Leaderboard

Something really strikes me as fake about that sketch. It just doesn't look like what a real primate would like. For example, the jaw and saggital crest: saggital crests are used to anchor jaw muscles, but the animal in that sketch has a tiny jaw. There also isn't any widening of the face liked you'd expect to see to accomodate jaw muscles large enough to make a saggital crest. Basically, a sagittal crest is ususally followed by a large masseter, mandible, and zygomatic arch, none of which are actually bigger in that sketch, despite the saggital crest being huge. The chin bugs me, too. It looks like the jaw recedes and then a chin jets out - it's very awkward, and not something I'd expect to see on a real animal. Either a jaw recedes (as with every hominin besdies us), or there's a chin (like with us), it doesn't make sense to see both traits mixed. The forehead is pretty strange, too. There are weird bumps that seem like they might indicate a brow ridge, but they're way too high, which would mean they'd have to be muscles. However, there's no reason for muscles on the forehead to need to bulge like that, and I've never seen it before, or anything indicating it on a skeleton. It just doesn't make anatomical sense, IMO. It looks like someone cherry-picked human features and ones usually given to bigfoot (and apes, I guess) and threw them together to create an ape-ish human. I guess it worked, since a lot of you seem to buy it, but it can't. It just looks like an awkward mash-up of features that does make sense. Not a real animal, just something thrown together by someone who doesn't know a lot about primate anatomy.

Anytime you interview a witness you are taking a risk of somebody hoaxing a report. Usually they don't answer their phones. Sometimes they do. I have done a lot of interviews and posted 205 reports with BFRO. The witness is in his sixties, retired and on disability. This particular witness does not own a computer and has hidden his interest from his wife and relatives. He uses his friend's computer to look at reports. He contacted me last fall and begged me to come down during the spring. He said he was having activity just before the leaves would come on the trees while he was out mushroom hunting. So we kept in touch for six months and when I returned from Florida we set up a date. On Sunday night I thought he was going to call me and he thought I was going to call him. So we rescheduled for the next day. I was able to get to his home a half hour earlier than my GPS said. We headed directly for the woods. The railroad crossing we stopped at was not his regular research area, but he had had a sighting a month earlier there when he was in his car while going over the crossing heading for his site. We only planned to stop by the railroad tracks long enough to walk down the hundred yards where he had seen the squatches standing next to the tracks a month earlier. We were there no more than ten minutes when we headed back towards my car. The train went by and we headed for his main area and mushroom hunting.

Saskeptic, but can you show the peer-reviewed, journal-published papers that verify the peer-reviewed, journal-published papers that negate the peer-reviewed, journal-published papers in a peer-reviewed, journal-published paper? Sorry, I couldn't resist