Sasquatch

[Tuckahoe Joe]

Ok. So there may not be a plethora of evidence thats going to convince every single person. Im sure that a large portion of reported accounts are probably hoaxes but there are also some reports by people that are a bit more credible like park rangers and police officers. I think its better to keep an open mind. Have i ever personally seen a bigfoot? No. But that doesn't mean their existence is completly outside the realm of possibility. New species are discovered all the time and the wilderness in the pacific northwest and Canada is vast. Abscence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of abscence.

[shootermcbob]

Obviously Sasquatch is real. C'mon guys, I see him nearly daily. He plays the lead character in the "Messin with Sasquatch" Jack Links commercials!

[retiredbosn]

I was really bored the other day and came across a show Ancient Aliens, their theory is that Bigfoot is an alien, if so that would make them wookies like Chewbacca

[retiredbosn]

Ooh, I'd love to see the journal paper on this. Have you got a link? I certainly hope it's in something reputable, though.

:edit:

I've searched and searched, but the best I can come up with is some Melba Ketchum who, to put it nicely, is a complete twonk and a sham. A terrible scientist. There is no peer reviewed research!

Just for the naysayers who likely will pop up and say something like "mainstream science wouldn't even accept evidence anyways", I will just put this here:

So yea, Oxford is willing and ready to examine legit evidence, but so far, none has been brought forth.

:edit #2:

Evidence please? I have been unable to find any for this statement either.

Hooaah

To make ya feel better it was National Geographic, Dr Jeff Meldrum professor of anthropology at Idaho I believe. The primatologist was staff at NG. The lab was in Ontario. Not peer reviewed I don't think, as there was not enough material to have multiple labs duplicate the findings. It was a televised on Nat Geo, they had field biologist using footprints to speculate on population and using the size and measurements from the casts they imput this into a computer program which formed the classic bell curve when graphed, which according to the biologist illustrates a population of living creatures and not a hoax. A forensic scientist an expert in finger prints and foot prints examined casts that had dermal ridges (think fingerprints) his conclusion was that all of the casts he recieved were from an unknown primate, as the human dermal ridge on the foot run in a certain direction and form specific patterns. The same can be said for every specie of primate, in other words you could give this scientist a cast of a mountian gorilla, a lowland gorilla and a chimp and he can identify the specie from the dermal ridge pattern on the foot. He examined over 100 casts and never had a duplicate nor did they match any known patterns. The show had all types of accredited specialists with reputations on the line. Most concluded there is enough evidence to support the theory of a living population of some type of bipedal primate in the North West and Canada. These weren't backwood ignorant people rather all recognized as specialist in their field, and everyone is risking their professional futures and their personal reputation to publically declare their findings.

The Washington stuff is from the late 80's early 90's when I was building homes, was in the publication put out by the North American Home Builders Association, possible Bigfoot population was cited as reason to deny an application to develop land. After some further searching this is a county issue Whatcom county in Washington, the county passed law declaring bigfoot protected within their borders, here is the link http://www.whatcomco...res1992-043.pdf

I don't think your classification of Dr Melba Ketchum as a twonk and complete sham is honest. She is one of the pioneers in DNA testing, he lab was used to identify remains from the 9/11 disaster. She enjoys a good reputation in the field of DNA testing, paternal testing, etc, your biased classification of her is the reason that many in the scientific will not even consider the possibility that an heretofore unclassified primate exists in North America. Here is the link to her company and bio http://www.dnadiagno....com/staff.html

Science until late 1800s declared there were no great apes anywhere, the mountain gorilla wasn't discovered until 1902, obviously these animals were around for centuries but scientific arrogance refused to give any credence to the wild hairy man of Africa. Famed primatologist Jane Goodall is on record as stating that it is possible that Sasquatch exists. As far as I'm concerned the traditional scientific community is too close minded on anything anymore, there is no true empirical experiments, rather experiments are approached with a preconcieved outcome and then worked backwards to prove a theory, instead of looking at the results to form a hypothesis. There are numerous scientific blunders that have been proven false, Piltdown Man, flat earth, heliocentric universe, etc. I choose not to remove the possibility, just when we think we know everything we find out we don't. Too many native American accounts, too many foresters, biologist, police officers, ppl who would be considered professional and reliable have encountered them. Makes ya think.

