Making Bigfoot Plausible

[Horta]

The "claimed" evidence for bigfoot, when it isn't obviously fake is very poor and seems highly sporadic. It is slightly worse than the evidence claiming aliens are whisking people off at night (at least we have their implants!). There are some parallels with people like Stanton Friedman and Don Meldrum in both their MO and claims. It all points to folklore.

What should happen is the footprints showing ol' bigfoot is in the area should eventually (with continued research) yield all sorts of other signs (that aren't fake). Further continued research will then yield the creature itself. Instead bigfoot seems to "evaporate/ dematerialise" back into the ether. It isn't true that only a bigfoot on a slab will convince people they exist, this seems another myth. It only requires reasonable evidence that could be attributed to bigfoot. When the best evidence anyone has ever acquired is a dubious film of even more dubious provenance and about as convincing as the "alien autopsy" footage, it all looks obvious.

Something like this would change many minds. Yet what we get instead are all manner of special pleading fallacies.

[OntarioSquatch]

NAWAC has been "interacting" with bigfoot on a 10 acre parcel of land for around a decade afaik, yet so far have 0 evidence (other than lots of tall stories and frightening members of their own species with firearm incidents) as to their claims. Meanwhile the many millions of people who also frequent the surrounding wilderness area seem to not really notice bigfoot. Anyone who would shoot at a large biped in the forest at night and genuinely think they are shooting at bigfoot, should not be allowed near firearms. That has no possibility of ending well.

Their field notes indicate that the Sasquatch there don't actually physically show themselves. There's the occasional rare glimpse, but that doesn't happen very often. Nearly all of the reports from that area come from locals and people who use the forest for recreational purposes. The elusive, yet constant presence of Sasquatch there has actually led to some of the locals speculating that they're spiritual beings and not made of flesh and blood. The NAWAC's research there suggests that Sasquatch are flesh and blood beings that are incredibly intelligent and paranoid.

Edited June 23, 2015 by OntarioSquatch

[Horta]

Their field notes indicate that the Sasquatch there don't actually physically show themselves.

That's hardly surprising.

The elusive, yet constant presence of Sasquatch there has actually led to some of the locals speculating that they're spiritual beings and not made of flesh and blood.

Closer to the truth IMO. It's understandable that people would speculate this way, though more likely to be a psychosociological phenomenon. It is surprising that researchers heatedly reject such a hypothesis, preferring to stick with methods that have constantly failed. It makes it look like make believe, rather than genuinely trying to gain understanding.

To broach the subject with someone who has experienced such a thing, from this pov, is seen as insulting or inferring insanity, but in reality it shouldn't and it doesn't. It could offer great insights into the human psyche and how it is affected by cultural and social influences and probably something we are all capable of, in the right circumstances. Though even then it is likely that the overwhelming majority knowingly reinterpret experiences to allow for bigfoot, or make it up whole cloth, there does seem to be some that appear genuine (in the personal claim).

This is the part that is especially fascinating IMO.

[Horta]

OS, what are your thoughts on some of the more "way out" or "fringe" abilities attributed to bigfoot? One of the more fascinating is the "glowing eyes" phenomena. I know of researchers who claim this as a fact. While I listen and wonder what evolutionary adaption would allow for eyes to glow like light bulbs on a large mammal, I know of at least one long time researcher who claims this, yet doesn't believe in evolution anyway (god faring). So as my sig indicates, there is little common ground there ("in the beginning men created god and religion"). Though the claim seems genuine and it's highly likely that some people really believe personally, for whatever reason, that they have experienced it.

I know this isn't a claim in most reports. But to me, it is no more unlikely than bigfoot existing as proposed and such things (coupled with a lack of genuine evidence) open up a lot of other possibilities for what is happening.

[Night Walker]

It is interesting that bigfoot has actually become entrenched in NA pop culture during a period of prolonged social upheaval. From the end of WW2, nuclear weapons used on Japan, cold war, reds under the bed, assassinations, anti war movements, impeachment, race riots, all manner of cults (people's temple etc), prolonged military actions, 9/11 attacks and so on.

