Leaderboard

There may one day be a non-funded, on-the-cheap individual chance meeting engagement, and one will be brought in. It's possible. The problem I see with a lot of organized endeavors is the mistaken core assumptions before they ever start, trying to force a square peg into a round hole, resulting in a flawed approach and subsequent plan. A flawed approach results in a flawed strategy, by choosing the wrong technologies, which in turn dictates a flawed set of tactics. Flawed tactics demands a mistaken reliance on technology to compensate for poor execution, complicated further by misunderstanding the vulnerabilities and flaws in the selected technologies, by underestimating the Critters own patterns and capabilities. Then I see a tendency to make things much more complicated than they should be, with emphasis on the wrong skills among team members, and worst of all, this results in a misapplication of funds. Just one of these flaws will lead to failure. But when you pile on 7-8 errors, it guarantees your results.

What are helicopters and cameras going to give us that we dont already have!!!!?? Crazy. Thanks for sharing. I had no idea that sort of money was being thrown around. But aviation is expensive. Rapid response for one. Urgency is one thing footers don't seem to be interested in. If Peter Byrne and his backers had urgency? They would have been pro - kill. So you race out there with a helo and take a top down PGF video with prop wash blowing dust and tree tops around? And then present it to science with a cherry on top? Sure The outcome is predictable. It doesnt matter how fast you respond......if your not commited to collected physical evidence? Epic Fail.

I think your question depends so much on the experience, or lack of it, of the observer reporting it, that it is almost impossible to quantify. Virtually all of the preceding observations apply, under the right conditions for each case: experienced hunter/trapper, city boy/girl, trained observer of nature, drunken yahoo, needy for attention teenager, and a hundred other cases of the human condition. My personal experiences lead me to believe that at least some reports are legitimate, and that is enough for my continued interest in providing confirmation of the existance of Sasquatch/Bigfoot.

Yep, too many think of all of this as some sort of competition. When one thinks in terms of winning, regardless of which side of the issue one is on, nothing gets done. Too many try to one up their opponent at any cost, and there in the conversation is lost. Too many people on both sides of the issues have closed their minds and declared themselves the one who's right, and all others points are moot. Those people have nothing to add to the conversation and I simply put them on ignore and move along to something that progresses the conversation. Others like to spar with their imagined opponent to see who can out zing the other. Those people have ruined the forums for a lot of folks. Every once in a while one can glean a few pearls of wisdom and a few interesting facts and theories, but they are getting harder and harder to find. I keep reading, plowing through the chaff to get to the wheat.

I don't keep up with this stuff - but I've always thought that some of these archaeologists and anthropologists were a bit quick on the trigger to make the next big discovery and get their name attached to it. As we all know, most fossil homos are coming out of Africa, from Chad, Kenya, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and South Africa. And every time we turn around, another species has been discovered. There would be a fragment with some little nuance, and they'd name a whole new species. Such excitement. Yawn. But something's changed, and a lot of those "species" may be eradicated from the record due entirely to a phenomenal discovery in (Russian) Dmanisi, Georgia. Pretty much in one locations, they found five 1.8 million year old skulls, most entirely complete - an elderly male, two adult males, one female, and one juvenile of unknown sex - all of them Homo Erectus, but the skulls vary so much that they demonstrate that many of the so-called African species are just simple variants of the same species. And here is the proof. Now, we can probably trim off the record the H rudolfensis, the H gautengensis, H ergaster, and the H habilis. Four species. Aren't species. That's what happens when these guys get in a hurry to get their name attached to some new discovery. So forgive me if I don't jump at some of the mankind/fossil/genetic postulations made a few years ago, and then just fall off the earth. That's how I maintain what little sanity I still have. MIB is already where I stand as well. We'll see, when we see.

Dang you Old Dog, you sure are a spoil-sport. Just when I was fixin' to go all scientific hair-splitter on you, you disarmed me completely! But yeah, we got lots of opinions here, don't we? A buyer's market of opinions, take your pick and make us an offer. I do think though some invest way too much in this kind of subjective ball/strike calling. You are best to set aside the extreme outliers on either side of the argument, and you are then left with the solid middle ground that doesn't lend itself to glib explanations. That is where the best evidence is. What I see many do is put up a number of pieces of good evidence up against an equal weight of bad evidence, and declare the final result on the question of existence to be a net zero. Total wrong approach, to my mind.

