Description Of "bigfoot"

[Bill]

antfoot:

I would tend to agree with you in your remarks about the DNA issue. I think there's far too much investment of time, effort and financing, plus too large a collection of people for any kind of hoax to be successful or reasonable. The whole matter of trying to get a paper peer-reviewed for possible publication brings in a whole additional group of people who would (I think) be ruthless in denouncing a hoax if they thought for one minute it may be such, to protect their own reputations.

So I look forward to this with considerable interest.

I don't expect it to be an instant solution, but I do think there's potential to raise the level of dialogue above the "can't exist" to at least "maybe there is something out there we should pay more attention to".

Bill

[Branco]

Easy. Variation in visible features (Genetic variation; mainly individual variation) and all are of the same Human species. :]

Can you produce clear pictures of the typical Bigfoot?

Ya sure, You point me to any government official that points out these human racial groups.

Look down for the section headed: Racial Determination.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric1.htm

[Guest HucksterFoot]

Look down for the section headed: Racial Determination.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric1.htm

Thanks for the link: It really helps drive home my point.

I'm perfectly aware that the word Race and Racial groups is used. Like I said before, it is still a social construct and not a biological reality. There is only one Human race; this is a demonstrable fact. One Human race with genetic variations and plenty of individual variations. Your link demonstrates these variations.

Guess I'll just cling to this flimsy belief that I have here. :]

Maybe Bigfoot, if? and when? can be the first modern Human subspecies. Science will work that out and make a conclusion based on testable data.

[Guest]

There is only one Human race; this is a demonstrable fact. One Human race with genetic variations and plenty of individual variations.

Correct. By the criteria we apply to other vertebrates for identifying "races" or "subspecies", humans are very difficult to pin down. There might be some really obvious differences in morphology among a random selection of native people from South Africa, Denmark, Brazil, or Japan, but those differences grade together imperceptibly across the globe.

[Guest Primate]

Saskeptic, Imperceptively according to what criteria ?

[Guest]

Saskeptic, Imperceptively according to what criteria ?

Genetic divergence. Our species does not exhibit distinct boundaries of genetic divergence where the traditional "races" intersect.* Instead, there tend to be broad zones of overlap and mixing of traits more in keeping with clinal gradients of gene frequency and phenotype. Where clinal variation is illustrated (rather than geographically distinct types with sharply demarcated boundaries), the "subspecies" or "race" concept is untenable.

*Caveat: I don't claim to be very well informed on the rapidly changing field of human evolution, so my understanding may be out of date. If so, I'll defer to others better informed.

[Guest]

I tend to believe we are dealing with an offshoot, an Australopithecus of some sort,or something very much like that. I think that its far more intelligent than we give it credit for. We tend to label things that don't have the same ambitions as ourselves as primitive, a mistake we make over and over,particularly by urban industrialist.We measure intelligence by tool use etc, and that in many ways is flawed.Can you measure a dolphin, or whales intelligence this way? Someone spoke of them as a species currently in flux,and again I can agree with that, although I would not put so much influence on selective adaptation making much difference in appearance etc, in the time frame we are talking about. I do believe there may be some large social adaptation going on,learning to live closer to man, perhaps taking advantage of our crops etc.

Watching some of the work done,particularly by people working the same area's consistently over long periods of time, there seems to be social patterns there. For example I have seen some good examples of "luring", where obviously this species is leading researchers away from,or to specific locations,good examples of working in complex groups,literally outsmarting the researcher. This is obviously part of the difficulty in locating them,they are probably much more intelligent than we give them credit for. I actually get frustrated at some of the techniques I see on documentaries etc, for example,a pheromone chip? Hanging shiny things? These to me,would seem like a sign post saying "keep away"

Has anyone gathered a data base of any sort on stick structures? I am wondering if there is any consistency in these that can lead to a clue about their content? I think I will spend some time online and gather as many photo's of these as I can.

Anyways, my ramblings are all leading to, I think we are dealing with a race here that is certainly there,and advanced enough to know,as a whole,and collectively to avoid direct contact with us. This would imply language,burying their dead,etc.I think an anthropological approach,based on the long term study of specific area's will yield better results than stalking them at "hotspots"

That is my unqualified,simplified,humble opinion,based only on several thousand hours of reading everything I can on the direct subject,and based on the assumption that many of the amateur researchers are reporting the truth as they see it.

[Guest UPs]

Bill,

I fully understand the intent and agree with your thoughts on the description of bf within your original post. To me, the referenced description of bf follows a pattern that is generally used by pseudo-skeptics. When I read these types of arguments (straw-man, personal attacks, etc), it tells me that their own position is weak and that the facts do not support it. Another example can be found within the PGF threads. The film itself cannot be shown to be a hoax, so the back story and person get attacked.

As far as my own opinion on a description of bf goes, I have never seen one and could only make a guess based on the mandible I saw years ago. The jaw was very wide, human shaped, and based on size, very large. Keep up the good work!

UPs

[Guest Primate]

Thanks Saskeptic that was very clear..

John C in Murphy's "Know the Sasquatch" there is an inscription allegedly made by a Sasquatch which was casted and transcribed and turned out to be an ancient Iberian script .I was struck with how similer it looked to stick structures , figures and bent trees..

[Bill]

UPs:

Sadly, yes, argumentative tactics often take the tactic of creating a description of Bf than can then be easily ridiculed and discounted.

But sadly, we see in in common use in politics, law and most other human endeavors of discussion where the intent is to win, moreso than to understand or to teach.

Bill

[Guest Primate]

To me , It was like saying ; 6'9" 400lds , a 4.1 forty yard dash , able to throw a football 80 yards and making 20 million dollars a year..??

Clearly professional football players do not exist . There is no one who fit's that description..

[Guest]

In post #35, I provided direct quotes of individuals who claim to have encountered bigfoots and submitted information to Pete Travers' fascinating "Bigfoot Sketch Project." Several of the sketches went through revisions before a final sketch was accepted, and that led to several individuals (including Matt Moneymaker) praising Travers for how accurately he reproduced the subject on paper.

Six of those quotes include direct estimates of height; of those 6, 4 estimated a height greater than 7 feet and 2 indicated that the subject was at least 6'5" tall. From this information, it is safe to assume that bigfoots are taller than humans, and routinely exceed 7' in height.

Two of the quotes included estimates of weights. One estimated a weight of at least 400 lbs, another's minimum estimate was 275lbs. Other descriptions offered qualitative assessments of the subject's massive bulk.

From these descriptions, I assume that a typical bigfoot I might encounter would be basically human-shaped, but much bigger than any human I might encounter on a regular basis. I consider Shaquille O'Neal to be bigfoot-sized. Shaq is 7' 1" and listed at 325 lbs.

Check out this photo of Shaq with his new girlfriend who at 5'3" is petite, but certainly well within the range of a typical woman in the U.S.

The average-sized man in the U.S. is about 5' 10" and 200 lbs. Based on how much bigger than average is our friend Shaq, I did a little back of the envelope calculation on how much bigger a "Shaq-if-fied" bigfoot would be than a typical 7', 325 lb bigfoot: I got 8' tall and 430 lbs.

[Guest exnihilo]

Here is an old topic I posted years ago, but which seems relevant to the discussion. It is unfortunately unavailable in its original form, though I have edited it to a degree:

___________________________

This topic was partially inspired by this article: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/biology/willduncan.htm

THIS LISTING IS MEANT TO BE SUGGESTIVE AND STIMULATIVE, NOT DEFINITIVE! Please feel free to suggest modifications or additions as you feel they are warranted.

Although there are as many theories about the BF phenomenon as there are members of this forum, there seem to be four main categories these theories fall into:

• Pongid Bigfoot
  
• Hominid Bigfoot
  
• Paranormal Bigfoot
  
• Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot

Pongid Bigfoot

Pongid Bigfoot is a somewhat hoary paradigm, that either was or is espoused by John Green, Rene Dahinden, Grover Krantz, and Jeff Meldrum. The characteristics of Pongid Bigfoot are:

• Descendant of Gigantopithecus blacki, generally a more distant relation of mankind than chimpanzees and bonobos
  
• Extremely rare, presumably endangered
  
• Restricted in range to the montane Pacific Northwest (including portions of Canada)
  
• Solitary
  
• Ape-like in intelligence and behavior
  
• Share few behavioral traits with humans
  
• Incapable of language or proto-language
  
• Generalized omnivore with heavy reliance on forage
  
• DNA samples from hair and scat are difficult or impossible to obtain
  
• Elusiveness explained by extreme rarity, nocturnal lifestyle, and a retiring temperment
  
• Preferred method of scientific documentation is capture or kill
  
• Genuine evidence of Bigfoot is rare, with hoaxing both ubiquitous and insidious within the body of evidence
  
• Supporters of this theory tend to be more skeptical of new evidence and less certain that Bigfoot exists

Strengths:

• Most conservative explanation for the BF phenomenon that includes a physical creature, and presumably the most palatable model to science.
  
• Relies upon a scientifically accepted antecedent: Gigantopithecus blacki.
  
• Supported by most BF-favorable scientists.

â—¦Weaknesses:

• Not very explanatory of BF elusiveness.
  
• Tends to exclude a significant amount of evidence on the basis of hoaxing or over-active imagination.

Hominid Bigfoot

Hominid Bigfoot seems to be gaining a significant amount of acceptance at present, it is or was espoused by Bayonev et al. as well as many of the younger generation of researchers. The characteristics of Hominid Bigfoot are:

• Part of the hominid line, perhaps as closely related to mankind as Homo heidlebergensis
  
• Cunningly elusive rather than rare
  
• Ubiquitous across North America
  
• Social, but with solitary periods during the life cycle, especially for males
  
• Human-like in intelligence and behavior
  
• Share many behavioral traits with mankind with the notable exception of a technological culture
  
• Capable of language / proto-language, often thought to speak Native American tongues
  
• Specialized omnivore with heavy reliance on socially cooperative hunting
  
• DNA samples from hair and scat closely resemble human "contamination"
  
• Elusiveness explained by human-like intelligence and cunning, nocturnal lifestyle, retiring temperment, and possible culture-of-concealment which includes the active concealment of sign
  
• Preferred method of scientific documentation is habituation
  
• Genuine evidence of Bigfoot is more common than assumed by the Pongid camp, and hoaxing is a minor annoyance rather than a signficant problem
  
• Supporters of this theory tend to be less skeptical of new evidence and more certain that Bigfoot exists

Strengths:

• Robust explanation of BF elusiveness.
  
• Much more inclusive of the evidence not obviously hoaxed or unreliable.
  
• Explains the difficulties in obtaining BF DNA from biological samples (i.e., "human contamination").
  
• Consistency with the P-G film (jaw and facial characteristics).

Weaknesses:

• More ambitious model of the BF phenomenon which is presumably going to be a tough sell to mainstream science.
  
• Significantly less support from BF-favorable scientists.
  
• Possibility of excessive credulity as regards new evidence and reports.
  
• Apparent absence of technological development by BF not well understood.
  
• Ascribing human qualities to BF has paradigm-shattering implications for mankind, thus ensuring a high level of resistance.

Paranormal Bigfoot

Paranormal Bigfoot is a minority view, espoused by JEB et al. The characteristics of Paranormal Bigfoot are:

• Uncertain lineage accompanied by possible alien genetic manipulation
  
• Extra-dimensional rather than necessarily rare
  
• Ubiquitous across an unknown range
  
• Social but with unknown aspects
  
• More than human intelligence
  
• Share behavioral traits with alien "grays"
  
• Capable of language and mental telepathy
  
• Unknown survival economy
  
• DNA manipulated by aliens
  
• Elusiveness explained by ability to shift dimensions and/or interact with UFOs
  
• Preferred method of scientific documentation is recognition that Bigfoot is a higher order being than mankind and the question of documentation is irrelevant
  
• Difficult to quantify the attitudes of the supporters regarding new evidence, except that they feel that the other camps are extremely misguided

Strengths:

• Comprehensive, if incredible, explanation of BF elusiveness.

Weaknesses:

• Model is dependent on other paranormal phenomenon, which limits both its explanatory power and credibility.
  
• Generally scorned by all but the "true belivers".

Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot

Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot is a minority view, albeit one which seems to occupy a lot of space within the old guard of mainstream science. The characteristics of Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot are:

• Not a physical entity
  
• The phenomenon is psychic or imagined in origin
  
• Reports are evidence of mass delusion
  
• BF characteristics are projected reflections of our 'inner wildman'
  
• Physical evidence is wholly hoaxed or the result of wishful thinking
  
• Preferred method of documentation is evidence of mental instability, incompetence, and/or charlatanism among witnesses
  
• New evidence is yet more fakery or wishful thinking

Strengths:

• Comprehensive and self-consistent explanation of the BF phenomenon.
  
• Some academic support.

Weaknesses:

• Completely discounts all evidence even that which is apparently well documented.
  
• Takes a very dim view of human witnesses and takes an highly skeptical view of humans generally

[Guest HucksterFoot]

Correct. By the criteria we apply to other vertebrates for identifying "races" or "subspecies", humans are very difficult to pin down. There might be some really obvious differences in morphology among a random selection of native people from South Africa, Denmark, Brazil, or Japan, but those differences grade together imperceptibly across the globe.

Maybe, someday in the distant future there will be known examples; populations (some which may be genetically isolated groups) of new biological homo sapiens; where the human species has diverged significantly enough to be classified as a new species. Cladogenesis out in the cosmos (When we manage to spread out and populate other life friendly planets, that is) Allopatric isolation in space - Speciation modes of the Universe. lol :]

Below, I have made a Cladogram; demonstrating this space Lineage.

lol, Really. My time machine is out of order. Well, it was partially working. I did manage to posit myself about 4 million years into the future and snag a photo.

.

[ShadowBorn]

Here is an old topic I posted years ago, but which seems relevant to the discussion. It is unfortunately unavailable in its original form, though I have edited it to a degree:

___________________________

This topic was partially inspired by this article: http://www.bigfooten.../willduncan.htm

THIS LISTING IS MEANT TO BE SUGGESTIVE AND STIMULATIVE, NOT DEFINITIVE! Please feel free to suggest modifications or additions as you feel they are warranted.

Although there are as many theories about the BF phenomenon as there are members of this forum, there seem to be four main categories these theories fall into:

Pongid Bigfoot

Hominid Bigfoot

Paranormal Bigfoot

Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot

Pongid Bigfoot

Pongid Bigfoot is a somewhat hoary paradigm, that either was or is espoused by John Green, Rene Dahinden, Grover Krantz, and Jeff Meldrum. The characteristics of Pongid Bigfoot are:

Descendant of Gigantopithecus blacki, generally a more distant relation of mankind than chimpanzees and bonobos

Extremely rare, presumably endangered

Restricted in range to the montane Pacific Northwest (including portions of Canada)

Solitary

Ape-like in intelligence and behavior

Share few behavioral traits with humans

Incapable of language or proto-language

Generalized omnivore with heavy reliance on forage

DNA samples from hair and scat are difficult or impossible to obtain

Elusiveness explained by extreme rarity, nocturnal lifestyle, and a retiring temperment

Preferred method of scientific documentation is capture or kill

Genuine evidence of Bigfoot is rare, with hoaxing both ubiquitous and insidious within the body of evidence

Supporters of this theory tend to be more skeptical of new evidence and less certain that Bigfoot exists

Strengths:

Most conservative explanation for the BF phenomenon that includes a physical creature, and presumably the most palatable model to science.

Relies upon a scientifically accepted antecedent: Gigantopithecus blacki.

Supported by most BF-favorable scientists.

â—¦Weaknesses:

Not very explanatory of BF elusiveness.

Tends to exclude a significant amount of evidence on the basis of hoaxing or over-active imagination.

