Bigfoot myth or monster?

[xspider1]

35 minutes ago, norseman said:

Not when it comes to military tech watching 1000s of miles of borders and coast lines. It absolutely does not explain it.

 

They know it’s there. They have to know it’s there. But they don’t want us to know it’s there.

 

Did Scientific classification of the Mountain Gorilla, finally, in 1902 cause World panic?  Did millions of World Government employees conspire effectively to keep Mountain Gorillas a secret since the beginning of recorded history, up until 1902?  Of course not.  They were just an extraordinary discovery that required definitive proof before most people who had never seen one would 'believe'.  As Backdoc has indicated (several times I think) there is no massive, coordinated conspiracy required for Bigfoot to exist and not yet be classified. 

 

"A very large alpha predator that is intelligent living in remote dense mountainous terrain poses a significant threat."  How do you know they are an Alpha predator?  How do you know they are intelligent?  How do you know they are a threat?   just wondering  

 

I am more scared of Black Widow spiders than Bigfoot although, they are very non-aggressive and I hope I never need to kill one.  Unless there is no other viable option, Bigfoot, Black Widows and many other creatures are just too magnificent to kill, in my opinion.  

Edited 13 hours ago by xspider1

[xspider1]

35 minutes ago, norseman said:

No. Bigfoot would fall into either the extant or extinct category.

 

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.

[Huntster]

23 hours ago, norseman said:

.........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.........

 

This. The federal government have agencies full of scientists, and their work and publications are government property. It may or may not be published. So if it isn't published, is it still Science? Is it still truth?

 

Quote

.........if your work happens to pertain with above top secret research? We know who the real boss is...........

 

We've been told that even the POTUS has been kept in the dark over many issues over the "need to know" doctrine. But if the POTUS learns that aliens exist, and he/she announces it, does it make it so? If not, why not? Who then looks into the POTUS's claim and verifies it? 

 

Somebody has to be the final voice of discovery. Who is that, and how did he/she get that power?

 

Quote

.........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.

 

Beating Uncle Sam to an alien crash site is pretty much beyond the capability of Joe Sixpack, but beating authorities of all levels to a fresh sasquatch habitation area? Very, very possible...........

[Huntster]

10 hours ago, xspider1 said:

Did Scientific classification of the Mountain Gorilla, finally, in 1902 cause World panic?...........

 

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.

[norseman]

11 hours ago, xspider1 said:

 

Did Scientific classification of the Mountain Gorilla, finally, in 1902 cause World panic?  Did millions of World Government employees conspire effectively to keep Mountain Gorillas a secret since the beginning of recorded history, up until 1902?  Of course not.  They were just an extraordinary discovery that required definitive proof before most people who had never seen one would 'believe'.  As Backdoc has indicated (several times I think) there is no massive, coordinated conspiracy required for Bigfoot to exist and not yet be classified. 

 

"A very large alpha predator that is intelligent living in remote dense mountainous terrain poses a significant threat."  How do you know they are an Alpha predator?  How do you know they are intelligent?  How do you know they are a threat?   just wondering  

 

I am more scared of Black Widow spiders than Bigfoot although, they are very non-aggressive and I hope I never need to kill one.  Unless there is no other viable option, Bigfoot, Black Widows and many other creatures are just too magnificent to kill, in my opinion.  

Gorillas don't eat meat and they don’t run down prey and break its neck.

 

They live in tropical Africa in lush jungles.

 

A Bigfoot is bipedal. A Bigfoot lives in mountainous regions of North America. It cannot sit around all day long 365 days a year eating leaves. Its tracking game in snow. Like we would…..

 

If you are more afraid of black widow spiders? So be it. But I bet if you were in the cabin at Ape Canyon? You would be quite scared.

 

Magnificent or non magnificent has nothing to do with scientific classification of biology. We don't just kill and classify ugly animals.🧐

[xspider1]

^ That is a good point, thank-you, Huntster.  I could only add that an ideology struggle over Darwinism doesn't make much, if any, sense to me.  Are there actually opinions with any credibility that deny random variations in organisms?  And, if so, is there any credible notion that favorable (along with unfavorable) variations are passed down to offspring?  That seems like a no-brainer to me.  And, I think (hope) that the favorable variations are prevailing, overall.  Although, these days, it often seems like evolution is going backwards..  

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

This. The federal government have agencies full of scientists, and their work and publications are government property. It may or may not be published. So if it isn't published, is it still Science? Is it still truth?

