Leaderboard

That "perennial lack of proof" is in itself a perennial distortion of fact, and always used by those who have never seen one. (If anyone has clearly seen one or more BF and can't consider the sighting as personal proof of their existence, that would be very odd an unusual.) Would you consider it proof of their existence if you were fortunate enough to see one at close enough range and lighting conditions that would discount it being any other animal, including a human in a costume? Would that be using logic? Could you give some examples of "conspiracy panders" who derive income from such activities?

That's STILL not the point. The question is whether or not they can understand how to do it. Not whether or not they use it to cook their possum.

Nobody said they definitely use fire. The debate started because Norseman said "creature that doesn't understand how to create fire or stone tools" & I said "How do you know that they can't/don't make fire?..... Bonobno...... etc." There is no debate about whether or not they actually USE fire.

If for some reason I have given you the erroneous impression that your opinions about what I "have" or what I have learned about BF is of some concern or interest to me, I certainly must apologize; nothing could be further from the truth. Please don't waste your valuable time.

You could always start a thread giving your OPINION of these things. We really shouldn't call something a hoax without facts to back up that claim. I mean, that's what we expect skeptics to do when they call "Hoax!", so we need to be sure to adhere to that same standard as proponents calling something a hoax in my opinion. Right. Regardless of whether you are a skeptic or proponent, arguing for or against the evidence, I think when we make definitive statements about anything related to this subject, we should have facts to back up our claims. IMO

The government can neither contain, dominate, regulate, restrict, oversee, "educate", or tax them, among several other things that they can't do to them. They can't even get a look at most of them. And they won't pay for government healthcare, accept welfare, or vote. Having a whole race of people running around that they are powerless over is not something that makes them appear to be the capable over-lords that they want us to see. So it's better to just pretend that they don't exist.

Wag, Fella, don't get funny with me and tell me to use my brain, I don't take kindly to that at all and all it shows is that you have little to no idea of how to interact with people that question you 3 out of 13 of the cases mentioned are accounted for, the other was highly likely the mum of one of the victims killed, for the second time. 3 missing people in a place notorious for serial killers and bad people. There's my brain for you, only god knows where yours was when you thought it was a good idea to post about this on a Sasquatch forum. So does this cross over into the 911 stuff ? No, those books are about strange, unexplained, un solved crimes. Is this area mentioned in the book ? Don't know Has Yosemite got meth labs ? That hasn't got anything whatsoever to do with what we are talking about. Your dreaming something up that isn't there and clearly has a different answer to what you're suggesting. Pareidolia in all it's glory right there.

Forty years is a long time. Not sure of Branco but many anti kill types hate science and have no desire to prove nothing to no one. Thats their choice of course but in the big picture they are of null value. If you dont want me shooting at one? Provide proof, I will gladly shake your hand and sign a petition and donate to your Sasquatch conservancy fund. Absolutely. Call me stupid and walk away? I'll keep walking the path I'm on.

It could take days for you to settle down your emotions and start objectively looking back at what happened... Don't be too gung-ho to try to explain everything right now. Take a break. Just my 2 cents.

Kitkaze, I applaud your interest in our wilderness heritage. It's awesome. Stay beautiful. I have seen two Sasquatch up close. They are people. I have never seen a Swamp ape, Bigfoot , Yeti or Yowie. The reason Sasquatches are not often caught on camera is that they do not need to do risk behaviour at this time. A Sasquatch crew may, in this day and age, never visit a human owned area. Animal numbers are up in Canada. There is more than one wolverine hare. In fact, we could have herds of wolverines roaming around doing they wolverine shyte and no one would ever know. There are certainly enough quadruped protien packs walking around to satisfy needs. I don't know about bigfoot, or any other variants, but how many transient humans have been attracted by the bait at these cams? I suggest to you, that an extremely (to the point of psychosis) wary human, with excellent eyesight, could detect the bait wrap, or recognize the unlikley situation. A rascal in Canada, lived in the woods for two years, raiding cabins and camping out. He was avidly sought by police (with trackers, dogs, helicopters)because he did property damage and embarrassed them in the press. They found his camps. They found his gear. They never found him. He turned himself in to police in a different area. I urge you to consider a paradigm shift. Does it make sense to you that a sort of upright chimp could evade human contact? No, I am sure you would answer. It does not make sense, at all. If you cease to project expectations onto evidence, you will soon realize that the existing evidence is of a thinking, communicating species. Not like man. Actually man! A tremendous man, that doesn't drink or smoke and has never tasted a food additive! Could this man avoid civilization if he chose to? Also, I would point out the tremendous cultural bias we humans have against ackowleging stuff that might be unpleasant. Do you suppose, a bakery owner, faced with clear images on his back door cam, would report it to CNN? I think most people would leave out pies, instead of becoming whistle blowers, knowing they'd be put in the position of defending themselves in the media. I talked myself out of a good job just by admitting I'd seen Sasquatches. Guess what happened to my credit score. I think the Bigfoot population is becoming bolder, though. I cite problem bears as evidence. Why are healthy bears rummaging in garbage so much lately? There is ample food in the woods. Unless the woods aren't safe for bears any more. If bear eating predators move in to my nieghbourhood and I'm a bear, I might go elsewhere. I might go someplace the predators avoid. I don't think we have long to wait. I think the truth is known and is waiting for government strategies to be in place. Once legal defintion can be established, governance can be enacted. As it stands now, arguements could be made for ownership of the uncatalogued DNA. Someone might actually be able to copyright. This is a significant value. What would businesses pay for unfettered research platforms? Got a drug you want to test? A vaccine? A virus? Test here! That's assuming there can be some difference demonstrated, seperating them from us. I doubt any distinction exists, personally. Bigfoot isn't an unknown. That assumption can be thrown out, I am sure. Bigfoot is a known and understood phenomena by someone. This agency might be benevolantly sheltering them, or us. I feel certain the Sasquatch have human friends. Not just habituates, either. The Sasquatch may well be a footnote in the business of running the world, but I am sure they have been examined. Again, because it doesn't make sense to consider otherwise.