Studies in other areas show the US has some unique socioeconomic circumstances which aren't seen elsewhere in the first world, coexisting with such mythologies.

Yes! Bigfoot makes a whole lot more sense when it is placed within its appropriate social and historical contexts but that view is not as sexy as carrying-on like there really are mysterious giants in the local forests. Quite understandable, really...

Do you have any links or references to those studies? I stumbled across one such study a few years ago that linked regional mythologies to concerns about conservation in those areas but I'll be buggered if I can find it again...

[Night Walker]

I still frequent your site occasionally

I am more interested in the US reports.

Ah - so you're the one my sites been getting hits from. It's interesting to note that the first "Yowie" from Australia (1789) claim pre-dates the first "Bigfoot" claim in America (1811) - yet both of these are works of fiction. The Australian example demonstrates how the giant hairy-man lore was imported with the colonists of the time from Britain (and then later melded with indigenous lore) so it is kind of fitting that Bigfoot has migrated back to Britain in the new millennium.

It's also evident that there was a cross-pollination of ideas from the 1800s onwards - some sensational reports from the Americas were also reported Down Under. Initially, it would take months for foreign papers to arrive and be reported but that quickened markedly with the advent of the telegram. Sensation sells then as it does now. The great PT Barnum, too, had a "missing link" which was copied in sideshows everywhere for decades afterwards.

Stories and ideas (memes) migrate, take seed, and grow in ways we can't always predict or even comprehend but we can always marvel at how and when it happens. Bigfoot as a creature cannot be tracked but Bigfoot as a meme it sure can and it is no less a great story than Bigfoot itself...

[Merc14]

Their field notes indicate that the Sasquatch there don't actually physically show themselves. There's the occasional rare glimpse, but that doesn't happen very often. Nearly all of the reports from that area come from locals and people who use the forest for recreational purposes. The elusive, yet constant presence of Sasquatch there has actually led to some of the locals speculating that they're spiritual beings and not made of flesh and blood. The NAWAC's research there suggests that Sasquatch are flesh and blood beings that are incredibly intelligent and paranoid.

I have seen this claim before and the first question that arises is how can an incredibly intelligent hominid live in the forest yet not construct any tools of any kind? Even chimps make tools of a sort. How can these highly intelligent creatures not create shelters for themselves? Lastly, how intelligent is it? What is it comparable to? That's just four but there are a lot more questions that come to mind when bigfoot is presented as highly intelligent.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Merc14

[OntarioSquatch]

It's said that the manual dexterity that allows people to make fine tools and throw accurately arose sometime around 3.5 mya. It’s theoretically possible for a primate to be both intelligent and at the same time not be able to create any tools, but I guess the fossil record doesn’t really support it.

Some of the reports that I’ve read in the past and found credible seem to support the idea that Sasquatch have human intelligence. It doesn't really make sense, but it seems to be the case.

OS, what are your thoughts on some of the more "way out" or "fringe" abilities attributed to bigfoot? One of the more fascinating is the "glowing eyes" phenomena. I know of researchers who claim this as a fact. While I listen and wonder what evolutionary adaption would allow for eyes to glow like light bulbs on a large mammal, I know of at least one long time researcher who claims this, yet doesn't believe in evolution anyway (god faring). So as my sig indicates, there is little common ground there ("in the beginning men created god and religion"). Though the claim seems genuine and it's highly likely that some people really believe personally, for whatever reason, that they have experienced it.

I know this isn't a claim in most reports. But to me, it is no more unlikely than bigfoot existing as proposed and such things (coupled with a lack of genuine evidence) open up a lot of other possibilities for what is happening.

The glowing eyes is just light being reflected by the tapetum lucidum, a special layer in the eye that helps certain animals see at night. There's primates that have this same feature, but it’s not seen in any of the currently known species of apes.

Edited June 23, 2015 by OntarioSquatch

[Swede]

It's said that the manual dexterity that allows people to make fine tools and throw accurately arose sometime around 3.5 mya. It’s theoretically possible for a primate to be both intelligent and at the same time not be able to create any tools, but I guess the fossil record doesn’t really support it.

