Leaderboard

One of our own forum members!👏🏻

I don't think that's automatically a strange question. It is something we should be thinking about .. society-wise, not just bigfooters. I think the best answer is "it depends." There are some really bad assumptions built into the question, assumptions that should be examined. First thing .. what we consider "normal" is not historical normal. (1) Transpiration creates a downwind moisture plume which allows forest to grow in places it naturally could not. Fire destroys not just what it burns, but the downwind moisture plume which "artificially" supports forest in places that would naturally be desert if there were no forest upwind to provide the atmospheric moisture. (2) We have 100 years and more of fire fighting / fire prevention which has altered the natural landscape. Though it is familiar to us, it is not the long term norm and it is not "natural." Complicating things further, the Native Americans / First Nations people deliberately altered the environment / landscape with large scale fire. Because they seem to have arrived before deglaciation, there probably has not been a "natural" environment, one not altered by human activity, since before the last glacial maximum. Data suggest we are in a period of rapid climate change. Second thing .. forest regrowth is though a progression of stages. Once forest is lost, we get grasslands / brush, smaller trees, etc before big trees return. This can take centuries, not decades, not years, and given changing climate conditions, I'm not sure we will have periods between fires long enough for the cycle to complete, we seem to be looking at forest -> burn -> brush -> burn -> brush -> burn -> brush .. etc. We .. in my area .. are getting much more frequent dry lighting and large fires than we have ever had in recorded history. The opportunities for mature forest to re-form under these conditions seem nil. In fact it seems the only chance of restoration is via human intervention, not via natural processes. This situation seems likely to last for centuries, maybe tens of centuries, and the new equilibrium, if there is one, won't be the one we're used to. I suspect much of North America, if humans just vanished, would turn into a land of brush and grasses with very little "reclamation" by forest as we know it because of the increased rate of lightning fires driven by global warming. Once turned to brush and grasses, it is very difficult to return to forest because conditions don't last enough years in a row for that to happen. IMHO of course! MIB

Regarding the Cerruti site mastadon bones purportedly dated to 130,000 years ago .. mainstream science has the ability to determine whether the scratches / notches in the bone were made 130K years ago when the bone was fresh vs recently when they were being dug up. This is the study of taphonomy. Those markings / scraping / etc are NOT recent effects of the earth moving machinery, those markings were made while the bones were still fresh. That does not settle the question of who / what did them but it does settle the question of when the markings were made. Maybe, or maybe lacking technology, they saw solutions that our reliance on technology trips over?

Wow, xspider1 and Norseman. What a debate that has been civil and neither party has backed down even during the most intense language at proving bigfoot is a real monster. It seems both of you have proved bigfoot is a monster. Seems like most of the audience has backed off while you two have carried on a debate that would heat metal to the bending point. One of the main points that is still not clear is does it take a deceased bigfoot male and female body to prove the existence of bigfoot? Do we agree bigfoot is a real living animal and a new species? Does DNA make the distinction between myth and real living monster? Presently what is the status of bigfoot ............................. myth or monster? Has enough evidence been brought forth for proof of the bigfoot with its own species name? What is the present status of bigfoot? Some claim bigfoot is a myth that can disappear and is abducted by aliens and delivered to Earth's forest.

I've never watched a bear drag anything away, but have run across lots of their buried treasures (I really don't like that.........). But one of the most impressive things I've seen (more than once) is a grizzly running for its life as I entered the valley or area (they heard or smelled me/us coming).........especially in the fall when they're fat and their fur is thickening for winter, and their hide moves like Patty's in the PGF. Bears can really cover territory!

I had to dig real deep for this bad boy, nearly 15 years deep in fact but i found it. I'm still adamant that he got his locations mixed up too, and i'm gonna send this to Aleks..