I don't think the hybrid hypothesis is dead. I don't think this new "info" either strengthens it or weakens it. It won't be proven 'til it's proven and it won't be disproven 'til something else is proven, everything else falls between empty conjecture and special pleading. How rational an explanation seems to you or to me has no bearing at all on whether it is correct or not. If you want answers, do field work. There is not one iota of truth to be found on the net which did not come from the field first. MIB

No need to get too explicit, but the fact that these critters may be 8' tall doesn't mean there's no way they could breed a 125 pound woman. And no one suggests it's common, just trying to explain the different facial features - some more ape-like and some more human-like. I would expect if it were even possible, of the few to be born, very few of them would survive. For a few thousand years, the narratives have been consistent - the Big'uns take human women. I can't change that - and to ignore it is a personal choice. They've reportedly been taking human women for some purpose. One can only guess why. Then, we hear occasional narratives NOT of the common, primitive ape-like faces, but these occasional narratives describe a more human face - and I'm just trying to suggest a possibility to account for that. I exclude NOTHING. How could most BF have buttugly ape faces, and on occasion, a more human-like face? If the BF can mate and produce - even - sterile offspring - they they're a type of close relative, possibly a hybrid in of itself - hybrid in terms of NOT being an ape, but maybe close enough to man to mate and produce offspring like the donkey and the horse can produce sterile offspring.. This gigantopithicus idea that has been thrown out there by some is just crazy - the gigantopithicus was an ape. BF is not an ape. It's not h.sapiens, but it's not an ape, either. To make it even worse - the experts don't have diddly squat on the gigantopithecus! A few teeth and a partial jaw? They don't know squat about gigantopithecus - except it was big. It wasn't long ago we had the diprotodon, basically a five foot tall wombat, a nine foot tall bird called a moa, a North American wooly rhino, a giant elk some six plus feet tall at the shoulders with over 9 feet width of antlers, the giant sloth about 12 feet tall, sabre tooth tiger, and mastadons - but the only thing some folks than think of that may be a BF is the big ape of the day - although nothing is known about it as no bones exist. BF is one, strange critter. Hopefully, one day in the near future, someone will bring one in - and I'd bet a two-dollar cup of coffee that on that day, what they find will raise more questions than get answered.

Nature finds a way. If Sasquatch can or has mated with Human women or vice versa? Our evidence should be stacking up in maternity wards across the country! I'm a rancher.....i find it rather dubious that a 800 lbs Sasquatch can breed to a 125 lbs woman and..... 1 ) She lives through the encounter. 2 ) She shares enough gene pool with the beast to create a fetus. 3 ) She lives through delivering the baby. This is putting the article aside, in which she will ONLY carry a female hybrid baby to full term. (Neanderthal and Human) And If you get too closely related to us? Then why are they 8 ft tall, eat raw fish, sleep in snow drifts and leave 18 inch foot prints around??? That's not human, thats not half human......and its paternal side logically should be even farther removed. Was the mystery Ape man in question that spawned Sasquatch with human woman.........12 feet tall? Was it some sort of Gigantopethicus? How on earth did it breed to a human female resulting in a pregnacy and birth. Why arent human women who are being raped by Orangs not giving birth? The scenario is unworkable. The beast you saw had to be a species unto its own. Do you honestly think it came from a human mother like your own? And remember we lose men too.....

Oh no! Danny Vendramini is just as crazy as Melba Ketchum!!! We know quite abit about Neandethals, we have sequenced their DNA. I think if they were cat eyed nocturnal super predators we would know about that. Science does not support Vendramini's assumptions, its purely fantasy.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Genetists are looking at human women pregnancy specifically carrying hybrid children. And that the results of that is that no male hybrid fetus survives. Does Ketchum's hypothesis include human women carrying hybrid fetuses? Why yes...yes it does. Humans are one half of the equation in a hybrid scenario. We dont have to study sasquatch DNA To understand ourselves.