Some of the reports that I’ve read in the past and found credible seem to support the idea that Sasquatch have human intelligence. It doesn't really make sense, but it seems to be the case.

The glowing eyes is just light being reflected by the tapetum lucidum, a special layer in the eye that helps certain animals see at night. There's primates that have this same feature, but it’s not seen in any of the currently known species of apes.

Technically correct, though the details are not uncommonly overlooked within certain "contexts". The presence of the tapetum lucidum amongst primates occurs within the suborder Strepsirhini (Lemuridae, Indrividae, Laridae, etc.). While the term is a bit outdated, this grouping was/is known as the Prosimians and generally restricted to Old World species. Also note size and habits (nocturnal/arboreal) of said representatives.

Those that would attempt to apply the presence of the tapetum lucidum to a large, North American, bipedal primate would be obligated to provide a quite elaborate (and credible) volume of genetic, environmental, and physiological data to support such a claim. Not to mention supportive bio-anth data that would support such a degree of geographic distribution without the presence of intermediary speciation.

.

[Merc14]

Technically correct, though the details are not uncommonly overlooked within certain "contexts". The presence of the tapetum lucidum amongst primates occurs within the suborder Strepsirhini (Lemuridae, Indrividae, Laridae, etc.). While the term is a bit outdated, this grouping was/is known as the Prosimians and generally restricted to Old World species. Also note size and habits (nocturnal/arboreal) of said representatives.

Those that would attempt to apply the presence of the tapetum lucidum to a large, North American, bipedal primate would be obligated to provide a quite elaborate (and credible) volume of genetic, environmental, and physiological data to support such a claim. Not to mention supportive bio-anth data that would support such a degree of geographic distribution without the presence of intermediary speciation.

.

That pretty much crushes that hypothesis.

[Thorvir]

Considering that there is absolutely no reliable, verifiable, and believable evidence of bigfoot to date, then in order to make bigfoot plausible in any way, evidence would have to be found first.

It is not plausible that a hominid of that size could exist in this day and age without leaving any sort of hard evidence, primarily a body. Shaky hand cams, blurred footage, garbled sounds, contradicting accounts...these things do not make evidence.

Bigfoot is a fun legend, and interesting (or entertaining) at times, but until someone can actually prove beyond any reasonable doubt, he's just that, a make-believe legend.

[OntarioSquatch]

There's reports suggesting that there's a government cover up of Sasquatch bodies. I don't think these things are just apes. I think they're humans that were genetically engineered. There's reports from as far back as the late 1800's suggesting that Sasquatch are being released from aircraft into various locations across the continent. The mitochondrial DNA from promising samples always shows up as Homo sapiens. Their hairs under a microscope suggest the same thing. It's a real dilemma because now you need an entire body to prove that they're real.

There's one person out there who I've heard has clear video of Sasquatch. The guy has thousands of posts on this forum on the subject of Bigfoot, but reading through his posts, it doesn't seem like he ever revealed the fact that he has it or that his brother shot one dead in Oklahoma 15 years ago.

It's only a matter of time though before someone finally brings in a body. I don't know when it'll happen, but it's going happen eventually. Either that or we'll eventually reach a point where the government will want to reveal what's really going on, but that won't be anytime soon.

Edited June 25, 2015 by OntarioSquatch

[Merc14]

Considering that there is absolutely no reliable, verifiable, and believable evidence of bigfoot to date, then in order to make bigfoot plausible in any way, evidence would have to be found first.

It is not plausible that a hominid of that size could exist in this day and age without leaving any sort of hard evidence, primarily a body. Shaky hand cams, blurred footage, garbled sounds, contradicting accounts...these things do not make evidence.

Bigfoot is a fun legend, and interesting (or entertaining) at times, but until someone can actually prove beyond any reasonable doubt, he's just that, a make-believe legend.