[Tuckahoe Joe]

well said retiredbosn

[MarkH024]

Washington state has declared Big Foot an endangered specie and use its existence to thwart any development. Additionally there is dna samples from an unknown north American primate that is closer related than chimps. I've never seen one but believe they are real. Its to bad that the idiots on TV make it a mockery with their Squatch calls and silliness.

Tourist attraction.

If they are real, we (humans) would have found remains at some point. If we can dig up 65 million year old dinosaur bones, we can find a Bigfoot. We can find new species of marine life in the depths of the ocean but not find a 10 foot ape in forestry a fraction of the size?

Until I see it with my own eyes, it's forever a gimmick.

[hooah212002]

Retiredbosn: it appears that you and I have far different standards of what we require as evidence before taking something on as a "belief". You should note that I provided links to back up my statements. You should also note that if you believe there is still valid evidence, why is Oxford still looking for it?

Ahh, but you watched something on tv 30 years ago and still believe it. I, on the other hand, don't feel the need to "believe" in an animal. Do you believe in all of the spider species that are found in the Amazon before they are found, too? Or do you instead believe that scientists will find them and categorize them?

Why am I harping on about this? Because you indicated that there was evidence somewhere for Bigfoot, yet all you've given is your say so. The evidence even for an "unknown north american primate" is missing and highly unlikely.

Second of all, what does flat earth and heliocentricism have to do with anything? Science advances when new knowledge/evidence is found. Those examples are great examples of the strawman fallacy, but not examples that do what you want them to do.

Believe what you want for whatever reason you want, but if you claim to have evidence, provide it. If you don't have evidence that is up to par, what you have is faith.

[retiredbosn]

Retiredbosn: it appears that you and I have far different standards of what we require as evidence before taking something on as a "belief". You should note that I provided links to back up my statements. You should also note that if you believe there is still valid evidence, why is Oxford still looking for it?

First I really don't know why it bothers you so much that someone is open minded enough to realize that science has not yet categorized and documented every animal on the planet, but I will say it is very entertaining. As far as links to back up your statement you provided ONE where Oxford has volunteered to be part of the study, wow, good work lol. I noticed you didn't bother providing links for your opinion about Dr. Ketchum, and it is indicitive of something else goin on to resort to elementary type behavior with the name calling, but I digress. Evidence is evidence not proof, evidence built upon evidence leads to hypothesis to testing and then finally proof. When you asked for something in the Washington state refuge I provided the link to the actual pdf file, not to bad recalling that sucker from memory that is 25 years old, lol.

Ahh, but you watched something on tv 30 years ago and still believe it.

Never said I watched a 30 year old show, I do not think that National Geographic was in the television business at that time, but as you were probably still in diapers then I wouldn't expect you to know that. Shoot there was hardly an internet 30 years ago. The show I was talking about is 2 years old.

Why am I harping on about this? Because you indicated that there was evidence somewhere for Bigfoot, yet all you've given is your say so. The evidence even for an "unknown north american primate" is missing and highly unlikely.

Here you have asked for where I'm getting my information and will provide links to video excerpts for you at the end of answering your questions.

Second of all, what does flat earth and heliocentricism have to do with anything? Science advances when new knowledge/evidence is found. Those examples are great examples of the strawman fallacy, but not examples that do what you want them to do.

I used those analogies for the same reason you did, science is an evolving thing, it never has all the anwers and as new discoveries are made modification to the scientific lexicon follow.

Believe what you want for whatever reason you want, but if you claim to have evidence, provide it. If you don't have evidence that is up to par, what you have is faith.

