Why are there no bigfoot fossils found in the USA?

[MIB]

1 hour ago, georgerm said:

4. Or maybe Bigfoot fossils have been discovered and the Smithsonian Museum is not making this public information. Why would the Smithson Museum want to hide the fact that Bigfoot fossils are in fact in their collections? 

 

There's an assumption hiding here .. that they know what they have.    My understanding is they are wildly, **wildly** understaffed so far as people trained to properly handle and classify incoming "stuff".    There's a backlog of "stuff" on shelves in boxes that will take them decades to get through and by then, an even bigger stack will have accumulated.    If you want results, rather than blame the Smithsonian, consider lobbying for additional funding for trained staff.

[Backdoc]

Why can't they find fossils?   

 

A needle is always a needle.  The size of the haystack helps determine the odds of finding the needle in that haystack.

 

 

 

vs...

 

 

I would guess that more than anything determines finding such fossils.  There may also be an expiration date where the bones might degrade at some point after Bigfoot or any animals dies.    

 

 

[TD-40]

Bigfoot bury their dead. I have heard several witness accounts of this, and their funerals are really large events.

[georgerm]

On 12/1/2025 at 12:43 PM, TD-40 said:

Bigfoot bury their dead. I have heard several witness accounts of this, and their funerals are really large events.

Thanks for your comments. I wonder where you found this information about bigfoot attending funerals? Especially, since Bigfoot does not want to be noticed and having a large funeral would attract lots of attention since it's hard to find a place that is remote enough to hide the event. I wonder if somebody observed such an event taking place? If this funeral took place, then it is most likely going to occur at nighttime and of course in a very remote place. 

[georgerm]

american mammal fossils - Search Well bigfoots are found in practically every state within the United States and it's amazing that we have found no Bigfoot fossils. 

 

"In 1916, the Department of Paleontology began a long association with Childs Frick, the son of steel magnate Henry Clay Frick and a longtime American Museum trustee. Using his personal fortune to employ a small army of collectors and researchers including Morris Skinner, Theodore Galusha and Beryl Taylor, Frick accumulated a collection of over 200,000 fossil mammals, which formed the basis of a series of monographic studies on mammal evolution. The collection was donated to the Museum after Frick's death in 1965. The financial assets of the Childs Frick Corporation, which were donated to the Museum along with Frick's fossil collections in 1968, assisted in the construction of a new, 10-story collection and office building, which opened in 1973. "

 

Why no bigfoot fossils? Probably lots of animal fossils.

[georgerm]

On 12/1/2025 at 9:28 AM, MIB said:

 

There's an assumption hiding here .. that they know what they have.    My understanding is they are wildly, **wildly** understaffed so far as people trained to properly handle and classify incoming "stuff".    There's a backlog of "stuff" on shelves in boxes that will take them decades to get through and by then, an even bigger stack will have accumulated.    If you want results, rather than blame the Smithsonian, consider lobbying for additional funding for trained staff.

Are they unobservant and don't question the fossils of giants that should stand out in their collections. The needle in the haystack is huge and hard to miss. 

[MIB]

1 hour ago, georgerm said:

Are they unobservant and don't question the fossils of giants that should stand out in their collections. The needle in the haystack is huge and hard to miss. 

 

No.   Once the boxes are opened the first time that may be true.    From what I'm told, though, they're not opened, not categorized: they are warehoused, no more.   The staff are that overwhelmed by sheer volume.   What you're grasping for is a nice story but it is a false story.   

[norseman]

4 hours ago, georgerm said:

Are they unobservant and don't question the fossils of giants that should stand out in their collections. The needle in the haystack is huge and hard to miss. 

They aren’t unobservant at all.

 

 

[norseman]

 

[norseman]

How long was CLOVIS FIRST jammed down our throats? How many scientists careers were destroyed for simply reporting the truth? And it wasn’t just a little wrong…. It was vastly grossly WRONG.

