Leaderboard

Bigfoot doesn't have a monopoly on hoaxing. There's been plenty of UFO hoaxers and ghost/spirit hoaxers. I think what drives Bigfoot to such a low percentage of belief is the lack of a type specimen, or a piece thereof, despite the general perception that it's a terrestrial, physical being. It's easy to understand why there's no tangible proof of ghosts, whether they exist or not. The same goes for aliens. But it's hard to wrap one's head around the proposition that flesh and blood, giant apes have lived alongside man for eons, yet we don't have a single piece of one. That same conundrum is somewhat responsible for the more fanciful theories among those who do believe. Why's there no Bigfoot body? Because Bigfoot's an interdimensional being traveling through portals. Or, Bigfoot's an alien. Or, Bigfoot can transform into a tree. I have to admit that I'm at a loss for why there's no specimen, so I latch on to the most "rational" explanation: conspiracy. (You're not paranoid, as long as people actually are conspiring against you, right?) Everyone may not agree that evidence is being suppressed. But, it is at least a plausible explanation.

The local media was just discussing a new study released that showed a direct correlation between primate brain size and muscle mass. The larger the brain the less muscle mass. Humans have little muscle mass compared with gorillas but have far larger and more capable brains. If that applies to BF, and we have no reason not to think it does, BF in spite of its huge muscle mass, must have a small brain. Perhaps that explains lack of tool use, no evidence of food storage, and apparent lack of creative skills?

What is the expression Norseman? 'When a man holds a hammer, everything he sees looks like a nail"? You might be holding the "existence" hammer. Look, I realize your sine qua non, plus ultra is to get a body to confirm existence. It is not mine (not that I would treat that as bad news, on the contrary) and it is not necessarily the motivation of all who post and read here. There are ways out of that, if you want it. My post above was just an explanation of how some might move to looking at it through a different lens, and allow us to write a different menu for predicted outcomes. It is neither an outcome that confirms existence, or disproves it. It is a useful approach, a third way. It takes us above and beyond the zero-sum debate that seems to eat up most of the discussion around here. The reason I know it is useful is because neither the hard-core proponents or the dyed-in-the-wool opponents find it an entirely satisfying outcome. That tells me something. So this: The state of California declares there is insufficient evidence to declare if BF does, or does not, exist with any degree of reasonable certainty, BUT, given the compelling evidence for existence, the possibility cannot be entirely dismissed when matters of its citizens' safety and welfare are concerned. While this court is not able to grant all the relief requested by the Petitioner, it is ORDERED...

I like his channel too, Pdub. He has posted some very interesting structures and stills, and I think his assessments of what is or isn't Sasquatch-friendly terrain and forest are pretty sharp. He's also described some encounters w/Sasquatch that are remarkable if true. That said, I have a few gripes about his video editing and the way he documents interactions - the dude never met a video transition he didn't like, and the still images to which he resolves (after one of these transitions) are only onscreen for an instant before he moves on to the next one, so a bit more time and analysis would be welcome. Also, every time he uses the word "timestamp" I cringe - that word does not mean what he thinks it means. That said, I still think his channel is head-and-shoulders above almost all every other channel I've watched. he seems to have his head screwed on pretty straight, too, which is also not always the case, IMHO.

I don’t believe it.....