Leaderboard

No. My results, whatever they may be or not be, have always been kept close to the vest and not shared. My efforts are only to prove to me what's out there. If I'm ever blessed with something remarkable, it would only be seen by a few but never offered for public consumption.

My hat's off to both @BlackRockBigfoot and @NathanFooter. Their thermal equipment left me in the proverbial dust at the starting line. Their Pulsars are the absolute best. Mine is good enough for me. Thermal imaging is a game changer. Maybe, just maybe, a sasquatch has no idea what this small black (maybe unseen) instrument is. In my opinion, it levels the playing field, at least, as much as can be done by us. It allows us to sneak up on the other side of a field, or pond, and record movement. We know from using it what is a fox, coyote, deer, or sasquatch. BRB recorded a deer in very fine detail. Right out of the starting gate, I recorded something I didn't know what it was. A Michelin Man figure with exceptionally wide shoulders. Eyebrow raiser for sure but not enough. In the end, and having said all the above, our equipment can only record what our efforts put us in the position to do. It's always back to basics.

If cattiness were a requisite for being an anthropologist, you'd have exceeded.

Well, seeing as how it is undefinable…that leaves a lot of possibilities as to what it could be. If your 5 year old nephew can figure it out, get him to join up in 13 years. Lots of certainty here about what the indefinable is and isn’t. A prehistoric man/relic hominid is actually one of the prevailing theories out there, so I am not sure why this topic ruffled so many feathers. Not sure what anyone’s post count has to do with anything. But please, post your own theories so that the rest of us can examine them in the same manner. And welcome to the forums.

Lol. Bad theory? I love how everyone has figured out this mystery creature that no one can prove exists. Norse identified some Neanderthal traits that sound very similar to those reported to be found with Sasquatch. How is that a ‘bad theory’? Ok. Y’all lay some more cherry-picked anthro-babble on us. Only peer reviewed information on Sasquatch, please. No assumptions or hypotheses…about this undiscovered creature that the scientific establishment pretty much universally finds foolish.

Some people just cling to bad theories. Sasquatch as a neanderthal would even make the producers of ancient aliens leave it in the cutting room floor. And those guys fish for every scrap of details they can to fill space.

Why not? Well first, that article is behind a paywall and also wants me to take off adblock, do you have anything else? And no, as far as I'm aware Neandertals were not flat footed. They have a longitudinal arch. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.499.2010&rep=rep1&type=pdf Possibly, but there is no real evidence to suggest as much. In fact if we are to assume that it was a less archaic hominin that made it to america and become Sasquatch it was probably Homo erectus or Denisovans. Again, an oversimplification of the point I'm trying to make. Neandertals and densiovans were closer for a longer period of time than Tals were to Humans and just as Humans and Neandertals exchanged culture (an example being the Châtelperronian) despite only overlapping for 30,000 years we can expect that Denisovans and Neandertals did that same. I mean we already know they were interbreeding https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0455-x Sorry, I'm not trying to come across as an a$$hole (is cursing allowed here?) that's just how I talk.

I don't have what science is looking for nor even what I'm looking for. More importantly, I am not interested in there being a discovery and formal recognition of sasquatches by the world at large and would not do anything to contribute to that result.

Interesting but can I ask why keep it private if you are in the right place at the right time? I'm not knocking you for it but I just dont understand it. If you happened to find a skull or a body of one you wouldn't want to finally have the proof science is asking for?

How about an episode covering this....

Please, don't oversimplify it. If we are to suggest that Bigfoot evolved from a extinct hominid then we have to look at the evidence in a relative sense. Moreover, while both of our candidates lack the associated height that is usually reported in sightings my theory doesn't have the burden to explain why it has re-evolved certain basal characteristics like an extremely hairy body or a mid tarsal break and lower intelligence. Furthermore I have suggested that that there is an actual selection history that can explain how an Australopithecus could evolve a larger body size, namely high predation rates. Which I'd imagine a 4ft, 100lb primate living in a sparsely wooded area would succumb to and it is a far more parsimonious explanation than bergman's principle or allen's rule ( which you used incorrectly by the way!).

You could spend weeks on youtube watching people with bigfoot channels trying to tell you this stuff was done by a Sasquatch . I commented on one once because I could see with my eyes it was a squirrel that had moved down a tree and was told I was crazy and didn't know what I was talking about They wanted to see a bigfoot peeking and that's what they saw . I hope one day I do have an encounter with one .

Im going to stop spoon feeding you now like a baby. You can either start researching things on your own or not. Either way I don't care. Good luck.

How often is this reported? Are these reports reliable? Neandertals seemed to do it perfectly fine through multiple ice ages. Moreover, i don't have the morphology of a Nendertal. It's not that the link is broken, I'm just not going to give them my email address or pay for a subscription. Do you have a link to the actual study? Did you read my study? You seem to be confused. I have shown evidence. Just because you want to ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Furthermore, I'm not simply disregarding your hypotheses because we lack evidence, as you should be aware all hypotheses on this subject in particular engage in some level of speculation. Again, I just believe that if we narrow it down, Sasquatch is probably a descendant from more archaic Hominids like Paranthropus or Australopithecus. It is entirely possible that the morphology we associate with Sasquatch evolved within the old world before it migrated to america, just as it's possible Neandertals made it to america, lost all of it's technology and re-evolved many basal traits, but none of these claims have direct evidence. There is no need to be so combative.

Yep. Put it on youtube for now. We are as well connected as any other organization.

I haven't seen many finding bigfoot episodes and have never heard matt Moneymaker speak openly about his objections to paranormal subjects. He just rejects it out of hand.