Not so sure. Many whistleblowers have been threatened. And some scientists have disappeared. Is this a grassroots movement to get the truth to the public? Or some red flag event where the government is purposely leaking stuff while acting tough? Dunno. 1) No it wouldn’t. You can point to the child sized pilot chairs but mainstream Science will still want proof. The military is using scientists too. But they are not allowed to publish findings to peer reviewed publications. Part of science is now dark. And has been since the bomb. What else are they hiding in there? 2) Any scientist that can get their work published and accepted in a peer reviewed publication. But if your work happens to pertain with above top secret research? We know who the real boss is. Dr. Gary Nolan has stated they are building a retrieval team to beat the military out to these crash sites. All I can say is? Good Luck! 👀 You and I both agree something funky is going on with Bigfoot as well. Someone doesn’t want them discovered for what ever the reason.

Talked to the last land owner we worked for in Nespelem. He is of the Moses clan. I had rodeo’d in Nespelem in 89, and was asking about a kid that beat me chute dogging. He was first and I was second. The conversation somehow got to him asking me if I believed in Bigfoot. I told him the snow track story at our ranch. He told me that they were afraid after dark. And that one time they had found a Colt that had been ripped in half. Something had grabbed the hind legs and had just wishbone it in half. He always got ansy hunting and shot something and while tracking it, it got dark. The Bigfoot cutout on top of Disautel pass survived the fire. Amazing to me how people there have Bigfoot at the fore front of their minds much more so than a cross section of the white population. Other than the tracks I observed? I was raised with both Colville and Spokane Indians and I am sure they have rubbed off on me.

That hits the nail on the head. (And, thank-you for summarizing the affects that your encounters have had for you. Much appreciated.) Something funny is going on! Of that, I am 99.9% sure. There is just no way that an otherwise 'normal' biological creature of the reported sizes can exist and, remain unclassified after all these years, without something(s) 'funny' going on. This is a good thread, in my opinion. We can be civil here and honestly explore what may be the cause(s) for the lack of Scientific acceptance/classification. When I joined the BFF, it was stated that the official stance of the BBF was basically that Bigfoot are a biological animal, similar to Gorillas, Humans, etc. except in perhaps their size and elusiveness. And, as time went by, I never really understood why so many people categorically reject the idea that there may be (and most likely are) characteristics of Bigfoot that are beyond the current Scientific paradigms. In fact, if you accept that many witnesses are seeing something(s) matching the criteria, it seems undeniable that they must defy our current understandings. As a side note: I live in the middle of a big city, on a busy road. Yet, my backyard is interesting because it becomes almost rural when you step out the back door. And (not to imply too much into how this may affect this current discussion), I have seen unusual wildlife out there. One night about 15 years ago when it was just about to get fully dark, I saw the silhouette of some kind of gigantic bird fly by. We have barred owls and some hawks and a few eagles, but this thing had like a 6-7 foot wing-span and it flew right by me! I imagine that any Ornithologist would probably say 'No, you must be mistaken, there are no birds of that size anywhere around there' but, I know what I saw. Point being: no one really knows anything, until they know.

We can't honestly, with any integrity, call it proof until mainstream science accepts existence of bigfoot. That is what PROOF means. There is no real proof but scientific proof, any lesser proof is not proof, "proof" is the wrong word for that whether it is used from ignorance, illiteracy, or just stubborn malice. There is no way around this. You seem to not understand what "proof" means. You're trying to change the definition / refusing to use the existing definition. Best of luck convincing anyone but yourself with that.

I think you have to ask some followup questions. 1) WHEN did the encounter occur, because I think media attention has changed the answer over time, at least in terms of averages. 2) WHO are you? Because I think different demographics have different propensities to report. I take a LOT of local reports via word of mouth that are never formally submitted .. truly, I've heard many accounts even from BFRO and Olympic Project members around the campfire that I do not think are part of any public database. I think we have to be very careful, in the context of your question, about assuming any uniformity of answer. Then there's the question of what constitutes a report? Formal submission? Sharing with other bigfooters informally? Sharing with family .. who may not be proponents? Those will vary for each of us depending on something which may vary from trust of those we're sharing with to deliberately, abrasively jamming it down their throats and daring them to voice doubt.

I think the best circumstantial evidence was obtained by the Olympic Project.

There is the possibility of it being just a spiritual entity from Native Americans teachings. Then of course the possibility of being a living relic that survives in the here and now. One of our distant ancestors. Therefore not monster or mythical.

