Leaderboard

In response to Yowiie's initial comment, it fascinates me how people in Australia could allow themselves to be at the mercy of a tyrant or invading army. You willingly surrender your right of self protection. You and every neighbor on your street would be slaughtered like sheep. In the States, a tyrant or invading force would be up against a firearm from every direction. They'd be up against wolves, not sheep, every single step along the way. Many good reason outlined above. Those who don't believe or aren't looking for one are probably too stunned to even try to get a shot off. Many who are hunting for a squatch probably find what they're looking for and see a human face looking back at them. Not too easy to pull that trigger. It's one thing when you know you're hunting an animal. It has horns or hooves or long tails. It's altogether different when it has eyes, a nose, mouth, teeth and hands like us, and is looking right at you. I would never kill one unless I was attacked and there was no other option.

Plussed, although I'm guessing that you aren't really stymied. I'm not a researcher, but I don't feel stymied about anything. I just keep on doing what I like, which is learning more about behavior patterns. I've had my personal proof, which is the only sensible way to approach that concept, IMO. I'm repeating myself, but science is ongoing. I'd point to the tons of information gathered in the last few decades and emphatically state that it's teaching interested people much of value. It's a dynamic process that will probably last many more decades surrounding this subject, so be patient. If someone wants more right away, I don't know what to say. Read, listen, learn, go outside, it's fun. Period.

I don't have any trouble finding a trusted researcher. There aren't many I truly respect because their values don't align with mine but that's not the same as trust: none that I know of would "send my evidence off to the Smithsonian to make it disappear" or anything like that, they're as curious as I am and maybe even more aggressive than I'd be about getting stuff tested. Question: why you think a "researcher" is necessary? It's not like there's some BF researcher certification process that, upon certification, gives you access to resources that you or I don't already have equal access to. The most having a known researcher available to you might do is give you access to even more known researchers that are just all as stymied as the rest of us. That's a fact. MIB

Oh but Norseman remember that seeing does not mean it is real and for some even plaster casts of those tracks are "not evidence". I will not give up and go home, until I have something confiscated. Until then I know I have a chance. Even at that, I will get evidence of the confiscation to settle that question in court. Get that out in public where they don't want it to be.

^^^ Finding a "trusted" BF researcher may be a problematic as finding BF in the first place.

Yowie1: One of those "rambo" type hunters I know personally bragged to me and others that if he ever saw one, he was going to "lay it down". He hunted feral hogs and deer mostly, and he hunted the river bottoms. He made that brag for about 10 years. When he was about 27 years old he was walking out of the bottoms from his deer stand just before black dark one day about four years ago. A large male Bigfoot walked out of a cane thicket and onto the trail less than 20 yards in front of him. Both froze and stared at each other for a few seconds before the animals screamed and ran off at high speed. He made the mistake of telling me and others about his encounter. Of course he was asked by us why he didn't "lay it down". He would always laugh and say, "Well **** it, I would have, but my dang .308 somehow turned into a BB gun on the spot."

Interesting. You guys in Australia waited too long remaining subjects - we fought the Brits and became citizens - so we don't have to have a reason for a firearm. Now we too, use our firearms for vermin. We have lots of two-legged vermin, but thanks to our firearms, not as many today as a week ago, or a month ago. Actually, we don't have too few gun laws - some argue we have too many. I note that Europeans can't fathom our gun laws, nor our preference for personal firearms. With the attacks of immigrants rampant, they may be wishful for American type gun laws and commonality. It's not that every other American has a gun, but we do have 40,000,000 more firearms than American citizens in this country. And that's not nearly enough, so our factories are punching them out very efficiently. Our problem is ammunition availability. We keep selling ammo to the world who are using it, and it certainly drives up costs over here, and creates uneven distribution problems. Of the roughly 370 million firearms in the US, on any given day, the bulk are NOT to be found in remote areas of the US. Many are kept at home, many are what some of us would consider sub-calibers, unsuited to shoot and drop a Bigfoot, and many are handguns designed for anti-personnel use. Those who have experience killing, understand that firearms are just tools, and not one tool can perform all tasks, and what is great for prarie dogs or small game will not drop a brown bear. So there's that, too. Suitability. One would need to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right weapon for conditions, with the right amount of grunt, and then be lucky enough to get a drop. And then, get it out. Which I postulate, might be a bit more difficult than many may be inclined to believe.

