If You Believe In Bigfoot, Do You Believe He Is Closer To Humans Or Animals

[Guest Twilight Fan]

Okay so, for those of you who believe Bigfoot exists, or think he might exist...what kind of creature do you think he is? Do you think of him as another "species" or as another "race?" In other words, does Bigfoot have more human or animal qualities, in your opinion? I'd say if he exists, he has a fair mixture of both. He walks upright and has very human features from those described, and seems intelligent enough to never be discovered by us. But like other animals, he lives in the woods and hunts or fishes or gathers food, does not wear clothing, and likely doesn't speak.

I'm curious what the majority of posters here think about this. To YOU, is Bigfoot close enough to humans to deserve the same respect we humans have? Should he be called a race instead of a breed or species? As we call animals. How intelligent do you think he and his kind can be? Do they think and reason as we do? Even the most intelligent of great apes still act like animals for the most part. In the wild and in captivity, they rely on their instincts as any other animal does. (Eating and sleeping is what they do best!) Do you think Bigfoot does too, or does he have a superior intellect that allows him to rise above his instincts and think for himself as people do? Can he contemplate things, or wonder what a human is doing when one stumbles into his forest home?

What reasons make you think however you do on this subject; what do you base your opinion on? Any and all thoughts are welcome to be shared

Edited January 22, 2012 by Twilight Fan

[Guest MikeG]

This is a bit of a false dichotomoy, if, as I do, you count humans as animals.

We are an animal, a mammal, and an ape. Plenty of other animals display intelligence, and almost every characteristic that we think of as defining us as humans is found elsewhere in the animal kingdom, although not, (obviously) all in the same species. In many ways, species of themselves are false dichotomies, there being a continuum of "intermediate forms". I have never believed that humans deserve any special level of respect above any other animals, as implied by your question.

Secondly, I try never to do "belief". Exclude it from your thinking and free your mind! I don't "believe" in bigfoot.........but I expect that it exists. I've weighed the evidence, and I'm waiting for the proof, but I don't believe in sasquatch any more than I believe in side-striped jackals or that the sun will rise tomorrow morning. I "expect" instead.

Where does Sasquatch fit in the scheme of things? Well, why guess? If the rumour mill is to be believed, we're just about to find out.

Mike

[BobZenor]

I don't presume to separate us from animals except in certain abilities like language. I assume that other great apes are very much like us in their perceptions, emotions and general understanding of the world. They obviously lack our language skills so some of the more abstract ideas we have developed as modern humans are probably beyond their grasp since they probably require language to explain. They would see the world somewhat differently if they didn't have good language skills.

I think they probably do have at least crude language skills by the way. Many people aren't able to even accept that animals can think because we associate language with thought. Language is a layer of abstraction built on top of thought processes that are already there. Language skills are just complex symbolic associations and memorization and not really abstract thought by itself. There is a lot of disagreement with that opinion. Lack of language obviously limits what you can pass down to future generations. How much language they possess almost certainly depends on how closely related they are to us. I would guess we had crude language about 2 million years ago.

They probably separated from us about that time during early Homo. It was a logical time since that seems to be about the time our ancestors left Africa and they seem to be an Asian species. They may even live there today and logically did not very long ago. That separation of a couple million years would make them very close to a modern human when compared to a chimp but that isn't an either/or proposition. They are closer to us on the spectrum of human/animal but they apparently aren't modern humans. That doesn't make them just animals anymore than a chimp is just an animal. Chimps are clearly much closer to us in how their minds work than a deer or even a dog is. They could be very much closer than a chimp depending on when they separated from our lineage and how fast we evolved our language skills and other human abilities. They also could have evolved themselves since the split in some unknown way. How fast we evolved any particular human characteristic and when we share common ancestors are both unknowns. We also don't know the amount if any of interbreeding that took place between our ancestors. The behaviors of bigfoot still seem consistent to me with what I would expect from something that distantly related. I would have a problem with it being much more distantly related. Some of the problems would be all the convergent evolution required for the physical similarities.

Just as an example, I think there was virtually no significant difference between a chimp and early Australopithecus besides their locomotion. Sometime in that 3 million years we became human. I rather doubt it is as simple as just measuring brain size or tool use in the fossil record. We don't really have a lot to go on and deciding when something becomes human is very subjective if our ancestors became gradually more what we would call human over time. That is logically what happened.

