Leaderboard

Right? I want nothing - zip, zero, zilch - to do with UFO's or aliens. Nor shapeshifters, MIB's, invisibility cloaks or any other cryptids etc. I'm just interested in this relic hominid! I DO, very much, find it fascinating that we may live on a dual-sentient species (or more, if you count ocean dwellers) planet. If aliens do exist, I wonder if that's why they are interested in us? Ok, that's enough woo for the day 😀

Pics for comparison.

I will give you an A for persistence . I admire it. You are a nice person. I will stay out of this mistaken identity thread. Never going to convince me that any of these pictures depict anything other than a bear. Not chimp, not Sasquatch nothing but a bear. Notice I dropped the mangy part. 😆 Still a bear 🐻

Would it be reasonable to think that, just as not all humans are physically built or adept to sprint at near record speeds,...or leap over a high bar above their height, etc., etc. ; that it is probable that not all wild, hairy men - sasquatch, bigfoot, skunk ape, yeti, etc. - are equally adept to perform certain physical actions attributed to any one of them? I say this because I am convinced that there are different "types" of wild, hairy men/women. I would venture to say that this may well be the reason that some can & do move on all fours....as many accounts have reported. The smaller versions may be able to go "on all fours" easily...the largest sasquatch-bigfoot may not. Just thinkin' out loud......sorta

Looks like you're doing it right! Carry on 😀

Cool article!

Nah, I only had a buck twenty five after the loch Ness monster hit me up.....but yeah I gave him the $1.25 Dig that crazy doubleneck Danelectro guitar! And the pink Rickenbacher bass!

I'm inclined to agree with you. Irrelevant. It is not clear what it is. The picture is simply not good enough. Not being a bear does not mean that it is a bigfoot. Bottom line .. the Jacobs photo is a curiosity, one of many, but it does not stand as evidence of **anything**. Not this, not that, not anything. Relentless discussion of ambiguous photos is a waste of time. It won't sway anyone. MIB

Maybe some sasquatch buried it last fall to throw some researcher off the path. I hear they can be quite the tricksters! Either that or they're trying to get a Canada based tv series of their own... "Oh sure, all the american tribes are getting fearured! Even those dorks in Kansas who can't even teleport! But do the dwarves even think to come to canada, where there are way more of us than down south? Nooooooooo! We got to do something to draw their attention up north here! We can give em just as good a show! All the bluff charges they want and with the exchange rate, well, how can they resist?"

Part of me expects a crazy story about how ‘the government just came and took everything’

He looks like he's not sure if he wants to be Indiana Jones or The Man With No Name, but if that's a gorilla skull, his name will be S**t. We might end up with a drama that lasts a couple of months before the skull is confiscated by "Top Men".

It’s called Foramen. I don’t think it’s a great mystery. 350 bucks plus shipping and handling from bone clones. Burying it in some mud for a couple of weeks….

I don't recall many (if any) eyewitness reports of Bigfoot having such a big and prominent snout, it's always been described more like ours really. It's a gorilla skull, how it got out there is a great mystery.

Yep....laaaaazy with a capital 'L'! It's 2011 all over again, stacking up consecutive 100+ days, no rain, make Bigtex a dull boy, lol. I've hiked a few times, but hard to find anything meaningful with this drought, everything is so dry, I'm scared to pass gas out there for fear of starting a fire:). Back to this cloaking question, here's an article I read today....very similar description to what I saw, however I wasn't lost, dizzy, or weirded out. A group of hikers in San Bernardino National Forest went off trail during a hike when the leader of their group thought she heard a woman calling out in distress (though none of the other hikers did). They quickly became disoriented, losing track of where they were, as well as experiencing dizziness and other strange sensations. Hopelessly lost as night set in, one hiker was shocked to discover something climbing in the tree above her head. It was human-shaped, but oddly transparent, like “heat waves on a pavement” and they watched it for several minutes before noticing that all other sounds in the forest had stopped. When it began climbing again, they decided to get out of there, and were shocked to discover they were right back on the trail within minutes! You can read all the gory details below. Was it aliens? Bigfoot? Some kind of weird forest spirit? Or is it possible that what we think of as these disparate sorts of experiences are, in fact, the same thing after all? Maybe UFOs aren’t from outer space, but are from some sort advanced or supernatural terrestrial group. Perhaps the reason that both UFOs and Bigfoot-like creatures are so difficult to both spot and photograph is because they, too, have these invisibility or cloaking capabilities. And maybe these strange things that folks find in the woods, the creatures no one has seen and the voices that no one should respond to, are all part of this same, massive unknown.

There are some off road recovery guys in Moab. And I pack a Garmin Inreach now.

Made it home! More Moab!