Good map

Did you miss the part about only male offspring or Y chromosome being aborted in Homo Sapien mothers?The 1-4% Neanderthal DNA in humans is a result of female viable offspring being produced and absorbed back into humanity Without a male hybrid option that leaves female hybrids to either mate with Neanderthals or Humans. Either way this cross breeding was never going to give rise to a third hybrid species like its been suggested Sasquatch represents. And at 800 lbs and 8 feet tall I would argue that Sasquatch represents something much less related to Humans than Neanderthals are. And if they were a hybrid? The paternal mystery hominid? Would even be further removed from humans..... It didnt happen the way Ketchum says it did, I knew that but now its in black and white because the Neanderthal Y chromosome is extinct. "The researchers say it is possible that Neanderthal Y chromosomes were initially circulating in the modern human gene pool, but were then lost by chance over the millennia." "So far this is just a hypothesis, but the immune system of modern women are known to sometimes react to male offspring when there's genetic incompatibility." That's not exactly death to a hybrid hypothesis. Is it? Thing is, a few hundred years ago per the narratives of North, Central, and South America - there were gobs of giants - possibly giant humans - and we just don't see those any more, either. The Spanish Conquistadors, including their accompanying priests documented these giants in several engagements and meetings. One can find lots of Spanish reports as they were introduced to different portions of the New World running into giants after giants. Not just taller guys - giants. They were describing themselves as only coming up to the waists of some of those they met. Now, these giants are apparently gone. We have the red-headed giants that the Paiute's apparently wiped out the last of only 150 years ago - tracked and burned out in a large cave. "Others" who WERE here, but are apparently gone now. Who or exactly what they were - we'd probably have a lot better idea if the Smithsonian, etc., hadn't disposed of or hidden the multiple skeletons and skulls of large humanoids that were sent to them. And if the Smithsonian went to that extreme, there must have been some really shocking determinations made about some of these giants - human and/or otherwise. The report is a hypothesis, it's based on good data, but it also allows for other reasons to account for the lack of Y chromosomes in the current DNA tested, and they even state that this may occur often, but not always. And since this pertains specifically to Neanderthal and humans, one must assume the BF - or at least some of them - are Neanderthals. I have no problem with that as I have no idea, but it may be that there are other possible candidates - some not yet recognized in the fossil record. I could put every hominid and pithicine fossil in existence in the back seat of my truck. I think these anthropologists extrapolate way too many assumptions on too little physical evidence. And they seem uncommonly in a hurry to report findings that later they can't seem to follow up on, or they slowly back away from their early findings. Too many assumptions. But that's just me. Well its lucky we are dealing with Geneticists then.Homo Neanderthals are our closest extinct or extant cousins in the genus Homo. Pick ANY other species* in the genus or outside of it as a paternal line to a Sasquatch/Human hybrid? And they will be less closely related to humans. So if Neanderthals and Humans were having gene flow issues? That means that the Sasquatch/Human hybrid hypothesis is dead. *= Some Humans have Denisovian DNA. Denisovian and Neanderthals were closely related. Mystery Ape man? x Human female \ / \ / \ / >>>>>>>Sasquatch females only<<<<<<< / \ / \ / \ Absorbed back into either species No third hybrid species because male fetuses rejected by human mother.

Did you miss the part about only male offspring or Y chromosome being aborted in Homo Sapien mothers?The 1-4% Neanderthal DNA in humans is a result of female viable offspring being produced and absorbed back into humanity Without a male hybrid option that leaves female hybrids to either mate with Neanderthals or Humans. Either way this cross breeding was never going to give rise to a third hybrid species like its been suggested Sasquatch represents. And at 800 lbs and 8 feet tall I would argue that Sasquatch represents something much less related to Humans than Neanderthals are. And if they were a hybrid? The paternal mystery hominid? Would even be further removed from humans..... It didnt happen the way Ketchum says it did, I knew that but now its in black and white because the Neanderthal Y chromosome is extinct.

Not reliable evidence. If the creatures are real then they must reside in the dark forests and are very rare. Certainly, not everywhere as the alleged sightings would indicate.

Obviously, I am not a proponent. The maps and reports do indicate that the creatures are everywhere ,but the evidence suggests otherwise.