Hominid Bigfoot

Hominid Bigfoot seems to be gaining a significant amount of acceptance at present, it is or was espoused by Bayonev et al. as well as many of the younger generation of researchers. The characteristics of Hominid Bigfoot are:

Part of the hominid line, perhaps as closely related to mankind as Homo heidlebergensis

Cunningly elusive rather than rare

Ubiquitous across North America

Social, but with solitary periods during the life cycle, especially for males

Human-like in intelligence and behavior

Share many behavioral traits with mankind with the notable exception of a technological culture

Capable of language / proto-language, often thought to speak Native American tongues

Specialized omnivore with heavy reliance on socially cooperative hunting

DNA samples from hair and scat closely resemble human "contamination"

Elusiveness explained by human-like intelligence and cunning, nocturnal lifestyle, retiring temperment, and possible culture-of-concealment which includes the active concealment of sign

Preferred method of scientific documentation is habituation

Genuine evidence of Bigfoot is more common than assumed by the Pongid camp, and hoaxing is a minor annoyance rather than a signficant problem

Supporters of this theory tend to be less skeptical of new evidence and more certain that Bigfoot exists

Strengths:

Robust explanation of BF elusiveness.

Much more inclusive of the evidence not obviously hoaxed or unreliable.

Explains the difficulties in obtaining BF DNA from biological samples (i.e., "human contamination").

Consistency with the P-G film (jaw and facial characteristics).

Weaknesses:

More ambitious model of the BF phenomenon which is presumably going to be a tough sell to mainstream science.

Significantly less support from BF-favorable scientists.

Possibility of excessive credulity as regards new evidence and reports.

Apparent absence of technological development by BF not well understood.

Ascribing human qualities to BF has paradigm-shattering implications for mankind, thus ensuring a high level of resistance.

Paranormal Bigfoot

Paranormal Bigfoot is a minority view, espoused by JEB et al. The characteristics of Paranormal Bigfoot are:

Uncertain lineage accompanied by possible alien genetic manipulation

Extra-dimensional rather than necessarily rare

Ubiquitous across an unknown range

Social but with unknown aspects

More than human intelligence

Share behavioral traits with alien "grays"

Capable of language and mental telepathy

Unknown survival economy

DNA manipulated by aliens

Elusiveness explained by ability to shift dimensions and/or interact with UFOs

Preferred method of scientific documentation is recognition that Bigfoot is a higher order being than mankind and the question of documentation is irrelevant

Difficult to quantify the attitudes of the supporters regarding new evidence, except that they feel that the other camps are extremely misguided

Strengths:

Comprehensive, if incredible, explanation of BF elusiveness.

Weaknesses:

Model is dependent on other paranormal phenomenon, which limits both its explanatory power and credibility.

Generally scorned by all but the "true belivers".

Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot

Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot is a minority view, albeit one which seems to occupy a lot of space within the old guard of mainstream science. The characteristics of Psychic / Imaginary Bigfoot are:

Not a physical entity

The phenomenon is psychic or imagined in origin

Reports are evidence of mass delusion

BF characteristics are projected reflections of our 'inner wildman'

Physical evidence is wholly hoaxed or the result of wishful thinking

Preferred method of documentation is evidence of mental instability, incompetence, and/or charlatanism among witnesses

New evidence is yet more fakery or wishful thinking

Strengths:

Comprehensive and self-consistent explanation of the BF phenomenon.

Some academic support.

Weaknesses:

Completely discounts all evidence even that which is apparently well documented.

Takes a very dim view of human witnesses and takes an highly skeptical view of humans generally

I would stay away from the paranormal and Psychic Bigfoot for now.No one is willing to accept this or even confront this as an issue as of yet.Sure i have my views on it and yes I believe some what of what has been proven to me.Maybe there is some where in our brains that we have not reached yet that they have.In my humble opinion I honestly believe that have a talent of being able to communicate in ways we have not learned yet.That they know how to use the forest well and that have ancient knowledge that we have lost.Knowledge on how to survive in our forest and within our world.Maybe I am saying to much but it always seems like every deer season that i went out was a school time for me.These creatures I feel understood our forest and every animal in it.To them every animal has their purpose and are very important to them.Well i said to much maybe someone else can chime in.The main thing is go out there and test it you have nothing to loose but all to gain.I have never known that the crows when they are out will give your position away in the forest, no where to hide.