Two words Thorvir.....interdimensional travel. Yeah, that is what I was told. I actually got the person to say sasquatch poops in another dimension and then I was banned.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Merc14

[Merc14]

There's reports suggesting that there's a government cover up of Sasquatch bodies. I don't think these things are just apes. I think they're humans that were genetically engineered. There's reports from as far back as the late 1800's suggesting that Sasquatch are being released from aircraft into various locations across the continent. The mitochondrial DNA from promising samples always shows up as Homo sapiens. Their hairs under a microscope suggest the same thing. It's a real dilemma because now you need an entire body to prove that they're real.

There's one person out there who I've heard has clear video of Sasquatch. The guy has thousands of posts on this forum on the subject of Bigfoot, but reading through his posts, it doesn't seem like he ever revealed the fact that he has it or that his brother shot one dead in Oklahoma 15 years ago.

It's only a matter of time though before someone finally brings in a body. I don't know when it'll happen, but it's going happen eventually. Either that or we'll eventually reach a point where the government will want to reveal what's really going on, but that won't be anytime soon.

I think you are making a joke but I just want you to post the date of the first flight of a heavier than air craft.

[Occult1]

That doesn't mean that everyone who finds evidence of a sasquatch or claims to see one is a liar--it just means that folks jump to conclusions when they see something they don't understand, or when they're afraid, or somesuch.

There's some really good sightings of 'Bigfoots' though, that would be hard to mistake.

If you take the Dan Gordon case of February 1982, when two police officers witnessed a big Ape-like creature pass

before their very eyes at 4:30 in the morning at Whiteall, N.Y. These two respected citizens vouched for what they saw.

''Gordon said it looked like an ape with poor posture, as it slouched. Its arms were long and swung back and forth as it took huge strides. The speed at which it moved was remarkable, and he said ”a relay runner would have trouble keeping up with [it].”

http://www.cryptozoo...om/gordon-obit/

So either it's a bear (which makes no sense according to Gordon's description) or it's a very tall man wearing an Ape-like suit, which is kind of far-fetched.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Phenix20

[Podo]

There's some really good sightings of 'Bigfoots' though, that would be hard to mistake.

If you take the Dan Gordon case of February 1982, when two police officers witnessed a big Ape-like creature pass

before their very eyes at 4:30 in the morning at Whiteall, N.Y. These two respected citizens vouched for what they saw.

''Gordon said it looked like an ape with poor posture, as it slouched. Its arms were long and swung back and forth as it took huge strides. The speed at which it moved was remarkable, and he said ”a relay runner would have trouble keeping up with [it].”

http://www.cryptozoo...om/gordon-obit/

So either it's a bear (which makes no sense according to Gordon's description) or it's a very tall man wearing an Ape-like suit, which is kind of far-fetched.

Eh. Late at night, low light conditions? My money is still on guy-in-suit or bear.

[Occult1]

I still think Bigfoot is supernatural, like a woods ghost or fairy

Unless these creature are very clever and manage to live in deep woods, hiding in caves or something away

from peying eyes than it seems kind of difficult to consider seriously their actual physical existence.

I wouldn't rule our the possiblity of extra dimensional beings though. It may seem improbable but then

if people are genuinely seeing such creatures without any explanation than it's something to consider.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Phenix20

[Occult1]

Eh. Late at night, low light conditions? My money is still on guy-in-suit or bear.

These two police officers were adamant about what they saw though. They had no visibility issues from their own accounts.

Edit: That's the thing, if they didn't had a high degree of confidence in their sightings, they would never had gone on record. It took many years for them to finally go public in 2005. Claiming to have seen a Bigfoot-like creature isn't necesserely the most beneficial thing to do when you're a respected police officer.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Phenix20

[Podo]

These two police officers were adamant about what they saw though. They had no visibility issues.

There's no such thing as "no mistaking". I believe that they think they saw a Sasquatch. That does not mean they did, however.

[Horta]

There's some really good sightings of 'Bigfoots' though, that would be hard to mistake.

If you take the Dan Gordon case of February 1982, when two police officers witnessed a big Ape-like creature pass

before their very eyes at 4:30 in the morning at Whiteall, N.Y. These two respected citizens vouched for what they saw.