What if they know bigfoot are human? That would open a HUGE can of worms.

Scouting dozer line today! It was supposed to rain today but its just cloudy. We are up on Tyee ridge above the Entiat river.

Thank you. Whenever I start doubting the existence of Sasquatch I remember these stories. They can't easily be explained by known phenomena

Just got called out to the little giant fire over by Chelan. Take care family!👍🔥

'I personally think the Guy got his locations mixed up, but if he says he made his way up the Toba then we'd have to assume he did.. Assuming this is true however,, i don't believe that he could be sure of being taken 25 Miles North/North East of the Toba by a Sasquatch ( he actually said 10 Miles in what i read ), especially with, as you pointed out, him coming out down by the Sechelt Inlet. That would say to me that he got taken South/South East instead, it would also mean that Mt Baker would have been more likely with regards to visibility. Anyway's, he believed that he had made 10 Miles or so from the head of the Toba Inlet in a North/North East direction when he first noticed disturbances.. He said he was awake for around about 3 hours inside the Sleeping Bag until they reached their destination & was asleep when he was picked up, speed would be unknown but was " going at a trot for a long time ".. He actually said he was awakened when he was picked up but half aseep, then said he had " no idea when it started as i was asleep when he picked me up ".. On his " escape " he made 3 miles in " record time " & then headed West emerging 2 days later on the Salmon Arm of Sechelt Inlet.. He simply must have headed South/South East whilst in the Sleeping Bag, towards the Sechelt Inlet but on the East side of the Jervis Inlet.. The distance from Ostman's alleged Camp which is inclusive of the 10 Miles North East he thought he made from landing at the head of the Toba, to the middle of the Salmon Arm is around 60 Miles.. If we are to assume that Ostman was taken South by the Sasquatch, then in 3 hours the Sasquatch would need to have been going at a pace of around 15 Miles per hour on average for those 3 hours or so that he was aware he was being transported, to be there or thereabouts & within the time & distances..'

If the Washington DOT has caught it on FLIR cameras? The Feds have certainly caught it on all their surveillance.

What isn't so obvious to me is this: Why let their incalcitrant demands dictate my beliefs and activities? Why must I drag them kicking and screaming into what I believe is true? Why not let them rest smugly in their offices and classrooms in proud denial? I'm not responsible to update biology or anthropology. My hope is simply to see a sasquatch in the wild before I die (which is becoming pretty unlikely to occur now).

Until they fall into one category or the other, they don't fall into either. And, if they are never classified, they will never fall into either category. So, I think you are putting the cart before the horse. I read your post (and certainly not trying to call you out, especially since you graciously run the show here and participate intelligently, probably more than anyone else.) But, I still have not seen any indication that a full skeleton of both a male and a female Bigfoot would be required by Science.

I think of Anna Nikaris discovery of an unknown animal. The interest isn’t that it looked like bigfoot. The issue is the animal existed but was undiscovered until recently. To me the animal doesn’t have to be impressive. The principal of discovery makes it impressive. Dr Nikaris even had a lecture with the possibility of Bigfoot existing.

This is a bit rhetorical, not looking for an answer, rather, suggesting a question we should each ask ourselves. In light of others' responses, I want to look at this question again from a different angle. Success at what? Personal experience or scientific acceptance .. or something else (if so, what)? These are not the same thing. A lot of people continue having personal experiences that I strongly suspect are legitimate. Documented .. in a sense .. in that they are shared here and other places. Not rigorously enough for scientific use, but documented. I don't think these personal experiences are moving the needle toward acceptance. Maybe they silence a few hecklers but there are plenty of those remaining. So .. what is the goal? What is your goal, my goal, "our goal", "community goal"? If they are not the same, which are moving forward and which have stalled? MIB

Not only is interesting I would have thought it would have provoked 50 posts by now

I think the answer almost has to be a hybrid version of what MIB asked above: "Are there a) lots of bigfoots but they are super sneaky or b) only a few bigfoots but they are fairly clumsy, inept at hiding, so those few are seen fairly frequently?" I propose a possibility c) There are only a few hundred (or, maybe a few thousand) Bigfoot left AND they are super sneaky. How that plays into the sad possibility that they may be on the verge of extinction I don't know. But, I think it's either that, or we are dealing with critters far beyond our current Scientific paradigms. I'm currently about 50-50 between those two options. The only thing I'm 99.9% sure of is that Bigfoot exist and that they have, and probably still do, walk on planet Earth.