Ok enough of that silliness here some links to different videos,

1. the unknown primate dna, the Dr's name is Kurt Nelson from the University of Minnesota, the evidence comes from the Snelgrove Lake area in Ontario Canada, the footage that deals with this specifically comes in around a minute 30 seconds http://www.history.c...g-for-sasquatch

2. The Snookum Cast which is interesting, this supposedly shows the body inprint of a Sasquatch, looks like a mess to me, but the biolgists have some interesting things to say about unknown primates, and why this inprint did not come from an elk or other animals in the area. http://www.history.c...testing-bigfoot

3. Of course what bigfoot discussion would be complete without the Patterson Footage. This is not the link I wanted to provide where they discuss the muscular definition and the soft tissue injury evident on the beast in the film. But it is a short discussion of the film and it is the full footage not the shortened one people have seen, oh and btw they examine the original 16mm film not a copy of it http://www.history.c...igfoot-evidence

4.This is one of the National Geographic documentaries it is very long and I didn't review it, it does feature Dr. Jeff Meldrum an anthropologist from the Idaho State University and a recognized expert in the evolution of bipedalism, and other professionals and I'm sure a couple of quacks thrown in too. I'm not sure if this is the one with the forensic scientist talking about the dermal ridges or not, this video mentions 15 different dna sequences that can not be attributed to any known animal yet show primate sequencing, but it is not considered conclusive proof because there is no body of a bigfoot to compare it to. They also answer the questions concerning bones and fossils, why there are none. Did you know there are no chimpanzee bones or fossils? Just providing the link. http://channel.natio...behind-bigfoot/

I managed to find an article from Nat Geo that validates the dermal ridge, also documents the statements by Jane Goodall will provide quote and link.

Now, Bigfoot advocates are increasingly turning to forensic evidence to prove the existence of the giant creature.

Investigator Jimmy Chilcutt of the Conroe Police Department in Texas, who specializes in finger- and footprints, has analyzed the more than 150 casts of Bigfoot prints that Meldrum, the Idaho State professor, keeps in a laboratory.

Chilcutt says one footprint found in 1987 in Walla Walla in Washington State has convinced him that Bigfoot is real.

"The ridge flow pattern and the texture was completely different from anything I've ever seen," he said. "It certainly wasn't human, and of no known primate that I've examined. The print ridges flowed lengthwise along the foot, unlike human prints, which flow across. The texture of the ridges was about twice the thickness of a human, which indicated that this animal has a real thick skin."

Meldrum, meanwhile, says a 400-pound (180-kilogram) block of plaster known as the Skookum Cast provides further evidence of Bigfoot's existence. The cast was made in September 2000 from an impression of a large animal that had apparently lain down on its side to retrieve some fruit next to a mud hole in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest in Washington State.

Meldrum says the cast contains recognizable impressions of a forearm, a thigh, buttocks, an Achilles tendon and heel. "It's 40 to 50 percent bigger than a normal human," he said. "The anatomy doesn't jive with any known animal."

A few academics believe Meldrum could be right.

Renowned chimpanzee researcher Jane Goodall last year surprised an interviewer from National Public Radio when she said she was sure that large, undiscovered primates, such as the Yeti or Sasquatch, exist.

taken from article at Nat Geo http://news.national..._bigfoot_2.html

I wish I could find the other show from Nat Geo with the dermal ridges that was facinating, but anyway there is evidence of something bipedal, what it is has yet to be resolved.

Now here is a question for ya, do I really believe or have I just adopted the Devil's advocate role??? I will confess that I'm not a member of the bigfoot community or any cryptozoological community/group

[Quillback]

I hope you're playing the Devils's advocate. Since Bigfoot does not exist, it is a waste of time trying to prove that it does, well except for the entertainment value.

[shootermcbob]

Holy Cow, this has turned into, hypothetically speaking , pun intended, the most scientific peeing contest in quite a while.

