norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Lions exist. Lions have been imported to the Americas legally or illegally almost since western men have been coming to the Americas. In the subject of bigfoot a counterpoint of using an unusual circumstance for a known animal does not strengthen the case for bigfoot. Bigfoot has no modern/living counterpart. Giganto and early humanoids all of which are extinct are the only things bigfoot has going for it and that's not much. Relic humans could exist, so could Giganto, so could the giant Sloth but what are the odds? My guess is that odds of that are a lot steeper than an American population of lions that has had a couple of hundred years to establish a presence. If there were current proven big biped primates in Europe or Asia then sure there is a case for bigfoot but the rest of the world comes up as empty as the Americas. Lions exist in Africa. Which leaves three options for people in KY seeing Lions. 1) There still exists a relic population of American Lions. 2) There is a viable breeding population of African Lions in KY that have gone unnoticed for a very long time. 3) Granny was hitting the hard stuff and was watching the Discovery channel's African Safari week marathon, and that Manx cat in the backyard grew. If you think #3 is the best choice then......... The point being is that whatever granny is reporting seeing in KY has absolutely nothing to do with real Lion populations. But you say that Lions are real animals, and that Sasquatch is not proven to exist. OK. Let's just say there is a relic population of Sasquatch living in the wilds of Canada. What do sightings of Sasquatch in down town Cleveland have to do with that relic population? Absolutely nothing. When I was a boy I watched Jaws at a friends house...... I didn't want to swim after that. It did not matter that I lived a long ways from the ocean and I only swam in fresh water. No logical argument could steer me away from the visceral fear I felt for that girl in the opening moments of that movie. It's perfectly normal for people to be scared of things that go bump in the night. Because for much of the 3 million years of Hominoid history? It wasn't just our imagination, and in certain parts of the world it's still not just imagination. But modern technology beams danger into your living room every night. You may not be sleeping in a tent in Yellowstone or Kruger, but your mind thinks it is in Cleveland, Ohio. So the phrase "Sasquatch is everywhere but nowhere" isn't really a valid talking point IMO. It simply is pointing out human nature vs. searching for cryptid species that may or may not be proven to exist. Two separate issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Prof. Meldrum doing so now nor Prof. Disotell doing so in the future without reliable evidence means nothing. It undermines the very most basic principle of skepticism and critical thinking. Nothing anyone says will make me believe anything. That is the purview of belief culture. I will accept Bigfoot existing with the greatest of enthusiasm, but it will take the same evidence we have for any known North American mammal species for me to accept it. We've been doing it that way since Linnaeus and Bigfoot should not be given any special passes. No, but were clear images from the trail cams of the Cascades Carnivore Project to come forward of the same quality for that which allowed them to establish the incredible presence of a wolverine in Washington, I would be beyond the edge of my seat and my appraisal of the likelihood of Bigfoot existing would change drastically depending on the quality of images and circumstances of their capture. Your right, Bigfoot shouldn't be given any free passes, something I've advocated all along. But you held up a proponent who advocates questionable phenomenon as an example of someone who had a life changing Sasquatch encounter. I took that to mean that you did not find her story credible because of her other stories. So I held up as a example a Professor of Anthropology instead. Who is a proponent of Sasquatch, and not the others. And of course this did not sway your opinion one bit, because it doesn't really matter with you how credible the proponent is or isn't, other than for the purpose of making fun of the subject. So a photo does it for you? What happened to Linnaeus? If the CCP took a clear photo of a Sasquatch it would never see the light of day...,, why? No giant conspiracy here but they have the same immovable conviction you do and they would be looking for the zipper. And no aspiring bright Biologist is going to ruin his career over a prank at one of his camera traps.........hitting the delete button and forgetting the thing ever happened would be the smartest course of action and I would not blame him or her. It's going to take a body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Your right, Bigfoot shouldn't be given any free passes, something I've advocated all along. But you held up a proponent who advocates questionable phenomenon as an example of someone who had a life changing Sasquatch encounter. I took that to mean that you did not find her story credible because of her other stories. So I held up as a example a Professor of Anthropology instead. Who is a proponent of Sasquatch, and not the others. And of course this did not sway your opinion one bit, because it doesn't really matter with you how credible the proponent is or isn't, other than for the purpose of making fun of the subject. So a photo does it for you? What happened to Linnaeus? If the CCP took a clear photo of a Sasquatch it would never see the light of day...,, why? No giant conspiracy here but they have the same immovable conviction you do and they would be looking for the zipper. And no aspiring bright Biologist is going to ruin his career over a prank at one of his camera traps.........hitting the delete button and forgetting the thing ever happened would be the smartest course of action and I would not blame him or her. It's going to take a body. For what? To say, OMG, I've killed somebody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 You point is negated by the magnitude of non proof. Just because people claim to see bigfoot does not mean bigfoot exists. People claim to see Elvis but does that mean Elvis still exists? No you haven't negated my point at all and never will. And the evidence for bigfoot goes beyond mere sightings. Elvis is proven dead. Bigfoot is not proven non existent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 You'll need to ask Lansdale of the GCBRO bunch. It was (allegedly) type O+ blood. No, it's your claim, I'm asking you. Who tested it? Allegedly type O+? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 ^^^ Don't take my word, go ask Woodswatcher over on the GCBRO site, as he is the (Tulsa based) lab tech that did the typing of the initial sample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I don't belong to the GCBRO website. You claimed to have shot and tracked a Sasquatch and collected a blood sample from it. That's a extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Wrong, I never claimed to have shot a Sasquatch and the blood samples are in the hands of GCBRO members which has been publically discussed on their website and in YouTube videos. You don't have to be a member to ask questions over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 So you have nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Never claimed to have any forensic evidence in my possession, at this point in time. That info has been disclosed years ago in various public venues and for you to assert otherwise, is unbecoming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 (edited) http://www.network54.com/Forum/23217 You have to join before your posts are approved. Edited March 16, 2015 by norseman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake County Bigfooot Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Type O, what about DNA analysis, is that being done? This is an extraordinary claim, and one I will have to research myself. I hope that we can put this all to rest with DNA and spare you guys the risk as well as the guilt that would come with success. I know that anyone who really respects this creature is not a blood thirsty killer looking to bag one, so those who attempt to collect a specimen will have a battle of emotions in trying to do so. Though I suppose there are some guys just out to bag a specimen for the fame. I respect the viewpoint, but I hope it becomes unnecessary altogether. I think that if you have blood you would be able to get someone like Sykes to do the DNA analysis for no cost, or little cost. Do other apes share the common human blood types? That is a good question as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_type_%28non-human%29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake County Bigfooot Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Thanks Norseman that answers my question on the blood type, so what else was discovered by that blood sample Yuchi1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 LCB, The blood & stomach samples collected during the "Louisiana Hunt" were initially (blood) typed by a member of the GCBRO organization (Woodswatcher) who was a lab tech at a Tulsa hospital and he conveyed to our group, the blood type findings. A second blood sample was later recovered by the hunt organizer (Lansdale) and he later publically conveyed a preliminary DNA analysis (done by a lab in San Antonio) came back as "unknown primate". However, given the shroud of silence regarding any follow-up work on these items, my public skepticism regarding these claims has been no secret. IMO, the samples may well have come in as homo sapien or so close, a legal distinction may have been problematic hence the silence as the legal/moral ramifications were possibly something the GCBRO people did not want to deal with any further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts