Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/20/2026 in all areas

  1. One of our own forum members!👏🏻
    3 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
    3 points
  3. Yep. I would probably eat it if I had to. It's legal to eat road-kill here although, I usually just go to the store. Although, with the cuts in food-safety (including a 19% reduction to the FDA work-force) a squished squirrel or, a drowned rat doesn't sound too bad right now.. "No doubt, but Norse is correct that Science as an industry will simply not play ball until somebody delivers a carcass and essentially rubs their noses in it." I agree that Universities, most private companies, governments, etc. are not going to really get involved until Joe six-pack, wife and kids are convinced that they exist. 'Science' is often done by people who are unencumbered by those institutions. I don't know the best way to prove Bigfoot. I think one (or two, if Norse insists ) could be captured alive. I mean if we can capture elephants and whale sharks?? 🤷🏻‍♂️
    2 points
  4. Regarding the Cerruti site mastadon bones purportedly dated to 130,000 years ago .. mainstream science has the ability to determine whether the scratches / notches in the bone were made 130K years ago when the bone was fresh vs recently when they were being dug up. This is the study of taphonomy. Those markings / scraping / etc are NOT recent effects of the earth moving machinery, those markings were made while the bones were still fresh. That does not settle the question of who / what did them but it does settle the question of when the markings were made. Maybe, or maybe lacking technology, they saw solutions that our reliance on technology trips over?
    2 points
  5. Wow, xspider1 and Norseman. What a debate that has been civil and neither party has backed down even during the most intense language at proving bigfoot is a real monster. It seems both of you have proved bigfoot is a monster. Seems like most of the audience has backed off while you two have carried on a debate that would heat metal to the bending point. One of the main points that is still not clear is does it take a deceased bigfoot male and female body to prove the existence of bigfoot? Do we agree bigfoot is a real living animal and a new species? Does DNA make the distinction between myth and real living monster? Presently what is the status of bigfoot ............................. myth or monster? Has enough evidence been brought forth for proof of the bigfoot with its own species name? What is the present status of bigfoot? Some claim bigfoot is a myth that can disappear and is abducted by aliens and delivered to Earth's forest.
    2 points
  6. I've never watched a bear drag anything away, but have run across lots of their buried treasures (I really don't like that.........). But one of the most impressive things I've seen (more than once) is a grizzly running for its life as I entered the valley or area (they heard or smelled me/us coming).........especially in the fall when they're fat and their fur is thickening for winter, and their hide moves like Patty's in the PGF. Bears can really cover territory!
    2 points
  7. I had to dig real deep for this bad boy, nearly 15 years deep in fact but i found it. I'm still adamant that he got his locations mixed up too, and i'm gonna send this to Aleks..
    2 points
  8. Not so sure. Many whistleblowers have been threatened. And some scientists have disappeared. Is this a grassroots movement to get the truth to the public? Or some red flag event where the government is purposely leaking stuff while acting tough? Dunno. 1) No it wouldn’t. You can point to the child sized pilot chairs but mainstream Science will still want proof. The military is using scientists too. But they are not allowed to publish findings to peer reviewed publications. Part of science is now dark. And has been since the bomb. What else are they hiding in there? 2) Any scientist that can get their work published and accepted in a peer reviewed publication. But if your work happens to pertain with above top secret research? We know who the real boss is. Dr. Gary Nolan has stated they are building a retrieval team to beat the military out to these crash sites. All I can say is? Good Luck! 👀 You and I both agree something funky is going on with Bigfoot as well. Someone doesn’t want them discovered for what ever the reason.
    2 points
  9. Talked to the last land owner we worked for in Nespelem. He is of the Moses clan. I had rodeo’d in Nespelem in 89, and was asking about a kid that beat me chute dogging. He was first and I was second. The conversation somehow got to him asking me if I believed in Bigfoot. I told him the snow track story at our ranch. He told me that they were afraid after dark. And that one time they had found a Colt that had been ripped in half. Something had grabbed the hind legs and had just wishbone it in half. He always got ansy hunting and shot something and while tracking it, it got dark. The Bigfoot cutout on top of Disautel pass survived the fire. Amazing to me how people there have Bigfoot at the fore front of their minds much more so than a cross section of the white population. Other than the tracks I observed? I was raised with both Colville and Spokane Indians and I am sure they have rubbed off on me.
    2 points
  10. That hits the nail on the head. (And, thank-you for summarizing the affects that your encounters have had for you. Much appreciated.) Something funny is going on! Of that, I am 99.9% sure. There is just no way that an otherwise 'normal' biological creature of the reported sizes can exist and, remain unclassified after all these years, without something(s) 'funny' going on. This is a good thread, in my opinion. We can be civil here and honestly explore what may be the cause(s) for the lack of Scientific acceptance/classification. When I joined the BFF, it was stated that the official stance of the BBF was basically that Bigfoot are a biological animal, similar to Gorillas, Humans, etc. except in perhaps their size and elusiveness. And, as time went by, I never really understood why so many people categorically reject the idea that there may be (and most likely are) characteristics of Bigfoot that are beyond the current Scientific paradigms. In fact, if you accept that many witnesses are seeing something(s) matching the criteria, it seems undeniable that they must defy our current understandings. As a side note: I live in the middle of a big city, on a busy road. Yet, my backyard is interesting because it becomes almost rural when you step out the back door. And (not to imply too much into how this may affect this current discussion), I have seen unusual wildlife out there. One night about 15 years ago when it was just about to get fully dark, I saw the silhouette of some kind of gigantic bird fly by. We have barred owls and some hawks and a few eagles, but this thing had like a 6-7 foot wing-span and it flew right by me! I imagine that any Ornithologist would probably say 'No, you must be mistaken, there are no birds of that size anywhere around there' but, I know what I saw. Point being: no one really knows anything, until they know.
    2 points
  11. We can't honestly, with any integrity, call it proof until mainstream science accepts existence of bigfoot. That is what PROOF means. There is no real proof but scientific proof, any lesser proof is not proof, "proof" is the wrong word for that whether it is used from ignorance, illiteracy, or just stubborn malice. There is no way around this. You seem to not understand what "proof" means. You're trying to change the definition / refusing to use the existing definition. Best of luck convincing anyone but yourself with that.
    2 points
  12. No doubt, but Norse is correct that Science as an industry will simply not play ball until somebody delivers a carcass and essentially rubs their noses in it. And I submit that is just one of the reasons why government has decided that the best thing for them as a species is to remain a myth. And frankly, it's my opinion that aliens are science fiction, and Science (as an industry) is playing ball on that field because every base hit equals Big Money, government is managing game for spinoff technology, and the taxpayer plays because they have no choice.
    1 point
  13. There is the possibility of it being just a spiritual entity from Native Americans teachings. Then of course the possibility of being a living relic that survives in the here and now. One of our distant ancestors. Therefore not monster or mythical.
    1 point
  14. What if they know bigfoot are human? That would open a HUGE can of worms.
    1 point
  15. I believe 90%-95%+ of the Bigfoot eyewitness reports are seeing something real with only about 1-5% being outright liars and hoaxers. What I struggle with is not being sure what they saw. Is it a bear? Is it some other misidentification? That part of my brain I will call the BAD COP Then the GOOD COP part of my brain tells me, "Do you really think ALL of these people- every single one is wrong? Are they all mistaken?!" The GOOD COP part of me understands there only needs to be one of these reports to be real for Bigfoot to be real. Just one single report. For those who have had an encounter please forgive my struggle between the GOOD COP and BAD COP. I have never had such an encounter and honestly would never want to until Bigfoot in the public is a well-establish universal fact.
    1 point
  16. You have suggested many times that they are prone to ripping people's arms off and then beating people to death with their own arms? In one sentence you equate them as just another animal, with the same habits, diet, etc. as other non-human apes and then in the next sentence you say we are not dealing with 'just another animal'. You know their temperament, their diet, the way they hunt and basically seem to consider them to be almost just like a giant chimp. You really don't know if they hibernate, or not, right? Science tends to avoid assumptions, Norse. It does matter to some of us how they die, just not to you. Many type specimens are parts of animals, definitely not complete skeletons of both male and female. Your mileage obviously varies, but invoking 'Science' as if those who disagree just don't get it, doesn't work.
    1 point
  17. Not to mention up and over mountains from one drainage to another. But I've witnessed wild animals (specifically bears and caribou) do that, both at a trot and full run.
    1 point
  18. BTW the Disautel pass Sasquatch survived the fire! https://okanogancountry.com/poi/sasquatch-disautel-pass
    1 point
  19. If Sasquatch can pack a full grown man and his gear up and down the Cascade brambles at 15 mph? I guess that would explain a lot. Because we can never catch up to the hide and seek champion! My mules fully loaded averaged 3 mph in the mountains on a trail. Average load with pack saddle was 250-350 lbs depending on what was taking place. We often were heavier on the way out if we had scored an Elk. To avoid making several trips. 30 miles was a very very long day. 15 mph with a 300 lbs ”pack” off trail is absolutely smoking fast…. And Bigfoot is allegedly 800 lbs and my mules were between 1200 and 1400 lbs. So very fast and very very strong for its size. 800 lbs is the size of a large Pony. Or a Bull Elk. But if your whole life is about killing something and packing it back to a cave or hidden canyon? They gotta get it done somehow. And Grizzly are gonna come sniffing around. The best defense would be distance.
    1 point
  20. 'I personally think the Guy got his locations mixed up, but if he says he made his way up the Toba then we'd have to assume he did.. Assuming this is true however,, i don't believe that he could be sure of being taken 25 Miles North/North East of the Toba by a Sasquatch ( he actually said 10 Miles in what i read ), especially with, as you pointed out, him coming out down by the Sechelt Inlet. That would say to me that he got taken South/South East instead, it would also mean that Mt Baker would have been more likely with regards to visibility. Anyway's, he believed that he had made 10 Miles or so from the head of the Toba Inlet in a North/North East direction when he first noticed disturbances.. He said he was awake for around about 3 hours inside the Sleeping Bag until they reached their destination & was asleep when he was picked up, speed would be unknown but was " going at a trot for a long time ".. He actually said he was awakened when he was picked up but half aseep, then said he had " no idea when it started as i was asleep when he picked me up ".. On his " escape " he made 3 miles in " record time " & then headed West emerging 2 days later on the Salmon Arm of Sechelt Inlet.. He simply must have headed South/South East whilst in the Sleeping Bag, towards the Sechelt Inlet but on the East side of the Jervis Inlet.. The distance from Ostman's alleged Camp which is inclusive of the 10 Miles North East he thought he made from landing at the head of the Toba, to the middle of the Salmon Arm is around 60 Miles.. If we are to assume that Ostman was taken South by the Sasquatch, then in 3 hours the Sasquatch would need to have been going at a pace of around 15 Miles per hour on average for those 3 hours or so that he was aware he was being transported, to be there or thereabouts & within the time & distances..'
    1 point
  21. If the Washington DOT has caught it on FLIR cameras? The Feds have certainly caught it on all their surveillance.
    1 point
  22. I have been in the woods with Nathan in north Idaho. He is a very respectful, knowledgeable young man.👍
    1 point
  23. Of course you should! Right now as I eat my morning granola and type on this laptop I'm watching Nathan (a former, and perhaps still present poster here) on his Study Sasquach channel. He just casted yet another footprint. Now, I'm not so impressed with yet another sasquatch footprint cast. There must be thousands of them now in various collections, including the PGF casts that came with a film of the creature actually making the footprints. They "prove" nothing. What I'm interested with in Nathan's videos are: 1) He's honest, no BS, and is as down to Earth as they get 2) He's active and tenacious, and I can always expect him to provide an excellent video of his experiences 3) And he uses incredibly wonderful gear, which is a science in and of itself, and even at my age, I'm still interested in such stuff for hunting (which my tyrannical wife and decreasing health seems to increasingly prevent me from enjoying)
    1 point
  24. No, but the original "discovery" of lowland gorillas (a process during the years 1847-1859) came (part and parcel) with a world ideology/struggle that continues to this day: Darwinism.
    1 point
  25. Until they fall into one category or the other, they don't fall into either. And, if they are never classified, they will never fall into either category. So, I think you are putting the cart before the horse. I read your post (and certainly not trying to call you out, especially since you graciously run the show here and participate intelligently, probably more than anyone else.) But, I still have not seen any indication that a full skeleton of both a male and a female Bigfoot would be required by Science.
    1 point
  26. I'm fascinated by Homo floresiensis, the "Hobbit" prehistoric human species discovered recently. I believe there's a strong possibility that reports of Orang pendak could have an association with perhaps a remnant population of "Hobbits." What we currently know about Homo floresiensis is that they have a really strange conglomerates of physical characteristics. Could they have been a dwarf species of Homo erectus? or could they be something even more strange? Gutsick Gibbon, her real name Erika, has the 2nd most popular paleo-anthropology channel on YouTube. Here, she digs deeper into the question of just what the Hobbit really was.
    1 point
  27. I think of Anna Nikaris discovery of an unknown animal. The interest isn’t that it looked like bigfoot. The issue is the animal existed but was undiscovered until recently. To me the animal doesn’t have to be impressive. The principal of discovery makes it impressive. Dr Nikaris even had a lecture with the possibility of Bigfoot existing.
    1 point
  28. Hi, i'm exited to join.
    1 point
  29. Bigfoot like creatures have been reported from places around the world, and if we go back into world history, we will probably find reports of bigfoot like creatures being captured or killed. Evidence of these events was never presented to a group of primate biologist so proof of a bigfoot-like creature was never established and the topic became a myth and not a proven monster. Some of these reports describe human like monkeys while other ones describe bigfoot like creatures that became myths. Are these reports of bigfoot/human like apes just imagination or are they based on old reports from intelligent villagers? Research some of these reports and give your take on one or two. Go to Bigfoot - Wikipedia to find these reports. Click one of the reports below. Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Bigfoot Bigfoot - Wikipedia Similar alleged bigfoot-like creatures Almas – Central Asia Am Fear Liath Mòr – United Kingdom Amomongo – Philippines Barmanou – Afghanistan/Pakistan Bukit Timah Monkey Man – Singapore Ebu Gogo – Indonesia Fouke Monster – United States Hibagon – Japan Mande Barung – India Mistapew – Algonquinian cultures Momo the Monster – United States Nittaewo – Sri Lanka Orang Mawas – Malaysia Orang Pendek – Indonesia Sisimito - Central America Skunk ape – United States Urayuli – United States, Canada Wild Man of the Navidad Yeren – China Yeti – Asia Yowie – Australia
    1 point
  30. Not only is interesting I would have thought it would have provoked 50 posts by now
    1 point
  31. .........AND there are millions more people out there to see them, AND actually looking for them. The human population of this planet has quadrupled in just the last century: 10,000 BCE: About 4 million people lived on Earth after the shift toward agriculture. 1 CE: Around 170 million to 300 million people. 1804: Reached 1 billion for the first time, taking all of human history. 1927: Reached 2 billion (123 years later). 1960: Reached 3 billion (33 years later). 1974: Reached 4 billion (14 years later). 1987: Reached 5 billion (13 years later). 1999: Reached 6 billion (12 years later). 2011: Reached 7 billion (12 years later). 2022: Reached 8 billion on November 15, 2022 (11 years later)
    1 point
  32. I think the answer almost has to be a hybrid version of what MIB asked above: "Are there a) lots of bigfoots but they are super sneaky or b) only a few bigfoots but they are fairly clumsy, inept at hiding, so those few are seen fairly frequently?" I propose a possibility c) There are only a few hundred (or, maybe a few thousand) Bigfoot left AND they are super sneaky. How that plays into the sad possibility that they may be on the verge of extinction I don't know. But, I think it's either that, or we are dealing with critters far beyond our current Scientific paradigms. I'm currently about 50-50 between those two options. The only thing I'm 99.9% sure of is that Bigfoot exist and that they have, and probably still do, walk on planet Earth.
    1 point
  33. The following account of the event came mainly from two visits I had with Peter: first in early May of 2003 when I stayed with him for three days, and in September of that year when he put me up again for two days. We also talked about the shooting incident several times by phone, before and since my visits. The word-for-word questions and Peter’s answers presented here were mostly from the May visit; we sat together in his home where he lives alone now. I taped our conversation. The reader will note a leading tendency in my questions. The prior discussions, I bel ............................read on BFRO Report 9552- Moose hunter shoots -bigfoot- to death.url This BFRO account describes a young 17 year old Canadian moose hunter who shot and killed a bigfoot. This report is plausible enough to be published in the BFRO reports so there is a chance it could be true. Is this a myth or monster event that came about in a small Canadian village? Why is Bigfoot so hard to track, stalk, and capture? Some on the forum now throw the creature into the myth category. If bigfoot is a thousand times more intelligent and wary than a jungle monkey, it becomes a thousand times as difficult to stalk and capture live or deceased. Some animals are just too smart or wary and have incredible hearing and sense of smell. Some seem to fit into the myth category much like Michael Jordan , Joe Namath or a Roswell alien to name a few super individuals. Every now and then bigfoot will slip up and will be captured like Patty was captured on film. The lucky Canadian hunter will repeat itself and a body will be produced to cause bigfoot to be identified as a monster. BFRO Report 9552- Moose hunter shoots -bigfoot- to death.url
    1 point
  34. Lake Shelbyville Illinois:
    1 point
  35. Stellar thought the lights were off and the party over
    1 point
  36. After some research, here is what I found out about Jacko, the juvenile bigfoot found in Canada. Nov 18 The story of Jacko The story of Jacko – that of a small, apelike, young Sasquatch said to have been captured alive in the 1800s – is a piece of folklore that refuses to die, despite a superb investigative article published in 1975, co-authored by John Green and Sabina W. Sanderson. The investigation into the Jacko story did not began until decades later. During the 1950s, a news reporter named Brian McKelvie became interested in the then-current stories of the Sasquatch being carried by his local British Columbian papers. McKelvie searched for older reports. What he found was the Daily British Colonist July 4, 1884, article about Jacko. The account detailed the sighting of a smallish hairy creature (“something of the gorilla type”) supposedly seen and captured near Yale, British Columbia, on June 30, 1884, and housed in a local jail. McKelvie shared the Jacko account with researchers John Green and René Dahinden. MeKelvie told them this was the only record of the event due to a fire that had destroyed other area newspapers of the time. In 1958 John Green found and interviewed a man (August Castle) who remembered the Jacko talk of the time, but he said his parents did not take him to the jail to see the beast. Other senior citizens remembered the talk of the creature, but no one could produce any truly good evidence for or eyewitness accounts (other than the British Colonist story) of Jacko. The story’s appearance in Ivan T. Sanderson’s 1961 Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life propelled the Jacko incident into history. Other authors, including John Green, René Dahinden/Don Hunter, Grover Krantz, and John Napier, would follow. The story was repeated again and again.
    1 point
  37. You make some very good points in regard to Jacko and if correct the story was repeated in some newspaper. I will do some research to find out what newspaper. If it was written about, there is a chance that the author created a fantastical story about a supposed ape. There is also a 50% chance that the story is true and some unidentified primate was found on the railroad tracks and captured. I will do some research to find more information on Jacko. Let's not throw the report in the trash can yet. Let's allow a chance that the story is true. By the way your post is very informative, well written, and an interesting read.
    1 point
  38. Well definitely the discussions are a big part of it, as its always great to bounce ideas and get opinions and critiques, asking questions, even if sasquatch don't look like a shaved bear. I like the paranormal section, and I've yet to access the tarpit, but heck I couldn't even say how many years I've been coming here posting my own crazy ideas, hypothesesiz, answers/solutions, approach, long winded replies that might seem nearly rational at the outset, but then kinda veer off to something about generalist omnivores in the Pleistocene, and how wood tools work just fine when you can bench press a tractor, and sometimes even try my hand at Bigfoot humor, sometimes to make or illustrate a point, other times not so much. But gosh, you guys, after all these years we're nearly family! Sure some of has might be that grumpy uncle we seat at the other table, but still! Hey anybody here from Aunt Sasfooty lately?
    1 point
  39. In the folklore of the Caucasus, Pamir, and Altai mountains, an almas (also called an almasty) is a legendary hominid cryptid. Stories describe it as a human-like creature covered in reddish-brown hair, standing 5 to 6.5 feet tall, and resembling modern reconstructions of Neanderthals rather than large apes. Zana fit that physical description perfectly. She was called an Almas during and after her lifetime. Recently, Science dug her body up along with that of her son and analyzed the DNA of other descendants. She has been scientifically identified as Homo sapiens. She was both, and there is no reason why she could not be both.
    1 point
  40. 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
  41. Greetings from Southern Ontario. I've always been fascinated by cryptozoology and Sasquatch/Bigfoot. Nearing retirement and I'm forward to deep-diving into the subject more.
    1 point
  42. We are on the Kaiser Canyon Fire. Doing reclaim. We came across the Keller Ferry. Staging at Keller Wa.
    1 point
  43. Hello everyone. My name is Hope. I live in the middle of Michigan's thumb. I've been intrigued by Bigfoot since I was very young.
    1 point
  44. I think the best circumstantial evidence was obtained by the Olympic Project.
    1 point
  45. Interesting. So far as the cases I've been able to dig into personally, the further I dig the more off-the-mark he is. I would like to believe what he has to say but it simply does not hold up to scrutiny. Most of the reports I've dug into have been in the Crater Lake cluster along with a couple in Idaho. I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt in other places.
    1 point
  46. Totally shocked. Had the honor to eat supper with him in Gardner, Montana one night during a tracking course he presented with Jim Halfpenny. He was such a gracious and humble man. May he rest in peace.
    1 point
  47. Two copies of Delorme Gazetteer for Oregon. One is 'coffee table' mode for planning and it stays clean. The 2nd Gazetteer is the working copy for field use = dog eared, tattered, and stained from beverages. They used to be about $20 but I noticed that they are about $26 or more now. Garmin bought Delorme in 2015--2016. A small audio recorder operating in your vehicle day and night could be revealing. Campsites translate to human(s) with food and animals will be curious. Check your local regulations for bear proof food storage containers even if your food is in your vehicle. Bear spray has vegetable oil as the carrier for the irritant. No practice shots. You will get a bear due to the small residue on the nozzle. A small amount of vegetable oil goes a long way. No need for camo clothes because the birds will give your location away. Small steps.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...