It is one of the more interesting questions to me. How human are they?

Edited January 22, 2012 by BobZenor

[Guest Twilight Fan]

lol, I find it funny how the two of you seem more caught up on how to define humanity (and animal intelligence) when the question was more about Bigfoot. And what anyone thinks HE is like. Not humans or animals. We know what they (and us) are like already. Having said that, I'll add my two cents anyway, to that topic.

I consider humans a separate category from animals, above animals because we can do, think, dream and create things they could never wrap their (more simplistic) minds around. There are SO many defining things that set humans apart, that make us superior besides our intellect. But, that can be discussed all night long, and this thread is about what SASQUATCH is like. Not us, and not other creatures...

[Guest MikeG]

lol, I find it funny how the two of you seem more caught up on how to define humanity (and animal intelligence) when the question was more about Bigfoot.

With respect, the question was ".....closer to humans or animals", and we both explained pretty clearly that we think this equates to "closer to an animal or some other animals" and therefore doesn't make sense. There isn't the slightest doubt that humans are a subset of animals. Don't get too hung up on human intelligence, either, or speech, unless you want to do lots and lots of reading.

I also gave you a straight answer to your question........"we'll know soon enough"

Mike

Edited January 22, 2012 by MikeG

[Guest BuzzardEater]

To imagine they are anything other than sophisticated and systematic is absurd! To imagine a bunch of tall chimps evading us for centuries is absurd as well.

Did you ever wonder why the Gorilla Coco, once taught our language, never really had anything to say? She was polite and had decorum. She also had a breast fetish. Her son, unfettered by these considerations never talked at all, until heis Mother's death. Then he said a few things and never spoke again, except to order lunch.

Other intelligences do not regaurd us as godlike. They mostly think we are idiots. Why would a genius group bother with us? Do they think we will stop ruining the landscape if asked? No, they think we are out of control idiots with no thought process.

The only time a human will encounter a BF is when they are sought out for a demonstration. Most sightings are display behaviour.

An anecdote; my cat, who was a large male, when chastised would pretend to yawn and stretch his paw. So, he'd show his teeth and claws and dismiss human input.

Alligators frequently surface when threatened, to show thier size. As with BFs, that is usually enough.

Why do these massive creatures, possessed of enormous strength show such restraint? Mama bears are reputed to simplify a situation by removing the human element. Why don't BFs simply tear the occasional human apart and strew them from the trees? Os steal a baby and consume it on the spot?

Listen to the "911" call. The caller relates how his dog had been killed earlier, before the BF displays himself. This is the kind of thing I am talking about. If you set your dog on me, I would look you up, too, but I wouldn't just glare through a window. The BF, his point made, left it at that.

This isn't the work of chimps or gorillas. If anything, they show more brains than us.

They think we are stupid. How else to explain thier actions? They aren't shy. They do not fear us physically. They don't want our stuff.

They simply have no use for us. We are an annoyance to them, treated gently like an idiot child.

What do humans look like to them? We pride ourselves claiming we ran off all intruders, using our superior reasoning abilities. This is how far science has come, we still shake our spears and cry fircely into the unknown! In fact, I put it to you, that we didn't do any such thing. What we actually evolved was babes. How else to explain why evolution would make us smaller and hairless in relation to the competition? Our innovation was blondes with superb bodies. All the rest of the things we have done is compensating. This also addresses our utterly bizarre behaviour regaurding our females, that survives into the modern era. Burkhas, for example, or female circumsision cannot be attributed to anything practical.

If you do not understand where this places us on the importance scale, visit a peeler bar and see how the bikers treat the dancers. We are the dancers. After you have had your fill of derision, visit a university. Find a scholastic and disagree with him. You will quickly uncover kindergarden behaviour before the learned person dismisses your contribution with disdain and rhetoric. Do you suppose the scholar, once offended will ever seek your council? BFs are the scholars in this analogy.

Instead of asking why not, in regaurd to the question of contact, I suggest the question ought to be Why?

Edited January 22, 2012 by BuzzardEater

[Guest squatchrider]

TwilightFan, Based on the paragraph you used to elaborate your poll I suggest you do more research into the great apes and many other animals out there. There are many animals who deserve much more credit for their mental abilities than you are giving them.

[bipedalist]

I'll go with the false dichotomy argument but I think it is fascinating that BF is so often described as locomoting using both legs and sometimes legs/arms and moving back and forth fluidly between the two.

Even some of Tirademan's old archives of newspaper clippings note this.

[Guest Cervelo]

My dog dreams! Of having a dad that doesn't do this to her

[Guest]

To imagine they are anything other than sophisticated and systematic is absurd! To imagine a bunch of tall chimps evading us for centuries is absurd as well.

Did you ever wonder why the Gorilla Coco, once taught our language, never really had anything to say? She was polite and had decorum. She also had a breast fetish. Her son, unfettered by these considerations never talked at all, until heis Mother's death. Then he said a few things and never spoke again, except to order lunch.

Other intelligences do not regaurd us as godlike. They mostly think we are idiots. Why would a genius group bother with us? Do they think we will stop ruining the landscape if asked? No, they think we are out of control idiots with no thought process.

The only time a human will encounter a BF is when they are sought out for a demonstration. Most sightings are display behaviour.

An anecdote; my cat, who was a large male, when chastised would pretend to yawn and stretch his paw. So, he'd show his teeth and claws and dismiss human input.

Alligators frequently surface when threatened, to show thier size. As with BFs, that is usually enough.

Why do these massive creatures, possessed of enormous strength show such restraint? Mama bears are reputed to simplify a situation by removing the human element. Why don't BFs simply tear the occasional human apart and strew them from the trees? Os steal a baby and consume it on the spot?

Listen to the "911" call. The caller relates how his dog had been killed earlier, before the BF displays himself. This is the kind of thing I am talking about. If you set your dog on me, I would look you up, too, but I wouldn't just glare through a window. The BF, his point made, left it at that.

This isn't the work of chimps or gorillas. If anything, they show more brains than us.

They think we are stupid. How else to explain thier actions? They aren't shy. They do not fear us physically. They don't want our stuff.

They simply have no use for us. We are an annoyance to them, treated gently like an idiot child.

What do humans look like to them? We pride ourselves claiming we ran off all intruders, using our superior reasoning abilities. This is how far science has come, we still shake our spears and cry fircely into the unknown! In fact, I put it to you, that we didn't do any such thing. What we actually evolved was babes. How else to explain why evolution would make us smaller and hairless in relation to the competition? Our innovation was blondes with superb bodies. All the rest of the things we have done is compensating. This also addresses our utterly bizarre behaviour regaurding our females, that survives into the modern era. Burkhas, for example, or female circumsision cannot be attributed to anything practical.

If you do not understand where this places us on the importance scale, visit a peeler bar and see how the bikers treat the dancers. We are the dancers. After you have had your fill of derision, visit a university. Find a scholastic and disagree with him. You will quickly uncover kindergarden behaviour before the learned person dismisses your contribution with disdain and rhetoric. Do you suppose the scholar, once offended will ever seek your council? BFs are the scholars in this analogy.

Instead of asking why not, in regaurd to the question of contact, I suggest the question ought to be Why?

So do you think they are actually better than humans?

[Guest Cervelo]

Wow that covered at lot ground! My 2cents is this.... a gorilla with our brain and we wouldn't be having this discussion or maybe it would go something like this....

[indiefoot]

So do you think they are actually better than humans?

Ask the earth.

BTW, I'm not an environmentalist, I just think questions of better or worse need context that we can't provide. Since they live in cooperation with nature, they must conclude that we hate nature and spend our energy and time trying to overcome it. It might seem like folly to them.

[Guest Twilight Fan]

Wow that covered at lot ground! My 2cents is this.... a gorilla with our brain and we wouldn't be having this discussion or maybe it would go something like this....

That was a great movie, right there. Very emotional. But even so, it was still just a movie. It showed what animals (great apes) could become if they had human-level intelligence. There have been many interesting answers here, but it seems I'm in the minority (on this board) in thinking that humans are superior to animals. I still love animals, but they are not like us in so many ways.

[Guest]

To imagine they are anything other than sophisticated and systematic is absurd! To imagine a bunch of tall chimps evading us for centuries is absurd as well.

Did you ever wonder why the Gorilla Coco, once taught our language, never really had anything to say? She was polite and had decorum. She also had a breast fetish. Her son, unfettered by these considerations never talked at all, until heis Mother's death. Then he said a few things and never spoke again, except to order lunch.

Other intelligences do not regaurd us as godlike. They mostly think we are idiots. Why would a genius group bother with us? Do they think we will stop ruining the landscape if asked? No, they think we are out of control idiots with no thought process.