For those still tuned in, suffice it to say I am not a believer of bigfoot. However, I do absolutely believe in the abominable snowman, the yeti, the Easter Bunny, the Great Pumpkin, Scooby-doo, and of course, Santa Claus.

I will not be posting any scientific links to back up my beliefs. Feel free to resume with the peeing. :grin:

[retiredbosn]

No fair no links, peer reviews, I've come to expect more from you. Lol

in my defense there are just times that I must prove that I can be the biggest and most arrogant butt, I thought I might lose that title on this one. Maybe I'll start one on out of place artifacts that's always fun.

[shootermcbob]

No fair no links, peer reviews, I've come to expect more from you. Lol

in my defense there are just times that I must prove that I can be the biggest and most arrogant butt, I thought I might lose that title on this one. Maybe I'll start one on out of place artifacts that's always fun.

Just having some fun. No harm intended . I do the same thing from time to time...almost like it is an out of body experience that I am powerless to stop???? I am not sure if that makes me weak, weak-minded, or just a "butt". Anyway, I did enjoy reading the back and forth. Carry on with misplaced artifacts!

[RyneB]

I want to start by saying that i do not believe in bigfoot. But one afternoon while fishing, for a moment I thought one was in my presence. I was fishing a small river bank that is in Starved Rock State park. I have grown up in this area, so i know the trails and the whole park pretty well. The best stretch of river is wayyyyy off the trail. No tourist or hiker would be that far off the trail. One afternoon i was making my last few casts, as it was starting to get dark. I had that wierd feeling when you can sense that someone is looking at you. All of a sudden a BIG rock flew over my head and landed in the river about 25 feet in front of me. It scared the you know what out of me. I start getting my gear together and start putting my shoes back on (i was standing in knee deep water and didnt want to get my shoes wet). As i was starting to head back into the timber, another rock was thrown at me. This time it was a lot closer and it was more like a 100+ lb boulder. I started to jog at a decent clip to get the hell out of the area. I got about 3/4 of my way back to the vehicle and i hear a roar sound like nothing i have ever ever heard before. I have been in the outdoors since i could walk, and i have never heard a sound like that. I carry a concealed pistol with me when im out in the middle of nowhere, so that kinda of made me feel better. Im not saying it was bigfoot, but i definately have no idea what it was, and it scared me enough that i havent been back in the 2+ years that it happened.

[Tuckahoe Joe]

All of a sudden a BIG rock flew over my head and landed in the river about 25 feet in front of me. It scared the you know what out of me. I start getting my gear together and start putting my shoes back on (i was standing in knee deep water and didnt want to get my shoes wet). As i was starting to head back into the timber, another rock was thrown at me. This time it was a lot closer and it was more like a 100+ lb boulder.

Rock throwing is a primary element in several bigfoot reports and a common primate behavior. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03/09/chimp-stone-thrower.html

Unless there was another person way off the beaten path who was throwing rocks at you (which you've said is unlikely), what else out there has the physical abilitly to throw a rock or the mental capacity to make such a decision in the first place? It was a bigfoot!

[retiredbosn]

I'm really glad other ppl provided the links to the howls and primate behavior of throwing rocks. Great apes throw rocks at any intruder that comes into their claimed territory

[Quillback]

Since Bigfot does not exist, the rock thrower was either a gorilla that was AWOL from the zoo, or mischievous humans. I'd bet 99.999999% is was human throwers. I guess another extremely remote possibility is a meteorite. Think of it as a multiple choice test.

You're fishing at a local lake, a big rock flies out of the woods and lands in the water creating a big splash. The cause was (choose one):

a) Bigfoot

b Metorite

c) human caused

d) You had one beer too many

[hooah212002]

Since Bigfot does not exist, the rock thrower was either a gorilla that was AWOL from the zoo, or mischievous humans. I'd bet 99.999999% is was human throwers. I guess another extremely remote possibility is a meteorite. Think of it as a multiple choice test.