''Gordon said it looked like an ape with poor posture, as it slouched. Its arms were long and swung back and forth as it took huge strides. The speed at which it moved was remarkable, and he said ”a relay runner would have trouble keeping up with [it].”

http://www.cryptozoo...om/gordon-obit/

So either it's a bear (which makes no sense according to Gordon's description) or it's a very tall man wearing an Ape-like suit, which is kind of far-fetched.

Not really.

I enjoy how bigfoot usually gets left out of the "far fetched" category. Consider the following...

The passengers and Lindquist saw ahead of the bus a glimpse of something they all described as a seven-foot tall, 300-pound beast with dark brown to black fur or hair and a light-colored face.

"The first thing I noticed was the smell...a horrible smell like very rotten meat. The bush was thick and I was pushing the branches apart when I saw it about 20 or 25 feet away. I just couldn't believe it."

Lindquist, who is 6-foot-2, said the thing before him was no more than seven feet tall, only "much heavier than I am." "It had flat, flared nostrils like a monkey and large, wide eyes. It didn't make any sound except heavy breathing. It had a broad chest and it was heavy up and down."

"It could have taken two steps and grabbed me, but it didn't do anything. It didn't growl. It didn't show its teeth. It just looked at me." Lindquist said the hair on its face was a light brown and "it appeared to have the mange; the skin underneath looked kind of white."

The following sounds familiar from researchers re the "Pattycakes (Patterson/Gimlin)" hoax...The inverted, yet endearing logic of..it's a real bigfoot unless you can prove otherwise ie. supply the costume, explain how it was accomplished in minute detail etc...

New Westminster (CP) - Radio Station CKNW broadcast reports Monday that a Sasquatch sighted 10 days ago near Erroch Lake in the Fraser Valley was a hoax perpetrated by three persons, but veteran Sasquatch hunter Rene Dahinden wants proof. Maybe my view was colored but if there was a hoax, let's see them re-enact the whole thing."

The radio station said three persons faked large footprints using plaster casts and one of them dressed up in a fur suit. Dahinden said in an interview he'd like to see the suit. "If they can produce the evidence that this was a hoax, I would like to see it. The hoax would be more important than a real Sasquatch sighting...it would teach us a lesson to smarten up."

Dahinden said he heard similar reports of a hoax involving the legendary ape-like forest creature. "It (the report) claimed the three persons involved would also fake sightings in Washington, Oregon and California." "CKNW doesn't know whether or not it was a hoax because it doesn't have any evidence. Let them produce the fur suit and the material used to make the footprints."

Yep, couldn't be mistaken... the false dichotomy of "they must either be lying, or bigfoot is real".....

"The questioning was very professional and I cannot see how Lindquist could have mistaken a man in a fur suit for the real thing."

It was a hoax...The main difference being the hoaxers told them it was a hoax.

VANCOUVER, Canada (AP) - A bus driver and several passengers who reported seeing the legendary man-beast Sasquatch were tricked by four practical jokers using a $200 monkey suit and shoulder pads, according to the hoaxsters.

The pranksters said the hoax took three weeks to prepare, including buying the suit from a costume shop, manufacturing a foot to make a footprint, checking bus schedules so enough people would see it "to make it more believable" and planting a phony witness on the bus to make the first move and get passengers

excited.

http://www.bigfooten...anadianhoax.htm

Edited June 25, 2015 by Horta

[Horta]

The glowing eyes is just light being reflected by the tapetum lucidum, a special layer in the eye that helps certain animals see at night. There's primates that have this same feature, but it’s not seen in any of the currently known species of apes.

No, the glowing eyes have been reported by experienced, long time researchers who have gone to some lengths to rule out the possibility of light being reflected. This is how bigfoot acknowledges them, it's eyes emit light this way.

You seem quick to dismiss this. While I don't believe it for a second either, they seem to be genuine in that they believe they have experienced it. When you look at bigfoot claims and excuses overall (that you don't dismiss as readily), it might as well have glowing eyes and this isn't such a further stretch. Bigfoot as proposed by the research community is a paranormal beastie from beginning to end. It isn't possible to explain it without giving it all sorts of supernatural abilities.

