What's new

Bigfoot Fact or Fiction

Bigfoot: fact or fiction

  • Fact

  • Fiction

  • Art is Bigfoot

  • Deep down, Phil Really does Believe !!!!!


Results are only viewable after voting.
It would be exciting to think that something as big and unknown as Bigfoot was out there. Unfortunately, I don't think that's the case. There just isn't any untainted evidence out there and the determination of TV shows and the BFRO crowd to endlessly recycle the Patterson footage doesn't seem to be any more convincing. There is a minor TV industry created around this stuff, churning out cheap filler for outlets like the History Channel (who seem to have run out of Nazi film footage to fill up their schedule). That's drawn even more crackpots into it, as well as a lot of hucksters looking to make a buck. In some ways, this kind of sideshow activity has a long history in the US--after all, P. T. Barnum was one of our own.

On the other hand, there are a lot of sincere people who are deeply interested in this and are spending lots of their free time in the woods searching for something. But still nothing turns up. Apart from Meldrum (the anthropologist who is the duty expert on just about every TV show and must be making some nice coin for his efforts), legitimate primatologists have not made it a priority to catch the big guy. And I just don't think that the argument that "the lack of evidence that Bigfoot doesn't exist somehow proves that he does" will hold water.

I'm very interested in folklore, and I love to hear stories like this. In many ways, following Bigfoot lore lets us see legends being produced in the modern world. I think we can learn a lot about what people are thinking about the world around them by listening to the stories and following the expeditions. But I don't think that there's any big hairy primate to be bagged at the end of the day. If there is any real, living creature out there driving all this, I think that Todd hit the nail on the head.
 

Intrigued

Bigfoot & Bagel aficionado.
Has anyone here read the book Ishi Last of His Tribe? If not here is a link to a Wikipedia article about him. I find it interesting that his small tribe was able to hide for forty years. I understand that certainly does not prove the existence of Bigfoot. But after reading that book I've always thought that if there were Yeti or Bigfoot and they didn't wish to be 'discovered' it's possible they would not be.
 

BigFoot

I wanna be sedated!
Staff member
Damn Phil, I have to agree with you this time. There is another site who has been posting pics of a trail cam they have had going in Washington or Northern CA I don't remember. The photography from it is amazing. There are a few bizzare pics from it. I will post the link later on. Even if you find the Bigfoot pics hogwash the rest are worth looking at.

Phil, here is the link to the trail cam I promised to put up. The possible Sasquatch photos take a bit of a stretch of the imagination but there is something strange there. IMO this may be harder to explain than the PG film. The other photos of the natural wildlife is just spectacular. Enjoy all.

http://www.olympicproject.com/
 

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
Has anyone here read the book Ishi Last of His Tribe? If not here is a link to a Wikipedia article about him. I find it interesting that his small tribe was able to hide for forty years. I understand that certainly does not prove the existence of Bigfoot. But after reading that book I've always thought that if there were Yeti or Bigfoot and they didn't wish to be 'discovered' it's possible they would not be.

Point taken about "wanting to remain hidden".
The major difference being of course, that Ishi and his tribe looked exactly like any other group of Native Americans to the casual observer.

The people who ransacked his mothers camp certainly didn't think anything was odd, they were just being opportunistic.

Point of fact is, that if Ishi had cleaned up a bit to avoid the "wild man look" he could have walked down main street of the nearest town at noon, and no one would have reported anything out of the ordinary.
 

Intrigued

Bigfoot & Bagel aficionado.
Point taken about "wanting to remain hidden".
The major difference being of course, that Ishi and his tribe looked exactly like any other group of Native Americans to the casual observer.

The people who ransacked his mothers camp certainly didn't think anything was odd, they were just being opportunistic.

Point of fact is, that if Ishi had cleaned up a bit to avoid the "wild man look" he could have walked down main street of the nearest town at noon, and no one would have reported anything out of the ordinary.

I agree with the points you make. But if you read the book you realize just how well they did remain hidden for a very long time. I was also amazed at how Ishi survived through a winter with virtually no food when the rest of his tribe had all died. If you've never read the book, it's a very good read and really thought provoking.
 