 

So if science suppressed vastly older cultures found farther south than Berengia 13000 years ago? For 75 years?  What else are they suppressing?

 

They concocted a “narrative” and then they vehemently defended that narrative. This wasn’t science. This was a cult. And people shouldn’t just blindly trust science. It should be questioned repeatedly. And be forced to reconsider the evidence often and adjust hypotheses accordingly.

 

Heckle fish WF video talks about the Egyptian experts loosing their poo about older cultures in Turkey recently found. Why does science do this? 
 

And they of course throw shade on bipedal cryptids the world over. Despite more findings that our family tree was more bushy and more recently extant than previously thought. Why?

 

 

[georgerm]

6 hours ago, norseman said:

How long was CLOVIS FIRST jammed down our throats? How many scientists careers were destroyed for simply reporting the truth? And it wasn’t just a little wrong…. It was vastly grossly WRONG.

 

So if science suppressed vastly older cultures found farther south than Berengia 13000 years ago? For 75 years?  What else are they suppressing?

 

They concocted a “narrative” and then they vehemently defended that narrative. This wasn’t science. This was a cult. And people shouldn’t just blindly trust science. It should be questioned repeatedly. And be forced to reconsider the evidence often and adjust hypotheses accordingly.

 

Heckle fish WF video talks about the Egyptian experts loosing their poo about older cultures in Turkey recently found. Why does science do this? 
 

And they of course throw shade on bipedal cryptids the world over. Despite more findings that our family tree was more bushy and more recently extant than previously thought. Why?

 

 

 

 

"How long was CLOVIS FIRST jammed down our throats? How many scientists careers were destroyed for simply reporting the truth? And it wasn’t just a little wrong…. It was vastly grossly WRONG," Norseman. 

 

"It's been a while since I thought about the Clovis Points and the Clovis society so I had to brush up on the topic and here is what I found," georgerm.

 

The Clovis culture is an archaeological culture from the Paleoindian period of North America, spanning around 13,050 to 12,750 years Before Present (BP).^[1] The type site is Blackwater Draw locality No. 1 near Clovis, New Mexico, where stone tools were found alongside the remains of Columbian mammoths in 1929.^[2] Clovis sites have been found across North America.^[1] The most distinctive part of the Clovis culture toolkit are Clovis points,^[3] which are projectile points with a fluted, lanceolate shape.

 

Norse, what is your viewpoint on the Clovis Society?

[norseman]

5 hours ago, georgerm said:

 

 

"How long was CLOVIS FIRST jammed down our throats? How many scientists careers were destroyed for simply reporting the truth? And it wasn’t just a little wrong…. It was vastly grossly WRONG," Norseman. 

 

"It's been a while since I thought about the Clovis Points and the Clovis society so I had to brush up on the topic and here is what I found," georgerm.

 

The Clovis culture is an archaeological culture from the Paleoindian period of North America, spanning around 13,050 to 12,750 years Before Present (BP).^[1] The type site is Blackwater Draw locality No. 1 near Clovis, New Mexico, where stone tools were found alongside the remains of Columbian mammoths in 1929.^[2] Clovis sites have been found across North America.^[1] The most distinctive part of the Clovis culture toolkit are Clovis points,^[3] which are projectile points with a fluted, lanceolate shape.

 

Norse, what is your viewpoint on the Clovis Society?

My viewpoint is that they are NOT the first Homo Sapiens to enter the Americas. And its not even close.

 

They do do beautiful fluting and stone tool work.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that they could have been here for 100,000 years before they invented Clovis technology. 
 

Science seems to think they brought the new technology with them from Asia. Which may or may not be true.

 

They do this with Europeans as well. Like for example the Corded Ware culture. Its never clear exactly whom these people were and what their relationship is to modern humans living in the area.

[georgerm]

15 hours ago, norseman said:

My viewpoint is that they are NOT the first Homo Sapiens to enter the Americas. And its not even close.