Lake Shelbyville Illinois:

Could be. I’d say the older I get the longer I go without seeing a debunking of the PGF. Could be a hoax. But the longer I go without seeing a strong hoax case being made the more it suggests Roger and Bob may have really “got the sucker” One can be real but the Government involvement is not required.

Stellar thought the lights were off and the party over

After some research, here is what I found out about Jacko, the juvenile bigfoot found in Canada. Nov 18 The story of Jacko The story of Jacko – that of a small, apelike, young Sasquatch said to have been captured alive in the 1800s – is a piece of folklore that refuses to die, despite a superb investigative article published in 1975, co-authored by John Green and Sabina W. Sanderson. The investigation into the Jacko story did not began until decades later. During the 1950s, a news reporter named Brian McKelvie became interested in the then-current stories of the Sasquatch being carried by his local British Columbian papers. McKelvie searched for older reports. What he found was the Daily British Colonist July 4, 1884, article about Jacko. The account detailed the sighting of a smallish hairy creature (“something of the gorilla type”) supposedly seen and captured near Yale, British Columbia, on June 30, 1884, and housed in a local jail. McKelvie shared the Jacko account with researchers John Green and René Dahinden. MeKelvie told them this was the only record of the event due to a fire that had destroyed other area newspapers of the time. In 1958 John Green found and interviewed a man (August Castle) who remembered the Jacko talk of the time, but he said his parents did not take him to the jail to see the beast. Other senior citizens remembered the talk of the creature, but no one could produce any truly good evidence for or eyewitness accounts (other than the British Colonist story) of Jacko. The story’s appearance in Ivan T. Sanderson’s 1961 Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life propelled the Jacko incident into history. Other authors, including John Green, René Dahinden/Don Hunter, Grover Krantz, and John Napier, would follow. The story was repeated again and again.

You make some very good points in regard to Jacko and if correct the story was repeated in some newspaper. I will do some research to find out what newspaper. If it was written about, there is a chance that the author created a fantastical story about a supposed ape. There is also a 50% chance that the story is true and some unidentified primate was found on the railroad tracks and captured. I will do some research to find more information on Jacko. Let's not throw the report in the trash can yet. Let's allow a chance that the story is true. By the way your post is very informative, well written, and an interesting read.

I do not think you have any grasp of "proof" based on what you write over and over. If you do, you hide it very well. You're repeatedly saying false things and expecting them to be taken as fact. Scientific illiteracy, repeated endlessly, does not become fact. If you find that abrasive, maybe you need to be .. abraded .. a bit. How is it done? "Giant ballroom" .. is actually closer than you imagine. A virtual giant ballroom anyway. It is done the same way real science is always done. Gather evidence, analyze, write it up, and publish in an established journal. The journal is, in virtual terms, that ballroom. If your evidence is solid, if it is repeatable by other scientists, and if your analysis is correct, your claim will be substantiated. It will be scrutinized, probably painfully, in detail, questions will be asked probably via responses in other papers / journals, and you'll have to be able to address them. This is not for intellectual babies with easily hurt feelings, the processes are brutal .. ask Ketchum, ask J. Harlan Bretz, etc. Ketchum was refuted and ridiculed because her science was garbage. Bretz' work was rejected for decades but finally accepted and now is the mainstream understanding. If your work is good, it stands, if it is crap, it falls, and that is how it should be. There is no shortcut. If you're not going through the established processes you're not going to be accepted by the establishment. Until that happens, you do not have proof regardless of what you wish to believe.