i think bf exists.too many reports from competant people over too long of a period of time.now as to what bf is? that is the heart of the debate.to me.
ape? alien?et?extra dimensional?protohuman?spirit?demonic or otherwise? whatever bf is would color what type of evidence would be gathered ,if any.
now as for the most common objections...
no one has shot one..says who?.lots of hunters go missing every year and are never found,nor are their remains.many people think bf move in small family groups.shoot one and the family group they are thought to travel in would probably show their displeasure ,personally.
no one has found remains...if you find an arm or leg bone or miscellaneous small bones in the forest.first thought--dead deer or bear.its a wonder the squirrels have not eaten all the bones yet ,and you walk on. not many skeletal remains experts roam the forest. so unless there is a skull laying there grinning at you,you will ascribe the bones to a mundane source.
there has been no hair,no blood,no dna evidence.wrong. several items have been found and analyzed.hair--which showed non human and non animal characteristics.blood---dna testing showed an animal that had no match in the genetic database,but was similar to the great apes.
the blood testing was from canada and was shown on an episode of monsterquest.
as for bob heironomus.he stated several times" i made the bf costume out of a red horsehide".look at the p-g film.....riiiight.
those are just a few thoughts i have on this subject.
 
I just don't think that you can be on steady ground when you argue that the absence of any evidence is proof of existence. That's just the opposite of how reason works. It's possible to think up all kinds of plausible reasons why there isn't any evidence, but the simplest and most logical one is that there's no evidence because there is no bigfoot. People--even reliable ones--are often mistaken in describing what they think they saw. If there was any credible scientific evidence to prove that bigfoot existed, it would be on the front pages of the newspapers. But there isn't.

When you get to the point where you think something is true in spite of a lack of any real evidence, then you're talking about faith, not knowledge. I suppose it's kind of sad to think that there are no tiny colonies of clever, elusive sasquatch roaming through the woods, but that's the safe bet. On the other hand, there is a lot of cool stuff out there--bear, mountain lions, jaguar, etc. I'm pretty happy with that.
 

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
Folks who "want to believe" will never be convinced otherwise.
I addressed several of the issues in the post above, but like most of these kinds of things, adherence to the basic core belief does not permit objective analysis of facts.

Does anyone truly believe that comprehensive DNA testing has been done on blood and hair which revealed a previously unknown primate loose in the Pacific Northwest?

Such news as this would be all over the headlines and on all the cable news networks.

What has been done is examination of the hair under microscope and that this hair has similarities to some known animals but cannot be conclusively proven to be a specific animal without DNA testing.

In each of the few cases where DNA testing was actually performed, the results indicated a known animal (Georgia) or insufficient quantity of recoverable DNA for testing (Ohio).

Most recently is the case in Georgia where the hair was revealed to be from two sources, a human and an oppossum. To which the two discoverers prompty replied that it must have been what the bigfoot ate last before it died.

Still, fans of the Bigfoot theory will claim that secret testing has revealed the truth and that a vast conspiracy is keeping this information from the public.

As much as I would love to have conclusive proof that such a wonderful creature wanders the wooded unpopulated areas of North America, I am unable to bring myself to make that leap of faith required to believe in a creature that is no more wonderous than a Unicorn or a Mermaid, and which has no more evidence of existence than a Unicorn or a Mermaid.
 
I live in Trinity County, about 90 minutes from Bluff Creek (where the 1967 Patterson film was shot).

It is very rugged, and so remote in the area when Bigfoot has been seen. Oh I want there to be a Bigfoot so bad, but I find it so hard to believe that no one has found a dead one, and that there is only one film of any quality.

But if you study the Patterson film, there are some facts that lead me to believe it is real. The biggie is that Patterson cheated his partner out of any of the royalties, and that partner has never said it was fake.

But if I were to bet with an all-knowing God, I would bet there is no Bigfoot. :(
 
I don't know if Bigfoot exists or not, but some of you folks are operating under the mistaken assumption that there are no large areas of wilderness that as of yet, have never been explored by humans.
 
I went to the army with big foot. Seriously, this one guy had like shoe size 22, and was about 7'3".

About that other mysterious big-foot, I doubt it's real. There is no conclusive evidence, and hardly any evidence that isn't completely bogus that big-foot exists. Until I seen one, I won't believe. If you think about gorillas, and what type of environment they live in (mountainous rain forest!), it is hard to believe that sasquatch hasn't been found in the woods of NA.
 
An image-stabilized animated .gif of the "Bigfoot" walk - as seen in the Gimlin film. Note that the sequence is centered around the subject, which eliminates the shaky-ness of the original film.

Behold, the creature. He walks like a people! :001_rolle

proxy.php
 
Seems that way.

Actually I'm not debating that it does or doesn't exist.
I'm debating that there is not a shred of evidence that it exists.

Ok, then I'll hold off on my fake moon landing thread for now.

By the way, I missed what happened with the Nazi post that was removed, but I think it was smart to delete it. If Bigfoot is real, I'd hate to see him sue B&B for libel. I just don’t think there's enough evidence to call him a fascist.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom