Leaderboard

Hello All, Let's take this to a "real-world" example. In 1878 two astronomers in New South Wales, Australia reported a large dark area on a daytime Moon that was a couple of days past it's three-quarter phase. They observed the "shadow" which didn't move for three hours. There's a lot more to the story but fr this thread I only want to mention my experiences in contacting astronomers. From a top guy in Australia: Probably a smudge on the lens, I wouldn't take the report seriously". From the department that studies lunar impacts at the University of Arizona: "I am not aware of that report, good luck in your investigations". From NASA- a boilerplate response: "Thank you for your interest in NASA. To learn more about NASA just click on the links provided". Now tell me how a private citizen gets answers to things when one gets summarily dismissed at every turn. Needless to say I still sit here with questions regarding that report. Substitute Sasquatch and the problem is much, much worse. The only answer is to get out into the field and find the bones. Chasing this enigma around the forests as a live creature is a useless exercise in futility. Find the bones.

You guys understand that you're discussing the Ketchum DNA study, right?

IIRC, there were ~15 individual samples analyzed with a common result surfacing, the mitochondrial DNA was homo sapien female and the nuclear was unknown, as in not of any that had been previously identified. Supposedly, a major publication reviewed the findings but declined to publish saying basically the world would not be able to handle the information w/o having to make a major paradigm shift.

Hello SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT, First of all I appreciate your and everyone else's input on this topic If Sasquatch does use a cave for at least some of the worst winter conditions or to seek out a bat population then I think there's a criteria to bring up. Even without bats in the equation then the principle of igloo construction might come into play. Not the construction itself but the principle in the construction where the entrance is lower than the floor inside. It helps keep the heat from escaping and gives a place for cold air to collect- namely in the lower entrance level. This would also allow cold air from the cave to leave along the floor as a small vault is warmed. Snow caves in emergency situations should be constructed in this manner and the lee of a small hill is the best place to choose for it. Snow caves however can be dangerous for several important reasons but even at 32 degrees and out of the wind an individual or small group will have a better chance at surviving night time temperatures which are much lower along with deadly windchills. Be that as it mat animals are very sensitive to temperature and so experience will tell an animal which cave structure will be best suited to ride out a deep freeze or a blizzard. Bats seeking a consistent temperature situation will naturally utilize such structuring along with whatever heat they generate which will stay at the ceiling level. I can see where low entrances will have the advantage and might even provide better clues than the straight in entrances most imagine. BTW your account above was most interesting. Thank you.

Plus 1 on this,yeah thats what I fear, the stump not being there!. I drive a lot for my job and always watch the road sides, I'm more afraid of missing an opportunity regarding bF than I am of the BF itself, that is to say, a stump one day that is not there the next is a missed opportunity to investigate a BF sighting as its happening.

There's two kinds of caves. Easy access to humans, and those with no easy access to humans. They're not dumb - they'd avoid caves that have reasonably easy access to humans. Even in the South, on occasion, one will find an undercut in a stream bank - almost like someone dug the dirt out by hand. And a cave is much cooler in summer and fall, enabling one to start stockpiling meat, fruits, grain, and things like corn.

They can move with the help of the canine kind, lol. Though in truth you make a fair point. Find the bones and some might believe. Though bones have been found in the past and mismatched, improperly put together and even lumped in with other animals all together (not talking Sasquatch here just to be clear). It has resulted in for years people believing X animal existed when later it was proven to be a mix of bones. One example that comes to mind is the Brontosaurus. It was thought to be a need dinosaur and marketed that way (for lack of a better term). Later it was discovered to be an Apatosaurus. I don't think this would be a major problem now as we're much more astute with regard to fossil and bone finds. There has also recently been a lot of press and emphasis on our own evolutionary history with numerous finds across Africa and Asia which have made their way into the right hands relatively easily. While this 'mislaying' may have happened frequently in the 19th and early 20th centuries we seem altogether much more switched on and proactive today. If huge, apelike bones were discovered in a developed country such as the US or Canada I would have confidence they would find their way to the right people.

Bigfoot appears to be homo. ... Homo unclassificado? Homo elusory?

Don't make wild claims like that unless you want them challenged. There is NO chance the Patterson "creature" was a hoax. If it was, by now someone would have shown how it was done in a believable way rather than resorting to feeble excuses why they didn't match it exactly. Instead, every attempt to debunk it fails so horribly that it adds credibility rather than taking it away. MIB