Leaderboard

What are they ?

I do believe it could very well be because of several of the theories already brought up by previous posters (people might be less likely to visit state & federal parks if the existence of bigfoot was scientifically proven, shows us the government is not in control & is vulnerable, etc..). Another one of the theories (as out there as it may seem) is that it would tell us more about our own human origins, and the possibility that we may be aliens to some degree ourselves. The link below is to a presentation (it's a little long, not the best quality, but well worth the watch- IMO) that Llyod Pie did several years ago, and several of the points he brings up are very interesting to say the least, and make you really rethink about what's really going on. http://youtu.be/pe6DN1OoxjE Cheers!

I had a revelation last light watching a Discovery Chanel show about a new find in the Valley of the Kings in Egypt. Let me throw out some heresy. Has the P/G film all led us astray? Has it led us all down the wrong path? Has it done more harm than good for BF research? What has it done to further BF research? People claim that if we only have HD video, science would sit up and notice. When the P/G film was taken 16 MM was about the best you could have in the field that was portable. Did science sit up and notice? No, just a few academics said it appeared genuine and the debate has continued since. Since then people (like myself admittedly) have been roaming the woods with the best portable video cameras available at the moment trying to get a better video. Has anything ground breaking happened? No. BF remains as elusive as ever. You can spend a lifetime in the woods and never see the elusive creatures. The P/G film was pure chance, pure luck. Thousands of game cameras are deployed hoping to get a clear picture of he same elusive creature that even seems to know what they are for. The results are the same, blurry inconclusive pictures. If that clear video or game camera picture is taken will the debate be over? Will science sit up and notice? No. Elaborate costume, hoax, clever CGI will all be explanations we hear and the picture or video will be interesting but not proof of anything. Recently another path has started in earnest. Groups of pro kill hunters are searching our forests. If P/G can run into a BF at that close range, then skilled hunters should be able to do the same thing and get the shot of the century. Body on the lab table, slam dunk, proof positive, the debate is over. P/G did it. They should be able to do it too. But the things are very elusive, natural camo, smart, skilled hunters in their own right. Their night vision tremendously better than ours, they can probably smell us before we could see them. They move through the woods like a knife through soft butter, 3 or 4 times or more the speed we can move in the same situation. And we think we can catch them? Flank them? They know the woods like we know our living rooms. Every nook and cranny. Every hidden game trail. If someone gets a shot it will be pure chance not skill. It better be good because they will come after you. Then you got to get the body out to the right place. Now to my revelation. Bodies and bones do not hide, run away, not want to be found, are not smart, do not move away, cannot smell you coming, they are where they lay from the moment the species says goodbye to their own. Even if they eat their dead, the bones are left. We have to figure out what they do with their dead, and find the bones. That has to be 1000 times easier than chasing a live creature that does not want be found. With bones there will be no debate, the species will be proven. It is not likely the bones will be guarded, unless they bury in their settlements. That to me seem much more doable and definitive that an the video of an elusive creature that does not want to be found. From now on I am looking for dead ones not live ones. It is almost a relief. Chasing the live ones around is exhausting. Looking at that task. They do not have back hoes or shovels so dirt burial of adults is unlikely. Rock piles on the dead to protect from preditors seems a likely possibility. Lava tube or ice caves burial is possible. Early humans stashed their dead in such places. Limestone caverns could serve the same purpose in other areas. Water burial is unlikely because it would contaminate the water and they seem to be smarter than that. Cremation is not impossible but would require fire use that has not been observed. No matter what they do, bones are left that have some lifespan. Sure forest soils are acidic but perhaps BF know that too, and know of less acidic places to stash bodies where bodies last longer. So as of now, I am looking for dead ones. Not live ones.