Leaderboard

Inferior in the fact the Indians could not manufacture a Winchester 73 or a steam locomotive......absolutely. But other than liver eating Johnson and a few others? Most whites were not on par with Indian bushcraft, tracking skills, ambushes, etc. Being a more inferior human civilization gave Indians the leg up in low intensity conflicts especially on their own turf. But on an open battlefield with modern rapid fire weapons? It became a charge of the light brigade real fast. Western Indians did not stand a chance in open conflict. Chief Joseph tried it, and almost succeeded in escaping, but was defeated and never allowed to enter the Wallowa ever again. What does this have to do with Bigfoot? I think Bigfoot is not smart enough to invent the longer lasting light bulb. I often think about the California miner story, in which something kept disturbing his camp and campfire each time he left camp to prospect. He finally doubled back on camp and observed a Bigfoot who was playing as if child like in the fire. Lighting twigs on fire, twirling them like sparklers, burning fingers, dropping butts and doing it all over again. Curiosity is an ape like trait which includes humans. With that said Bigfoot is not on par with the Stone Age Indians 200 years ago even technology wise. Where are they on the Ape scale? They are bipedal so they must range somewhere between a Chimp, Gorilla, Orangutan and a Human. They don't seem to have mastered fire, stone tools, or Mayan pyramids. What they are or how smart they are I think is Something that we will never really know unless one is found or brought in. Anything is possible, I suppose.

The Europeans largely considered NA's as an "uncivilized" primitive people and did so up until just a few years before the date of the PG film when they were sent off to boarding schools and coerced into urban settings in an attempt to further assimilate them into the white man's world. What you personally know about cougars is probably a mountain of knowledge over what most know about BF and IMO, it's more to do with underestimating them than using knowledge of the fact they own the woods and especially the night. In history, how many British army units have been annihilated simply because of the arrogance of the officers in charge and their woeful underestimation of a "primitive" (i.e., Zulu's) adversary. IMO, same is applicable in Sasquatchery when the "researchers" go in with a mindset they are after something that cannot outthink them, in the woods.

Assuming they find DNA .. and they should .. the impact of contamination exists on a sliding scale. If bigfoot is markedly different than human it should not be difficult to tell what is bigfoot and what is contamination. The closer they are to us, the more similar "contamination" and sample are, the more difficult it gets to separate the two. If bigfoot truly is substantially different than us, this will be no big deal. If they are much like us, it leaves the door open to assumption whatever is found is contamination leading to summary dismissal of the O.P.'s efforts regardless of their validity, yet another body blow for those desiring proof of existence. MIB

I understand what they're trying to do there, but I hate to say I don't understand logistically how they could prevent contamination. Getting the nest(s) from the field to what appears to be someone's garage, then that many people with potential stray hairs on their clothing and person doesn't seem to be unquestionable evidence gathering. At the same time, I'll be the first to say that if you don't look you won't find anything. Thanks for sharing BobbyO!