 

"THE CLOVIS PEOPLE LIVED ABOUT 13,000 YEARS AGO. WERE THEY NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE AMERICANS? WHAT WAS BIGFOOT DOING AT THE TIME AS SPECULATION?" GEORGERM

 

15 hours ago, norseman said:

GEORGERM WILL REPLY IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.

They do do beautiful fluting and stone tool work.

ARE THOSE FOR THE STOUT SPEAR POINTS?

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that they could have been here for 100,000 years before they invented Clovis technology. 

NOW THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING?   WHEN DID NEANDERTHALS DIE OUT?
 

Science seems to think they brought the new technology with them from Asia. Which may or may not be true.

FOLLOWS THE HISTORY THEORY OF HOW ASIANS MIGTATED TO NORTH AMERICA AND EVOLVED INTO PROMINENT NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES. DID SOME COME UP FROM SOUTH AMERICA?

 

They do this with Europeans as well. Like for example the Corded Ware culture. Its never clear exactly whom these people were and what their relationship is to modern humans living in the area. DO YOU HAVE A NARRITIVE ON THE CORDED WARE CULTURE?

 

My viewpoint is that they are NOT the first Homo Sapiens to enter the Americas. And its not even close. HOW DID BIGFOOT FIT INTO THIS HISTORY?

 

"THE CLOVIS PEOPLE LIVED ABOUT 13,000 YEARS AGO. WERE THEY NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE AMERICANS? WHAT WAS BIGFOOT DOING AT THE TIME AS SPECULATION?" GEORGERM

 

[MIB]

The first Native Americans did not bring Clovis technology with them.    We know that there were settlements like Rimrock Draw cave in Oregon that predate Clovis by a good margin.    I know a photographer from the dig.   As of now they have solid dates to 18500 BP and there is a smattering of deeper material that hasn't been dated yet.   The fossilized trackway at White Sands, NM goes back to about 23,000 BP.   There are other sites being excavated that may prove older than either.    Nothing, though, in the way of settlement residuals that exceed 30K years and certainly nothing matching the proposed / purported mammoth bones said by some to be human-affected dated to 130K years.

 

For the moment, it looks like Clovis did not derive from Solutrean technology from Europe as proposed, it really was near-parallel development.     If Clovis tech were descended from Solutrean tech, we have another problem because there is no DNA in any existent Native American population dating from the same rough time, none.   This means that somehow the Asian-descended "Native" tribes would have had to have understood and adopted the Solutrean technology yet killed every single European -sourced person so that there is ZERO DNA passed along.   

 

If Clovis technology was imported, it was into a continent already peopled by those using other technologies.    Possible.   Also possible it was derived in place .. that improbable but not impossible parallel evolution idea.

 

South America is a different puzzle.    One piece interesting to me is the yam / sweet potato.   Apparently it is indigenous to the south pacific islands.   I is maybe reasonable that some could have washed up on South America and taken root, but if so, why do the south American natives use exactly the same word as the south pacific islanders for it?   This points to earlier contact than we currently think possible.   We could ask why the Olmec heads' features appear sub Saharan African.   Coincidence of artistry or .. familiarity with people from continents that shouldn't theoretically have been able to contact each other.  

 

We have to be a bit cautious about timelines though.   A friend years back was sure that South American and African people migrated back and forth overland before the mid Atlantic Ridge took over.   Hah hah, missed by a couple hundred million years.   Oops.

[Catmandoo]

37 minutes ago, MIB said:

South America is a different puzzle.    One piece interesting to me is the yam / sweet potato.   Apparently it is indigenous to the south pacific islands.   

 It would be interesting to follow the global spread of yams.

Thor Heyerdahl's theories were not universally accepted after his voyage. Polynesian navigators easily crossed back and forth. Genetic and linguistic research reveals that Heyerdahl's theories don't work. The modern version of Heyerdahl's voyage makes for a nice movie ( except for the parrot ).

I have not checked on the travels of yams to see if they went east from South America to Africa and Australia. Yams could have traveled west to Australia and islands.