XSPIDER ONE, a very comprehensive reply and totally agree with you. Thanks for addding to this topic and will reply to each of your discussion points. I WILL REPLY IN ALL CAPITALS. That is actually a very good question/point. Although I am not a witness to Bigfoot, I contend that there are many witnesses who have their own undeniable proof. It is a fantastical subject to convince anyone else of, but I would venture to say that there are Bigfoot witnesses who are more convinced by their own experience than they would otherwise be by any Scientific, peer-reviewed paper. They know what they saw and what they experienced! Most of us have probably read that a (personally) indisputable Bigfoot experience can be life changing. VERY WELL PUT AND WE NEED MORE SCIENTIST WHO HAVE ADVANCED DEGREES IN PRIMATE STUDIES WHO ARE ALSO EYEWITNESSES SO THE SUBJECT OF PROOF CAN BE MOVED FORWARD. However, and to the point, Google AI sums up the situation clearly, in my opinion: "Bigfoot could be scientifically proven only by providing a verifiable type specimen, such as an intact physical body or clear tissue sample, that undergoes independent, peer-reviewed analysis." I READ AN EYE WITNESS REPORT FROM A CANADIAN WHO LIVED IN A SMALL VILLAGE, AND WAS DEER OR ELK HUNTINS, SAW A BIGFOOT, AND ENDED ITS LIFE TRAGICALLY. HOW MANY CASES LIKE THIS THAT HAVE FAILED TO PROVIDE PROOF ? Unfortunately, testimony, video, footprints, structures, audio, etc. etc. will not suffice. In the warmer (hot) months, I see a bug almost every week that I have never seen before. My dad told me that it's the same where he lives, 900 miles away. It very well could be that some of those bugs are not yet scientifically classified and, I don't think that most people would deny that as a possibility. With Bigfoot, things are entirely different. It is a radical subject which probably 99.999% of people in the world have no personal experience. So, the easiest default opinion is to simply deny the possibility. THERE ARE PROBABLY MANY PRIMATE ADVANCED DEGREES BIOLOGIST WHO AGREE WITH BIGFOOT EVIDENCE BUT WILL NEVER COMMENT SINCE THE TOPIC IS A CAREER DETRACTOR. ONLY THE RISK TAKERS DARE SPEAK IN FAVOR OF BIGFOOTS EXISTENCE.

I try to avoid big groups, but I'd love to find someone to partner up with for some remote, dispersed camping in east TX soon. Going into my fifth year of research. I have a Jeep, a thermal monocular, audio recorder and some good camping gear.

Well definitely the discussions are a big part of it, as its always great to bounce ideas and get opinions and critiques, asking questions, even if sasquatch don't look like a shaved bear. I like the paranormal section, and I've yet to access the tarpit, but heck I couldn't even say how many years I've been coming here posting my own crazy ideas, hypothesesiz, answers/solutions, approach, long winded replies that might seem nearly rational at the outset, but then kinda veer off to something about generalist omnivores in the Pleistocene, and how wood tools work just fine when you can bench press a tractor, and sometimes even try my hand at Bigfoot humor, sometimes to make or illustrate a point, other times not so much. But gosh, you guys, after all these years we're nearly family! Sure some of has might be that grumpy uncle we seat at the other table, but still! Hey anybody here from Aunt Sasfooty lately?

Excellent interview, Daniel!

In the folklore of the Caucasus, Pamir, and Altai mountains, an almas (also called an almasty) is a legendary hominid cryptid. Stories describe it as a human-like creature covered in reddish-brown hair, standing 5 to 6.5 feet tall, and resembling modern reconstructions of Neanderthals rather than large apes. Zana fit that physical description perfectly. She was called an Almas during and after her lifetime. Recently, Science dug her body up along with that of her son and analyzed the DNA of other descendants. She has been scientifically identified as Homo sapiens. She was both, and there is no reason why she could not be both.

Hi everyone. I reside in Ontario, Canada. Been interested in Bigfoot and cryptozoology and have been reading up on them on and off for over 20 years.

As a bigfoot investigator, I've taken a number of Bigfoot sighting reports in and around the KC area in the past few years. Most have been near the Missouri River near Sugar Creek, Independence, and east at the Burr Oak woods conservation area. There was also a mothman sighting at Burr Oak Woods. The most recent Bigfoot sighting occured in the city in Independence when a large grey bigfoot was seen near 23rd and Pearl street at dusk. If you have had a sighting in this region, please let me know, as I would like to include it in an upcoming book on the subject.