You're fishing at a local lake, a big rock flies out of the woods and lands in the water creating a big splash. The cause was (choose one):

a) Bigfoot

b Metorite

c) human caused

d) You had one beer too many

You forgot the very real possibility of a Unicorn. I've heard of people that have talked to people that have seen them, so that's plenty of evidence for me to believe in them. Some of those people were scientists, so that's even better.

[RyneB]

Did it sound like any of these?

http://youtu.be/FDGZbjKwqy0

Very similar to #6. A lot deeper though. The wierdest thing was it was fall, and i didnt hear any leaves being kicked or walked on. That part always kind of freaked me out. I always tell myself it was kids playing a joke. But the fact those kids would have to had thrown a boulder a little over 30+ yards makes me skeptical.

I dont believe in big foot for the simple fact we have no physical evidence. Not a dead one, alive one, good picture, video. Nothing. Just some foot prints and some fuzzy pictures and videos. You would think that by now one of them would be stupid enough to get hit by a car or something. Or a hunter would spot one. There is just no good evidence.

[deaknh03]

Unless it's proven or disproven, the possibility exists that there is something. I cant think of any evidence that Jesus, or Mohammed, or any other spiritual entity exists, but millions of people believe in their chosen deity. Doesn't mean they exist or not.

[Tuckahoe Joe]

Unless it's proven or disproven, the possibility exists that there is something. I cant think of any evidence that Jesus, or Mohammed, or any other spiritual entity exists, but millions of people believe in their chosen deity. Doesn't mean they exist or not.

I was gonna make that point myself but didn't want to start a religious debate.

[Tuckahoe Joe]

I dont believe in big foot for the simple fact we have no physical evidence. Not a dead one, alive one, good picture, video. Nothing. Just some foot prints and some fuzzy pictures and videos. You would think that by now one of them would be stupid enough to get hit by a car or something. Or a hunter would spot one. There is just no good evidence.

answers to getting hit by car/hunter sightings http://www.bfro.net/gdb/show_FAQ.asp?id=407

[tyrius.]

Unless it's proven or disproven, the possibility exists that there is something. I cant think of any evidence that Jesus, or Mohammed, or any other spiritual entity exists, but millions of people believe in their chosen deity. Doesn't mean they exist or not.

Nonsense. You can not definitively prove a negative or "disprove the existence of sasquatch". The burden of proof rests with the positive statement "sasquatch exists". The fact that no definitive proof has been obtained in centuries of co-existing with these animals makes it incredibly hard to believe that they exist.

That is VERY different than a comparison to two guys who "lived" 2 millenia ago.

[Glenn]

It's estimated that Earth is home to at least 8 million living species, and every year scientists add 15,000 to 20,000 new discoveries to that tally.

Here's 10 of the most bizarre ones, just discovered this year: http://theweek.com/article/index/228428/the-10-weirdest-new-species-of-2012

So..... since the newly found species exist, does that mean they didn't exist before because there wasn't any proof?

Just saying....

[hooah212002]

So..... since the newly found species exist, does that mean they didn't exist before because there wasn't any proof?

Not for anyone with any intellectual honesty. An intellectually honest person simply had no reason to believe that those particular species existed until there was sufficient evidence (not proof. Proofs only exist in math and logic) that they did exist.

[tyrius.]

Here's 10 of the most bizarre ones, just discovered this year: http://theweek.com/a...species-of-2012

So..... since the newly found species exist, does that mean they didn't exist before because there wasn't any proof?

Just saying....

I didn't see any 8 foot tall primates that have lived in areas habited by modern humans for centuries.

I did see a 0.02 inch long worm that lives miles under the earth, wonder how they missed that one so long or the 3 centimeter mushroom.

Did you have any reason to believe that that 0.02 inch worm existed prior to it being documented as existing? Do you have any reason to believe a flying pizza monster exists? It hasn't been proven NOT to exist.