Leaderboard

From reading so many reports. Reading those reports have given our intrepid logic-slinger vast skill, and has enabled him to become the arbiter of all things what should be accepted by "Science."

More cap letters, DWA. That might just do it.

And this is my point. We know cougar in Florida are endangered, we know there is roughly 100 of them. We know what they like to eat and where they like to habitat. So the fish and game protects them and the endangered species act fights for their cause to continue to exist on this planet! Sasquatch has none of that, when bulldozers show up? They have no voice. We don't know how many they are or where the like to live or what they like to eat! Why? Because they are a myth......a figment of the imagination they exist between UFO and Poltergeist books at your local library......... If anyone cares one iota about this creature then they believe a type specimen must be procured!

I know I may not qualify as scientist or have a degree proving I am capable of helping in this topic but I am a field researcher and report investigator who has poured well over a thousand hours over data sets { seasonal, topo, forest composition and water table maps and as well as ranges and densities of flora and fauna within my state } from my own field work, state wildlife programs, field biology projects and a few fellow field researchers ongoing projects and report mapping studies. I have commented on a topic similar to this before, I will quote my self from the topic combining and adjusting a few posts with relevant information from the thread and as well add some new information for detail in the following. My theory has been called the evergreen theory and it was developed on a combination of data sets { from the listed above } from the state of Michigan where I live and research. Theory and information follows below. The activity from spring-summer-fall extends out from a massive evergreen swamp { about 4 X 4 miles in size } mostly composed of pine, spruce and cedar into farmland along large patches of forest near a few human residences. { I believe this to be due the deer are on these areas heavily during these times} . These types of areas produce a very broad food spectrum that offers calories from both seasonal and nonseasonal sources. Water is everywhere and is really the lifeblood and reason for this caloric density region. This evergreen swamp really acts as untouchable zone or core area, it is nearly impossible to enter due to muck, roots and the possibility of getting very lost. Deer hunters will not even venture very deep going after a deer { no more then 250 yards and coincidentally they sometimes get yelled at doing so, as reported }. The forest density for most of the region not only makes movement through the area nearly impossible but also brings visibility to a range of 1 to 10 yards unless you happen to be really tall but even then you still have a very limited visual detection range. It is my thought that the local sasquatch spend the majority of the warmer months going back and forth between areas of caloric density { be it man made or natural, what ever offers advantage } and this core area. In the winter the group would most likely restrict their movement to the core area almost entirely, feeding on the deer and other wildlife that have been forced into this core area by hunting pressure or cold temperatures. This pattern is strikingly similar to black bear life style and routine { for the warmer months }, in fact the number and quality of sasquatch observation reports drastically increases in good black bear habitat. This can be seen in the reflection of the BFRO google earth layer when held up to a forest composition map and a black bear population estimation map. In short, by the data alone it is safe to assume that more black bear per square mile equal more sasquatch per square mile. Side Note - A evergreen swamp produces heat due to the under lying decomposing material witch is black muck and also holds it down due to the flat layered growth of the evergreens it equals an environment that can be as much as 10 degrees warmer than the exposed hardwoods environments witch are scarce of food as well by comparison. I have noted that many of the reports { on and off record } of individuals passing through areas of higher human population { higher than the remote back country noted above } are of individuals of mid size { 6'6 to 7'4 } very muscular and of an over all male build, to me this strikes as possibly the result of young males reaching maturity and going out on their own to find a territory and or mate. My sighting in 2009 could be an example of this pattern. This may account for the this data point that has seemingly until now conflicted with the home range or core area theory. This would conclude the theoretical year cycle of activity and life style of the species in Michigan. I hope this information is of use to those involved. ,,,Nathan.

At some point our illustrious poster that simply posts the same thing in every thread should simply type "ditto" to save himself much finger-sweat.

We're talking about the points raised in the OP. Do you wish to discuss them? There's no point simply repeating your claims of evidence that you spam over every thread and refuse to quantify or provide examples of. I really get quite sick and tired of you trying to turn everything into an argument between 'skeptics' and 'believers' about whether Bigfoot exists, without seemingly being able to consider an individual point on its own merits.