Archeo anthropologists would have no problem in identifying it as non human.If Bigfoot is actually a human you now have a second problem... The trick is knowing when the bones are from a bigfoot,( if anyone could know) and of coarse, anything that is remotely large and humanoid would be from a robust native, if old enough. http://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/minaret/ They would know if it was human or non human. They would know what "type" it most closely resemble, say a gorilla, chimp, or Australopithecus (if a new type, what type it had evolved from). The more skull you have the more precise you can be. From the article you could probably tell brain size and that is one of the biggest identifiers and brain shape, brain structure. As far as race, forget about it, a meaningless construct, especially as you go back in time. In science there is just as much debate as in pseudo science so a skull would contribute to the overall picture and not likely define it. Perhaps overturning conventions such as that we are the only surviving hominid. I'm not sure they would know. The minaret skull reportedly had a nuchal ridge that was more developed, theoretically from larger muscle attachment from the neck and back. This occurs in other apes due to quadrupedal locomotion. In order to look forward in that position, the muscles must work harder in that area. If the physical anthropologist looking at it didn't know that bigfoot is sometimes seen in 4x4 mode, they might not put two and two together.

We can only hope that any skeleton found is different enough from modern human to be recognized as different. Size only cannot be the sole determinator since gigantism is known in humans. And female and child BF may be difficult to diferentiate from human. I think anything obvious would likely be in the skull. Different skull sutures and double rows of teeth are mentioned in finds that have been carted away. And Yuchi is entirely right. Who do you trust? Certainly anyone that works directly for the government is not on my list. If there is a government coverup, keep them out of it as long as possible because at some point it will be confiscated. The Kennewick man is a good example of that. My plan right now should I find the golden ring skeleton is contact someone in a university in my home state of Washington. That is less messy for several reasons. I can likely get them out in the field to do the excavation. That is important to determine likely age of the find etc. Should there be any question about human, we could just turn it over to authorities without transport across state lines. State law enforcement would likely recognize local university involvement. If Meldrum shows up, that might be a problem since he is from Idaho. His other problem, that the authorities would question, is that he makes money from BF. Selling books and speeches but never the less he makes money from it. The best I can hope for personally as a lay person is some credit for the find. Sue the T-Rex comes to mind and that is not much if you know the story. The PHD involved would get most of that, write the paper, etc. If the bones are from federal land I have no idea what to do other than get someone else at a university to take on the project. On federal land, it has to be handled properly or someone will go to jail and I don't want it to be me. (Look up the history of Sue the T-Rex). I would likely uncover just enough to determine it not human, photograph it, and leave it where it is, for excavation. That is probably the best way to avoid legal problems, especially on federal land.

Archeo anthropologists would have no problem in identifying it as non human. If Bigfoot is actually a human you now have a second problem... The trick is knowing when the bones are from a bigfoot,( if anyone could know) and of coarse, anything that is remotely large and humanoid would be from a robust native, if old enough. http://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/minaret/

I am pro kill for at least one specimen in the name of science. Possible reasons they are not shot here in my humble opinion. 1- They do not exist 2- There are so few 3-Elusive and intelligent enough to only dwell in the thick dark forests and swamps where humans do not tread. 4- They are shot and not documented for fear of repercussions. 5- Government intervention and or cover up. I personally think number one is the most plausible answer.

What a weekend!! Dr Meldrum purchased my book and is putting it on his facebook page. I have several more pics I'll work on later. I want to thank every one who came and supported Make-A-Wish.....and me

A body would be a massive game changer! Im not following your logic that if we pull one out of the bush? Science would not believe that there would not be more out there. Thats not how biology works unless we truly shot the last one of the species. A species needs a viable breeding population to sustain itself. Chances would be that there are more, and Im supremely confident that science at that time would go look. Regardless it would still prove the species existed, or exists. Which is alot better than we are doing know......us merry band of pixie hunters.