It was either go forward or back track 40 miles back out!😳

Greetings, everyone! First-time poster here, but somewhat long-time lurker. I live in the Washington, DC area but recently had some personal business take me to NW Ohio. I chose a stopover point near Salt Fork State Park, both because it made sense travel-wise and because it gave the opportunity to do some hiking in an area where there'd been Bigfoot activity both in the past and present. I of course hiked around the "Bigfoot Ridge" area. Actually, a really nice park employee pointed me to an unmarked trail (meaning, not on the official trail map) that was nonetheless blazed with red markings and which paralleled below the Bigfoot Ridge area. It's located right behind the picnic area of the Stone House that's one of the sights to see within the park. The same employee also showed me a pic of a tree structure she'd seen herself, and recounted how she sometimes heard whoops and whatnot in the evenings. Anyway, it was a pretty cool trail that was somewhat overgrown and had some deadfall on it, but nothing too bad (it's no longer maintained, apparenty). I can neither confirm nor deny whether I went off-trail to investigate some squatchy-looking hollers. While I didn't observe anything on that trail, earlier I had hiked the Morgan's Knob trail, where I saw an interesting track in the mud (first pic below). A few things to note: 1) there was a squall that had some through in the morning the day before, so it was quite muddy, and I wonder if it could've affected the shape of an otherwise innocuous print or have been an artifact of the water flow itself; 2) the print was on the actual trail, on an incline; and 3) for size reference, the water bottle is 8", sorry it's at a slight angle, as I said, it was on an incline and was kinda hard to place something that'd stay still. I think you can see some good detail of what looks like the heel area and some toe impressions as well. This was from the first of my two trips to the park, in mid-May. I'm interested in others' thoughts on it. I didn't see an discernible prints near it...some indentations, sure, but nothing with detail. To me, while it looked like a pretty good track, I did find it odd that it was basically in the trail itself, where a rivulet had probably flowed the say prior during the torrential rain. The following four pics are from my second trip in mid-June. For this trip, I drove on some of the gravel park roads, and there were pull-offs on these that led to "unmarked" trails. On one of these, after hiking through the woods for a bit, I came to a large meadow with tall grass. I hiked across it to the next wooded area, and shortly after entering, noticed a curious looking tree structure. I took two pics, one close-up, and one further back to give a better sense of the surroundings (pics two and three, respectively). Interestingly, near the possible tree structure (was it perhaps a marker?), I noticed what I thought was really a good, natural "hunting blind" that looked out over the meadow (pic four). Right behind the "blind," there was also a well-flattened area where it looked like something had lain, but perhaps not very recently, as there was a small fallen branch in the middle of the "bedding" area (pic five). I called it a "hunting blind," but it really could be used by prey too, I guess. Anyway, I'm curious to know everyone's thoughts on these too. Look forward to the feedback!

Makes ZERO Sense. ok so this guy tries to take some serious attempted study of a bigfoot. Great. Then, he injects what for me is a wild idea and applies it to Bigfoot. Not great. This to me is like the guys who think they know Bigfoot’s favorite color or what Bigfoot’s favorite baseball team is. That is bad enough and it’s done in this bigfoot world far two often where every snap of a twig is “a Squatch”. Then on top of this the man has to pull religion into this thing. Other than studying religion, what other format would the study of something else even need religion to be part of the conversation? Take the Stanford walking study: Can a man replicate the walk of the PGF? Study away. But at no time does any religious belief matter to that discussion. It shouldn’t. In the concepts of Bigfoot too often we see these type of straining to make things fit. In this case, it’s religion. Let’s discuss his concept let’s take a quick minute and just accept the idea offered by this guy as a purely historical reference and see if it makes sense. (Again, religion has no place in this as far as I am concerned) the source of the Bible where he gets this does mention these giants ( or various other translations which don’t even mean giants). They are thought to be the result of some offspring of fallen angles having relations with earth women. But the reference used makes no sense. Why? Because in that actual book as a point of the book’s chronology it is clear right after this nephilim reference is….a flood deluge. This deluge was said in the story to wipe out all the living things Noah did not bring on the ark. The goal of this divine flood was to wipe out the earth’s wickedness which included these very nephilim! Sorry. Even IF the religion factor was appropriate to the discussion of Bigfoot, his own idea falls flat from the same source he claims to get the idea from.

I don’t need to invoke the two reasons Carpenter gives to not trust Sasquatches. I don’t trust grizzly bears, cougars or black bears either. The two reasons Carpenter states for not trusting Sasquatches are: 1) He believes that they are a hybrid between the Nephilim (fallen angels) and humans and thus that they don't have the same morality and conscience as humans. 2) They don’t talk or communicate with us. He assumes that they have the ability to communicate (mind-speak or other) but that they don’t want to share any truthful information about themselves. His first reason is just a belief and is not based on science. His second reason only makes sense if they are cognitively able to communicate, which we do not know. His second reason is the main reason I don’t trust anything that supposedly “ETs” or beings associated with UFOs say. Messages from ET’s are all inconsistent, contradictory, not informative and useless. Very trickster like. However, since I consider Sasquatch to be a different entity than beings associated with UFOs, I can’t really use that reason to not trust sasquatch. I don’t know what they are. Thus, when I visit areas with their presence, I proceed with caution knowing full well that they are a potential threat and are not my buddies or forest friends. I think that some folks who pursue interactions with sasquatches and treat them as teachers, elders, forest keepers or brothers are delusional. I agree with Carpenter in that those people who claim interactions with them and claim to communicate with them, have obtained conflicting and useless information. One possible hypothesis is self-delusion, whereas everybody hears their own internal voice when they go out into the forest to communicate with seen or unseen entities. They hear what they want to hear or what they want to believe. An alternative hypothesis is that the entities are trickers and are indeed deceiving and telling lies to every one of those experiencers, but that hypothesis is more complex and requires more assumptions than the simpler self-deception. And, we don’t have any scientific data to support either hypothesis (just anecdotal evidence which is very weak, dispersed, and not fully vetted).