Jump to content

Belief in Reality of Bigfoot


Explorer

Recommended Posts

Bigfoot doesn't have a monopoly on hoaxing.  There's been plenty of UFO hoaxers and ghost/spirit hoaxers.  I think what drives Bigfoot to such a low percentage of belief is the lack of a type specimen, or a piece thereof, despite the general perception that it's a terrestrial, physical being.  It's easy to understand why there's no tangible proof of ghosts, whether they exist or not.  The same goes for aliens.  But it's hard to wrap one's head around the proposition that flesh and blood, giant apes have lived alongside man for eons, yet we don't have a single piece of one. 

 

That same conundrum is somewhat responsible for the more fanciful theories among those who do believe.  Why's there no Bigfoot body?  Because Bigfoot's an interdimensional being traveling through portals.  Or, Bigfoot's an alien.  Or, Bigfoot can transform into a tree. 

 

I have to admit that I'm at a loss for why there's no specimen, so I latch on to the most "rational" explanation: conspiracy. (You're not paranoid, as long as people actually are conspiring against you, right?)   Everyone may not agree that evidence is being suppressed.  But, it is at least a plausible explanation.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bluegrassfoot said:

Bigfoot doesn't have a monopoly on hoaxing.  There's been plenty of UFO hoaxers and ghost/spirit hoaxers.  I think what drives Bigfoot to such a low percentage of belief is the lack of a type specimen, or a piece thereof, despite the general perception that it's a terrestrial, physical being.  It's easy to understand why there's no tangible proof of ghosts, whether they exist or not.  The same goes for aliens.  But it's hard to wrap one's head around the proposition that flesh and blood, giant apes have lived alongside man for eons, yet we don't have a single piece of one. 

 

That same conundrum is somewhat responsible for the more fanciful theories among those who do believe.  Why's there no Bigfoot body?  Because Bigfoot's an interdimensional being traveling through portals.  Or, Bigfoot's an alien.  Or, Bigfoot can transform into a tree. 

 

I have to admit that I'm at a loss for why there's no specimen, so I latch on to the most "rational" explanation: conspiracy. (You're not paranoid, as long as people actually are conspiring against you, right?)   Everyone may not agree that evidence is being suppressed.  But, it is at least a plausible explanation.

 

Solid post. Thanks for that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great graph.

 

It has often bothered me that of all the woo-woo out there, Bigfoot is considered the most out there.

 

We are talking about discovering a new species.  It happens all the time so it should not be considered less likely than extraterrestrials, ghosts, psychokinesis.  BF has 

received a fair amount of ridicule in the media, and it is amazing how powerful that is...and how powerful it is to want be accepted by citizens to ridicule it.

 

Look at some of the social trends that were foundations of society for hundreds, if not thousands of years.  Many got toppled in just the last 25 years or so only because those in power got control of a narrative and communicated it through media, with a dose of peer pressure. 

 

End of rant.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/19/2018 at 10:12 PM, xspider1 said:

^ They look like flesh and blood man-apes for sure; but we don't know that's what they are for certain, do we?  

 

This is a very interesting topic, imo and there is some fascinating discussion above!  Sometimes it seems like none of the 7 subjects in the OP will ever be confirmed to 'All'.  That's weird, but it is what it is...  To a woodsman, I can see how a Sasquatch might be less intimidating than say, a ghost or an alien but to city folks, that might be different!  :huh:  lol   I saw a very perplexing UFO many years ago and I have limited experience with ghosts which was enough for me to, shall we say, "believe"?  It seems certain to me that there is other life in the Universe (with there being billions of other planets and all that out there you know) and I would guess that some of that life has probably been to Earth in the past 5 billion years.  As for fortune telling and people moving objects with their minds, I dunno.     

 

As for the low percent "belief" in Bigfoot, I contribute that to (among other things):

 

BF hoaxers (as mentioned above)

BF costumes (which always and can only look ridiculous)

The goofiness of the name "Bigfoot" itself ("Sasquatch" sounds much more serious)

Silly movies about Bigfoot  (They are not always so comical if you think about it...)

 

There are some things living in the woods that look 1/2 like big hairy humans and 1/2 like non-human apes that walk upright.  I am as convinced of that as I could be without having a "close encounter".  Again, great topic.  Thanks, y'all.
 

    

 

 Chewy is not real, he is a star wars character.   

 

 Sasquatch are flesh and blood creatures that can and do make mistakes. They bleed when shot, have scar tissue visible where wounds have healed and are born with genetic defects just like every normal living thing.

 

 I am sorry but international space travelers don't get spotted picking through garbage at night every Feb to March outside the town of Orting,WA. 

 

 They exist under our basic principles of physics and demonstrate normal wildlife behaviors. 

 

  Please take the paranormal/ alien bigfoot stories to the appropriate section of the forums.

Edited by NathanFooter
spell check
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I don't know if you are referring to me, but I don't have, nor have I ever relayed any " paranormal/ alien bigfoot stories".  I'm just careful about knowing things that I don't know.  If you have definitive proof that Bigfoot are flesh and blood creatures that make mistakes, bleed, are sometimes born with genetic defects, exist under our basic principles of physics and demonstrate normal wildlife behaviors then you might want to show that proof to somebody.  The world is waiting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, xspider1, it depends on how much stock one puts into the reports. John Green's database does have instances of most if not all the things on NF's list.

Edited by hiflier
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xspider1 said:

^ I don't know if you are referring to me, but I don't have, nor have I ever relayed any " paranormal/ alien bigfoot stories".  I'm just careful about knowing things that I don't know.  If you have definitive proof that Bigfoot are flesh and blood creatures that make mistakes, bleed, are sometimes born with genetic defects, exist under our basic principles of physics and demonstrate normal wildlife behaviors then you might want to show that proof to somebody.  The world is waiting...

 

  My bad, I did not intend that as a direct response to you, your post just summed up a share of the directions other posters where going.     

 

  I simply want to point out that the data collected over the last century shows a much stronger case that Sasquatch are just normal creatures surviving in the natural world.

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

Hi, xspider1, it depends on how much stock one puts into the reports. John Green's database does have instances of most if not all the things on NF's list.

 

 That is the beautiful thing, science is deeply related to the repetition of cause and effect.     

 

 Reports do show and represent the same behaviors in the same places ( or places of renewed similarity ) at the same times year after year.   

 

  Fictitious data does not align or form a pattern, the picture painted by these events over time shows us a strong presence in biology. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello, hiflier :thumbsup:  Yes, I agree.  Some Scientists have contributed a significant amount of effort in regard to this and they have come to some very interesting conclusions.  John Green's database is amazing.  As you probably know, John Bindernagel, B.S.A., MS, Ph.D. said: "I am now satisfied with the available evidence for the existence of the sasquatch in North America. My view is that not only do we have sufficient evidence to treat the sasquatch as a bona fide member of North America's spectrum of large mammals, but that we already know a great deal about its biology and ecology."

 

I completely get where those determinations are coming from, NathanFooter.  And for the most part, I agree!  :thumbsup:  What I don't get is why these animals don't seem to be "normal".  I bet that whenever ape species X first began to understand (for instance) wolves and lions, they probably didn't know that those animals have night-vision.  I'm personally just reserving a few determinations of what Bigfoot might be until we know more.  

 

Edited by xspider1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...