Leaderboard

Leaving the rest of your post for later, I'd like to address this, because it's the most significant part of your response. First, it's almost certain to be a hominin. The foot structure, bipedal posture, chattering language, and (most importantly) its ability to mate with us (Zana) makes it a done deal. However, if there is a mid-tarsal joint and sagital crest of any size, we're talking about enough structural variance to assign a different species within the Homo genus. But even if it is a novel North American ape, you are still talking about an endangered species designation and rewrite of the natural history record that is no small potatoes. African apes are big politics, there and internationally. A North American bipedal ape would be bigger than that. Much bigger.

Okay, I'll start this off by stating something that a lot of members have chimed in on. And that is does the government know about this creature. Some of you are of the opinion that government doesn't care one way or the other whether or not Bigfoot exists. Some, including me, have said it doesn't seem possible that government wouldn't know about the existence of the creature. Considering the surveillance level of outfits like the Border Patrol and even more mundane groups like the ones that monitor migration patterns of things like ungulates, along with tagging bears and other animals like mountain lions and even wolves, it would seem difficult to think that Sasquatch is an unknown. Agencies like USF&W, with their forensics lab in Ashland, Oregon (of all places!), and the Forestry Service, both state and federal, plus the BLM and the logging industry, coupled with various state and local agencies with their respective departments of natural resources, one could hardly hold onto the opinion that Sasquatch is an unknown quantity. And that all plays into "government" knowing but not caring? I think the government actually cares very much, but then, that leads right into why Bigfoot existence hasn't been made public. Does it exist, or does it not? Well, there are knowers here that claim that the creature is VERY real. Thousands of reports also suggest that the creature is real. Then what gives? And that returns the subject to what the ramifications would be should the public become aware that the Bigfoot is real.

Actually, before I asked I ran a search of the forum using the word "discovery" within thread titles only. There weren't many appropriate threads, and only a couple of short ones even addressed my questions. I don't want to derail this thread with further advances into this subject, but my mind is turning towards either resurrecting one of those earlier threads or starting a new one. Your answers deserve wide, regular, and recurring thought and discussion. However, in short, the preservation of large parcels of public lands for a non-political hominin by a government made up of homo sapiens in the current political environment brings up so many potential political problems that the understanding of why government wants these creatures to remain undiscovered becomes more than obvious.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Even 6 months ago I was in the, we need to prove it camp. Now...I don't know what that does for anyone...the elusive Sasquatch or Humanity. I just want to be a knower because I saw one and it was clear enough for me not to second guess myself....obviously from a safe position. Once/if that ever happens...doubt you guys will see much more of me around here.

Please think hard about this question before answering. Take your time: What do you think "discovery" will achieve for both sasquatches and humanity, and will any good outweigh any bad?

The potential of an unknown line of sub-Saharan Africans migrating into Asia over 100,000 years ago, as suggested by Sykes after his DNA work on Zana's progeny, is particularly interesting. Her physical description matches Patty from the PG film quite well.

Natfoot I would not say all. Since I have said that star wars fellow that is hairy and this to me would be the best match to what I saw. Beside I did see this little fellow who was about 5' tall and pretty heavy set for being so small. Which to me look like it could lift a nice size heavy 12" to 16" dia log that I would say be 10 ' feet long well over it's head and toss it. Sure do spend time a lot of your time on me. I really do not mind . Why would I be better suited looking for answers elsewhere when I can find answer here. I have just as much right to be here as you do . Why would you suggest that I did not see a Bigfoot? How would you know and how could you prove it? I have shown proof of the things that I have found that suggest that I have encountered a Bigfoot. So of those things have been lost on this very Forum since it was BF 1.0. How many times has this forum been moved from server to server. Since 2000 I have encountered the ridicule by some of or most of the members here on this very forum. But I have stuck around and have waivered. If you want to call me out then go ahead and do it on the forum. I do not have a problem with it. I know the truth and the truth is with me. Like I said I still have not found what I saw on the internet and the closes that I can think of is the book cover to the face of Enoch. A lot good people have left this forum and to me I have always wondered why. Why is there not a creature on a slab. It is not like they have not hunted for one. Yet, where is that body. Here we have a poll with suggestions of what we think it might be . But all that people can do is maybe guess. And come up with ideas of our past. All I said that on this poll there is nothing that matches so I suggested maybe one answer. Fine no one liked that answer and one suggested I take it to the paranormal so I did. Again I have not waivered from what I have encountered. Again I am talking about this on an open forum. When I came out with my encounter for the first time in public it was in a church. To that means a lot about what I am saying. I am not sure about your beliefs but for me it meant a lot. As you can see I am not coming out and attacking you. But you are very watch full at what I am saying . Now I see you as one wanting to kick me off this forum. Did I wrong you in some way?

Interesting to see 'hominid' leading the pack. That's the way that I have been leaning over the past few years. The fossil record is a finicky sort of thing. My gut tells me that, if and when found, it will be something that currently does not appear in the record as opposed to a variation of an already discovered hominid. Again, that's just my intuition speaking...if I was called upon to defend that opinion I couldn't tell you why other than none of the currently known hominids seem to possess the right blend of intelligence. Clever enough to systematically avoid detection but not a handy tool user. The one thing that always bothers me is the vastly different accounts that appear. This one looks like an ape, this one looks like a human with more hair and this one looks like an extra from Quest For Fire. I know that some think that there are regional variations, but some of the descriptions seem to paint a picture of completely different species of creatures. I know that is completely improbable, but it would be something if there were not one but a couple of relic hominid population scattered across the land that explained the differing descriptions...

I know I keep bringing this up but e-DNA testing of streams and brooks that flow out of these remote areas could be one solution for BF discovery in such inaccessible terrain. Those flowing water accesses would be much easier to approach than dense, rocky mountainous locations. Less time to get to, and daytime sampling would be a given. People have been dancing around this concept for the last eight months or so which only leaves the difficult tasks of chasing these creatures down in some of the toughest environments they have moved into supposedly due to our past efforts over the years of finding them. Personally, I think it's time to step into this new technology (like Meldrum, Disotell, Mayor and others have shown) and start getting ourselves scientifically tuned to the issue. I found his article which I found interesting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/, especially in light of its source: US National Library of Medicine , National Institutes of Health It tells me government science has looked at the subject of Sasquatch and DNA, or at least found it interesting enough to allow the paper to be published through them.