Hello! I'm a new person. I'm an avid lover and a believer in Bigfoot.

For a concrete example, the area near Hobson's Horn, a mountain in SW Oregon, burned in 2002. Prior to that, part was still old growth forest. I hunted it in 2014 and got a deer. It had regrown to clumps of brush about chest height with gaps between. There were many fire-hardened snags fallen into the brush. It was easy to see the ground in the gaps and watch animals walk through them. It's 2026 now. I was back there in 2025. The brush has not grown significantly taller since 2014. The clear spaces have closed in some. Another part of the same ridge which connects Hobson's Horn and Silver Peak "hosts" the Silver Peak trail. This burned in 1987's "Silver Fire". It has grown back a little more but from a distance it is still fairly bare with clumpy brush because there is not much water for most of the year and, being in designated federal wilderness, there is no reforestation activity at all. I don't see any natural re-growth of pre-fire species .. douglas fir .. yet. I wouldn't expect to see much improvement for the next 150-200 years. USFS / contractors have done some replanting. These are monoculture "super trees" meant to put on the most cellulose in the least amount of time to prepare for logging and they are not doing well because it is truly too dry for them. They're stunted, some are dying because they are too weak from lack of water to out-run disease and pests. I think something will come back, some portion of them, in maybe 100-125 years, if there is no fire forcing a restart, but they will not be the original trees with the original genetics. Another location, across the main divide toward the Rogue, burned in .. I think it was 1970 or 1971. It has grown back to alder (not the original species there) and heavy brush. The alder is 30-50 feet high in places. There are some cedar / spruce and a very tiny smattering of douglas fir returning but they are 20 feet tall or less. It will be another 25 years, minimum, and more likely 50+, before they are tall enough to begin to choke out the alder and return to pre-burn forest conditions. As long as there isn't another fire, it'll be roughly 100 years between the last fire there and a return to similar-ish conditions. It doesn't mean those areas won't support wildlife. As Norseman points out, that early/middle age forest supports animals .. in fact, it may provide more edibles per acre than mature forest. Much of the old growth left where I grew up .. well, there are 2 kinds. The increase in humidity has allowed some younger trees to reach proportions you'd expect only of pretty ancient forest. Cores of those trees sometimes show growth rings approaching 1 inch across. THen there are the truly old trees, mostly found in sheltered canyons which were surrounded by very dry ridges in older times, and some of those can run 400 - 500 years old or more. If you think about it, even under the most ideal conditions .. no intervening "resets" from fire, etc .. if the original trees took 400-500 years to grow, then their replacements are also going to take 400-500 years to grow.

Greetings from Southern Ontario. I've always been fascinated by cryptozoology and Sasquatch/Bigfoot. Nearing retirement and I'm forward to deep-diving into the subject more.

Take care / stay safe!!

Hi, My name is Jack and I'm from Massachusetts, I'm new(ish) to the subject and look forward to learning more. Thank you for having me. Can't wait to dive right in!

I’ve often heard about the legend of the The Grey Man in Britain. It’s seems to be seen in the foggy,rocky and rugged mountains. There a number of sightings in England. Ive seen them three times on the West Coast of California and Oregon

I was visiting my cousin (who grew up and currently lives on the northern coast of Oregon) 2 years ago and she revealed to me that she had a sighting in her backyard in the 80's. She has known of my interest in squatching for the last 15 years, but never said a thing. She finally opened up and told everyone after 40 years.

Fauna bone pile as a result of Glacial Lake Outburst Flood washing animals downstream until the wall of water dissipates and the dead animals 'pile up'. Muck piles have yielded bones of ancient animals to miners for many years. Many bones were washed out to sea in the Arctic and Bering Sea. Glacial Lake Outburst Floods were massive and repetitive.

Interesting. So far as the cases I've been able to dig into personally, the further I dig the more off-the-mark he is. I would like to believe what he has to say but it simply does not hold up to scrutiny. Most of the reports I've dug into have been in the Crater Lake cluster along with a couple in Idaho. I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt in other places.

My favorite interview it was so genuine Meldrum. RIP!