Not only is the "tapetum lucidum" hypothesis very unlikely, the "intelligence" claims that purport to explain away the lack of evidence are also. From what we know of evolution and brain/nervous system development, re studies of the fossil record (endocasts etc) in conjunction with neuroscience/cultural and physical anthropology. Afaik Meldrum doesn't even support this one (probably realise he can't) and I seem to remember him equating them with "chimp like" intelligence (though could be wrong there).

It seems less intelligence they require and more the ability to make all traces of their existence evaporate (except for that which eventually and inevitably is attributed to racoon and the like). It's all unlikely enough that unless someone provides genuine evidence, it amounts to special pleading.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Horta

[Occult1]

I enjoy how bigfoot usually gets left out of the "far fetched" category. Consider the following...

We could say that a hoax is more likely, because it's what the rational part of our mind tells us. It doesn't mean it's true in every case though.

I am not saying these guys saw an actual physical Bigfoot, but I can conclude that they did see something strange that fits the description.

A man-in suit hoax is kind of far-fetched in this case, because the creature was described as between 7.5 and 8 feet tall. You would need a man that is not only very tall but can also run very fast according to the witness accounts. This man would need to wait on the border of the road all night long until he can dash in front of their car at 4:30 A.M and disappear God knows where never to be seen again.

''When pressed on the possibility that it may have been someone trying to give them a fright, Gordon responded, ”There’s no way in hell that I could believe this was a man in a fur suit…” Gordon said it looked like an ape with poor posture, as it slouched. Its arms were long and swung back and forth as it took huge strides. The speed at which it moved was remarkable, and he said ”a relay runner would have trouble keeping up with [it].”

Source: http://www.cryptozoo...om/gordon-obit/

Edited June 25, 2015 by Phenix20

[OntarioSquatch]

Based on my own research on the subject, it's obvious to me that Sasquatch possess a tapetum lucidum and not any kind of internal light. There's enough data out there to know what color their eyes will reflect under different conditions. The fact that credible individuals report seeing really bright eyes as soon as they point a flashlight in a Sasquatch's direction makes it clear to me that it's light being reflected and not light being generated internally. Their eyes are highly reflective and it isn't unusual to hear about a bright red eye "glow" happening mid-day. Sunlight always seems to produce red. Most car headlights seem to produce red as well. Flashlights, lamps and halogen lights tend to give other colors like yellow, greenish-yellow and orange. It all depends on the type of light that's being used.

Edited June 25, 2015 by OntarioSquatch

[Horta]

Based on my own research on the subject, it's obvious to me that Sasquatch possess a tapetum lucidum and not any kind of internal light. There's enough data out there to know what color their eyes will reflect under different conditions. The fact that credible individuals report seeing really bright eyes as soon as they point a flashlight in a Sasquatch's direction makes it clear to me that it's light being reflected and not light being generated internally.

You may be right, yet both claims are supported by exactly the same corroborating evidence at this stage (none).

[Horta]

We could say that a hoax is more likely, because it's what the rational part of our mind tells us. It doesn't mean it's true in every case though.

Not just more rational. Everything we understand about reality supports it as being more likely at this stage.

I am not saying these guys saw an actual physical Bigfoot, but I can conclude that they did see something strange that fits the description.

I know and I'm not really taking issue as much as pointing out that people don't always see what is really there.

A man-in suit hoax is kind of far-fetched in this case, because the creature was described as between 7.5 and 8 feet tall. You would need a man that is not only very tall but can also run very fast according to the witness accounts.

Like a 7' tall 300lb, smelly big chested bigfoot that was really an ordinary person in a $200 monkey suit? You're assuming that what is claimed is exactly what was there. This is unlikely, the best of us humans aren't very reliable this way.

This man would need to wait on the border of the road all night long until he can dash in front of their car at 4:30 A.M and disappear God knows where never to be seen again.

How could you possibly know that? People go to a lot of planning and trouble to hoax. I can see this being a wonderful time and area for just such a hoax.

Humans are very fallible, that's why people like Houdini were so successful.

Edited June 25, 2015 by Horta