it buries its dead? just a suggestion ;)

They probably do. If they use leafmulch to bury them with the remains certainly would deteriorate fast.

Dallas Gilbert, a Ohio Bigfoot researcher, wrote a similar document to the one you posted originally in 1999 and people connect with the BFRO "ripped it off".

Lapi'che

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been looking more into the Gulf Coast Bigfoot Research Organization. They do have some information that the BFRO has but they have sightings that the BFRO doesn't have. I couldn't figure out why there hasn't been any resent sightings in MI in the last year or so. But I have found them on the GCBRO. Does anybody have any info on their creditability?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been looking more into the Gulf Coast Bigfoot Research Organization. They do have some information that the BFRO has but they have sightings that the BFRO doesn't have. I couldn't figure out why there hasn't been any resent sightings in MI in the last year or so. But I have found them on the GCBRO. Does anybody have any info on their creditability?

When Rick Tullos started toting around a Mossberg Goosegun ( a long barrel shotgun made for geese and ducks) at investigations thinking he was gonna bag Bigfoot with it, their credibilty hit the dumpster.....

Lapi'che

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great thread, Bigfoot is Real.

You've certainly done your reading. With regard to Bigfoot, I'm dubious. Though there have been many claims of sightings, and many curious photos taken, ir seems difficult to imagine that such a large creature could be living on the fringes of our settlements.

We see bears and deer all the time. We see their scratches on trees, and their footprints. Same with coyotes and mountian lions, too.

But we know these are real animals. We've captured them shot them, had them in zoos, photogrphed them, examine dtheir carcasses, even kept them as pets.

It boggles the mind that in centuries of living in North America, we can't even find a carcass of a Bigfoot. Just stories, and quesitonable snapshots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that BFRO give us the exact measurements of its "poop".lol. I have seen my share of deer crap in the woods, which isnt very hard to spot even though it is made up of several small(2-3 inch diameter) balls. You would think I would notice a 3 foot long turd. Im as much as a believer as anyone, but this sounds like BS, not BFS.

And about the hiding during deer season. Deer have not been known for their intelligence. I once had one skipping a long side my car for a few seconds just to slam into me and flip over my car(it was awesome). But when deer season comes around most of the deer seem to migrate around public roads, interstates, national forests, and government property where they cannot be legally shot. You will see them chillin, just layin in the grass by the road and not even paying attention to anyone who stops to snap some pictures. But if you run into them into the woods they would immediatly scatter. I like to think that bigfoot is smarter than these things, and probably has its own way of avoiding hunters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that BFRO give us the exact measurements of its "poop".lol. I have seen my share of deer crap in the woods, which isnt very hard to spot even though it is made up of several small(2-3 inch diameter) balls. You would think I would notice a 3 foot long turd. Im as much as a believer as anyone, but this sounds like BS, not BFS.

LOL! Yup! I would certainly remember seeing that. LOL! poo length? LOL! :lol:

Lapi'che

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened in there orginization?

It would take to long to explain it all. If you really must know head over to http://www.bigfootforums.com/ and do a search under BFRO. It wont take you long to see the sad state of affairs :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm good point maybe its a endargered species that with out proper protection could go exict

SAVE THE BIGFOOT!!! :w00t:

Yeah I agree SAVE BIGFOOT. But that may be the reason why only some people see him. Why didn't I think of that before? Duh. :rolleyes:

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 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.