Leaderboard

Are you from the US?

The only thing I was apologizing for was the transgender model which seems to be causing you angst. Please read that imagining my most sarcastic tone Other than that you have not succeeded any better than I have at swaying views. Your "evidence" is just as subject to error as any I've seen yet.

Yet you continue to idle here in bizarro world for many hours day after day... things that make ya go hrmmmm Another interesting watch for those who are interested

Certainly cannot chase down every rabbit and kick every dog but over the years have researched much of these infos and continue to find it compelling. The more time that goes by the more compelling I find the evidence and the history. I think as we move forward we see how the theory of evolution is falling apart and looking more and more silly and contrived. I predict that in the next 20 years that theory will be effectively supplanted and just simply unsupportable by any semblance of rationale. Here is an interesting listen in my opinion. I dont agree with all the theories and claims but enough of them are sufficiently convincing that I feel the subject wont be going away as it is sufficiently documented in so much literature, art, history and myth. There have been also sufficient evidences of other related coverups and false claims made in the studies of archeology, climatology, and other areas of study. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNGE74EOxJ8

Er...I thought you maintained that you had seen one?!

I would think that field workers from the Smithsonian in the 1800s would know real human bones from fakes and not go to the trouble to box up fakes to ship back to Washington. A human thigh bone is very distinctive and a giant human thigh bone would be well out of the human norm. Even a lay person could tell if a bone was real or fake by examining it, especially in the 1800s when composites were unknown. Articulation of a skeleton can cause the estimated height of a human skeleton to vary somewhat, but a thigh bone well out of the human norm would be pretty conclusive that the living person was gigantic in size. I cannot see that Smithsonian people would be fooled if they have examined the bones. Pictures do not say much other than the event happened as described and a skeleton of apparent large size was there. If the report did not mention the Smithsonian then of course the pictures could be of a plaster fake. But since they were, and thought the bones interesting, the reports seem authentic to me.

Wonder if there are any updates on this sighting.

Two or three people here have mentioned hoaxed late 1800 and early 1900's photos. The newspaper photos I have seen, in obscure newspapers like the New York Times, showed normal size humans and other objects in the pictures to produce size reference for the assembled giant skeletons. I had no idea that Photoshop existed as far back as the late 1800s but it must have to produce those pictures. Normal darkroom techniques that existed in the late 1800s were incapable of that sort of manipulation. You can learn a lot of stuff here from skeptics.

Well here is thought for you. Take a look at the eastern cougar or well the cougar for that matter. For years in different states in the USA and provinces in Canada the government has officially stated they are not here. Yet people have taken photos of them, track casts, Found evidence on livestock that they attacked, even shot them (My Granddad shot one in Nova Scotia when he was younger). Yet despite this the statement has been the same. They are not in the area. If they could/can cover that up over or hide that away could they do the same with another large mammal? I am not one to be in the darken basement with the "I want to believe" poster up on the wall, but it is worth noting. Again I am not sure where I stand on the case of the camp site. Interesting either way it goes. Should be investigated further. If there is something out there that can do this then people need to know.

I do believe that the powers that be know these animals exist and help keep them undiscovered. I find it difficult to believe that they'd cover up finding x 2 hunters in a tree with broken necks and nobody anywhere like family and friends have ever said a word and no Police Agency in that area would have any record of it. If that is true, then there's a very serious problem.

The only irony I see is the willful parroting of what is believed from others to be facts and then calling that advocating for science. The hubris here is staggering. What have you observed personally antfoot? As easily as you say a certain position is opinion and belief or conspiracy , I can easily show the same of yours or any for that matter.

I watched the podcast yesterday as it was linked on the Sasquatch Chronicles website, and being skeptical of the situation I paid special attention to Wes to see if he gave away any tell tale signs of lying, which I must say he seemed to be telling what he at least believes to be the truth. I am not defending the reality of the situation being described, but I will admit that Wes seems to believe it to be true. I will give him the benefit of the doubt, and not pan the show. As far as the Governments involvement, they have the responsibility to protect the public, but just as much to inform the public. Even if it is proven that Sasquatch are doing such things, that does not give the government the right to go into the forest and kill all the creatures in an area, as what is being described, this would be a travesty. I think that we can live peacefully along side of this creature, but we need to understand it better, and to respect it. People need to know what not to do in an encounter, shooting at one, which seemed to occur in the Bob Garrett case, that might be your biggest mistake. Yielding to the creature, not looking it in the eye, and walking away quietly might be your best bet, do not run, do not yell at it, and by all means do not point your gun at it, unless it is a very big gun and your sure you can pull the trigger, but remember, it's buddies are hiding around you when you do, so it may not solve your long term problem.

I'm not a fan of all this type 1 and type 2 stuff, I have no idea who gave the person that thought it up the authority to say such things as fact nor why he'd even begin to believe such talk would stand up for so many when we can't even nail or tie down a type specimen of any type in the first place. Much, much, much more chance of the witness getting mixed up with what they're seeing for me rather than upright walk dogs crossed with men. That to me sounds like a Bear, and Sasquatches most certainly aren't Bears.

I heard Cliff Barackman give a presentation last night in Portland. It was aimed at a total disbeliever and while most of it was spot on, I found myself disagreeing with several things he said. In his own presentation he cast doubt on what he was saying with many examples to the contrary. He said BF are nocturnal and then a few minutes later showed some of the many daytime BF pictures out there and told about several examples of daytime road crossing and other sightings. If BF are primarily nocturnal why are there daytime sightings and photographs? Daytime photographs of primarily nocturnal animals only happen when that animal is disturbed in its sleeping location during the day. The only time I have seen a bat fly in North America is when I have disturbed its daytime sleep. BF may elect to move around at night when humans are around, but when humans are not known to be around, they move around in the daytime too as indicated by the photographs and witness accounts. He mentioned human howls and knocks as if they are an essential part of making contact with BF. I had thought that aspect of "Finding Bigfoot" was more MM than Cliff but it seems I am wrong. Mind you this is not so much as differing theory, but experiences I have had and obvious data that he is aware of, that contradicts their methodology. He even mentioned at one point that when they start doing knocks, often they don't hear any more from the BF. What it told me is that the principal characters on "Finding Bigfoot" are so entrenched with their methodology, they are ignoring data that is suggesting a change in their tactics in the field. Perhaps that is why they are not "Finding Bigfoot". I wonder how many times they have stepped on a footprint find or walked past a BF peeking out from behind a tree blundering around in the dark like they do. He says most of the time they cannot see their hand in front of their face even though the IR cameras and IR lights on those poles show their faces well lighted on the show.