Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/27/2026 in all areas

  1. One of our own forum members!👏🏻
    2 points
  2. I don't think that's automatically a strange question. It is something we should be thinking about .. society-wise, not just bigfooters. I think the best answer is "it depends." There are some really bad assumptions built into the question, assumptions that should be examined. First thing .. what we consider "normal" is not historical normal. (1) Transpiration creates a downwind moisture plume which allows forest to grow in places it naturally could not. Fire destroys not just what it burns, but the downwind moisture plume which "artificially" supports forest in places that would naturally be desert if there were no forest upwind to provide the atmospheric moisture. (2) We have 100 years and more of fire fighting / fire prevention which has altered the natural landscape. Though it is familiar to us, it is not the long term norm and it is not "natural." Complicating things further, the Native Americans / First Nations people deliberately altered the environment / landscape with large scale fire. Because they seem to have arrived before deglaciation, there probably has not been a "natural" environment, one not altered by human activity, since before the last glacial maximum. Data suggest we are in a period of rapid climate change. Second thing .. forest regrowth is though a progression of stages. Once forest is lost, we get grasslands / brush, smaller trees, etc before big trees return. This can take centuries, not decades, not years, and given changing climate conditions, I'm not sure we will have periods between fires long enough for the cycle to complete, we seem to be looking at forest -> burn -> brush -> burn -> brush -> burn -> brush .. etc. We .. in my area .. are getting much more frequent dry lighting and large fires than we have ever had in recorded history. The opportunities for mature forest to re-form under these conditions seem nil. In fact it seems the only chance of restoration is via human intervention, not via natural processes. This situation seems likely to last for centuries, maybe tens of centuries, and the new equilibrium, if there is one, won't be the one we're used to. I suspect much of North America, if humans just vanished, would turn into a land of brush and grasses with very little "reclamation" by forest as we know it because of the increased rate of lightning fires driven by global warming. Once turned to brush and grasses, it is very difficult to return to forest because conditions don't last enough years in a row for that to happen. IMHO of course! MIB
    2 points
  3. Thanks for the info about the eclipse tonight!
    1 point
  4. Hi everyone. I reside in Ontario, Canada. Been interested in Bigfoot and cryptozoology and have been reading up on them on and off for over 20 years.
    1 point
  5. Hello! I'm a new person. I'm an avid lover and a believer in Bigfoot.
    1 point
  6. Hey how are yall from Louisiana
    1 point
  7. Agreed this is a great interview. Very timely considering the upcoming supposed release of the Capturing Bigfoot piece. Mr Perez’ book, Bigfoot at Bluff Creek, is excellent. I consider it a must read for those of us who want a complete breakdown of the Patterson Gimlin Film and all its history. Mr Perez was able to tie all the loosely connected dangling threads (people, places, things) into a cohesive explanation of the timeline of events and evidence surrounding the film.
    1 point
  8. Excellent interview with Daniel. I'll be sending off payment for his newsletter forthwith. The comments are gold, the folks buying the caca that the PGF has been "debunked," and disproven are (to me) hilarious.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...