The only time a human will encounter a BF is when they are sought out for a demonstration. Most sightings are display behaviour.

An anecdote; my cat, who was a large male, when chastised would pretend to yawn and stretch his paw. So, he'd show his teeth and claws and dismiss human input.

Alligators frequently surface when threatened, to show thier size. As with BFs, that is usually enough.

Why do these massive creatures, possessed of enormous strength show such restraint? Mama bears are reputed to simplify a situation by removing the human element. Why don't BFs simply tear the occasional human apart and strew them from the trees? Os steal a baby and consume it on the spot?

Listen to the "911" call. The caller relates how his dog had been killed earlier, before the BF displays himself. This is the kind of thing I am talking about. If you set your dog on me, I would look you up, too, but I wouldn't just glare through a window. The BF, his point made, left it at that.

This isn't the work of chimps or gorillas. If anything, they show more brains than us.

They think we are stupid. How else to explain thier actions? They aren't shy. They do not fear us physically. They don't want our stuff.

They simply have no use for us. We are an annoyance to them, treated gently like an idiot child.

What do humans look like to them? We pride ourselves claiming we ran off all intruders, using our superior reasoning abilities. This is how far science has come, we still shake our spears and cry fircely into the unknown! In fact, I put it to you, that we didn't do any such thing. What we actually evolved was babes. How else to explain why evolution would make us smaller and hairless in relation to the competition? Our innovation was blondes with superb bodies. All the rest of the things we have done is compensating. This also addresses our utterly bizarre behaviour regaurding our females, that survives into the modern era. Burkhas, for example, or female circumsision cannot be attributed to anything practical.

If you do not understand where this places us on the importance scale, visit a peeler bar and see how the bikers treat the dancers. We are the dancers. After you have had your fill of derision, visit a university. Find a scholastic and disagree with him. You will quickly uncover kindergarden behaviour before the learned person dismisses your contribution with disdain and rhetoric. Do you suppose the scholar, once offended will ever seek your council? BFs are the scholars in this analogy.

Instead of asking why not, in regaurd to the question of contact, I suggest the question ought to be Why?

I agree with your sentiments except that I dont think other animals are as judgemental as humans and so I dont think they would actually concern themselves with whether we are "idiots" or not. Im sure that we do come across as extremely dangerous due to our sort of social autism and fear of nature (fear of our own nature too). We destroy that which gives us life and as we step further and further from understanding our part in all nature our keen senses go to a blur. We no longer hear what other creatures are saying and somehow construe this to mean they have no language skills. We no longer see the vast possibilities of life and so we dont see a great deal. I do think that there are different forms of conciousness and so use of the intellect or language have differences but at the same time no conciousness is greater or less than another - all are infinite in nature, and all are ultimately connected.

If I were a yowie I would know to stay away from the humans as much as possible, not because I would be judgemental of their intellect (understanding the integrity and value of all conciousness) but because at present they seem to be a little psychologically unwell and go about destroying their home, their planet. I would also have use of my intuitive and physical senses to such an extent I would be able to sense their instruments of observation, sense their intent.

Yowies, BF Sasquatch etc are not less, not more but possibly have a similar form of consciousness to humans reflected in their physical form. Form is a way of expressing conciousness. It seems to me they chose quite clearly to experience nature very vitally while humans chose the path of wondering what it would be like to step away from nature. Humans have gotten lost and a path back would be to respect all life, learn from all about us, recognise the brilliance of each being and trust nature again. Yowies or BF may present for us a path of being with nature once more.

I am fully amazed there are still humans who think they are more intelligent than other creatures, and that human language is proof of that. Human language has been developed as we started to block out our deeper means of communication. There are whole languages just in a sound, which we used to know, but this is now being lost to our current civilisation. Why be so arrogant as to think that just because you dont understand what another animal says - they are the dumb ones?

[Guest Cervelo]

TF,

Not at all in my book! If they are all some think they are, I would guess we would have been wiped out a long time ago. The gentle giant/ infrasound/cloaking/paranormal stuff is fantasy/wishful thinking IMO. They are afraid of us for the same reason most animals are. We are very dangerous and smart. Are we doing the right thing/good stewards, highly unlikely but that's another topic....

Could they be something in-between, sure they could. But first things first! Prove they are real!