 

 

We've been told that even the POTUS has been kept in the dark over many issues over the "need to know" doctrine. But if the POTUS learns that aliens exist, and he/she announces it, does it make it so? If not, why not? Who then looks into the POTUS's claim and verifies it? 

 

Somebody has to be the final voice of discovery. Who is that, and how did he/she get that power?

 

 

Beating Uncle Sam to an alien crash site is pretty much beyond the capability of Joe Sixpack, but beating authorities of all levels to a fresh sasquatch habitation area? Very, very possible...........

The collective body of scientists is the final voice. In a peer reviewed journal. This is why Melba Ketchum got the smack down. She circumvented the whole process and her work was garbage.

 

But the Government is also the supreme judge because it controls the flow of information. Science cannot be done correctly without testable and repeatable results for the whole body to examine.

 

This doesn’t happen in compartmentalized cells each not knowing the results of the other. And then compound that globally among adversaries.

 

 

[xspider1]

25 minutes ago, norseman said:

Gorillas don't eat meat and they don’t run down prey and break its neck.

 

They live in tropical Africa in lush jungles.

 

A Bigfoot is bipedal. A Bigfoot lives in mountainous regions of North America. It cannot sit around all day long 365 days a year eating leaves. Its tracking game in snow. Like we would…..

 

If you are more afraid of black widow spiders? So be it. But I bet if you were in the cabin at Ape Canyon? You would be quite scared.

 

Magnificent or non magnificent has nothing to do with scientific classification of biology. We don't just kill and classify ugly animals.🧐

 

So, you have proof that Bigfoot run down prey and break their necks?  I guess I should be watching more youtube videos.  If Bigfoot are such an aggressive threat to humans then it seems like we would have a body already.  Instead, they seem to avoid us like the plague.  

 

I was not talking about classifying magnificent animals, I was talking about the notion that the only way to classify one was to kill a male and a female. 

 

You can bet all you want, but you don't know me.  There are many far more dangerous places than Ape Canyon, WA.

Edited 1 hour ago by xspider1

[Huntster]

23 minutes ago, xspider1 said:

........... an ideology struggle over Darwinism doesn't make much, if any, sense to me...........

 

That might be because you were born and educated some 100+ years after its birth. There has been lots of time for it to evolve itself. An example would be the question about why there are still crocodiles, which have existed without any evolving, while there are no Plesiadapiforms anymore (or for a long, long, long time). 

 

Darwin's two major publications, Origin of Species (1859) and The Descent of Man (1871) came precisely during the discovery era of gorillas, and there was plenty of social, religious, and scientific hubbub during the period between Thomas Savage delivering a gorilla scull to the Boston Society of Natural History in 1847 and Paul duChaillu's return from Africa with a dead gorilla carcass in 1859.

[Backdoc]

15 hours ago, xspider1 said:

 

That is a prevailing opinion among some (a majority?) here.  I am not a Taxonomist, but I take exception to that 'rule'.  That is because our understanding of the natural world changes over time, as even Science changes and advances, and because Bigfoot are, obviously, an extraordinary case study.  Why in the world would a body on a slab be better, overall, than a live Specimen that could be examined and then potentially released back into the 'wild', perhaps relatively unharmed?  That is mostly a rhetorical question.  My mind is not likely to be changed regarding this; I just want more people to consider the fact that we do have options.

 

 

That all makes sense to me.  

 

I just think of it this way:  When it comes to Bigfoot What one piece of evidence would be so convincing nearly every scientist in world would accept it?

 

The answer is obvious. It is not a perfect new high def. Bigfoot video. It is not some DNA evidence.  It is not a footprint. 

 

There is only one answer:  A BODY.  That body could be a body on a slab or a body secure in a cage/ trap.  

 

 

I might require less.  But a Body would remove all doubt to 99.9999999999999% of the world. 

 

Take the iceman.  Until we had him some of that what thought of recent ancient man was educated guesswork.  Now they have a body.  It might generate more Q's but no one would say there is no recent ancient man to begin with esp now.  

 

 

 

 

[Huntster]

28 minutes ago, norseman said:

The collective body of scientists is the final voice. In a peer reviewed journal.............

 

Represented by a governing body like, for example, the American Medical Association and National Institute of Health within the United States governs medical science? Or is it a journalist, like he/they who publishes (ore refuses to publish) journals?

 

Quote

.........But the Government is also the supreme judge because it controls the flow of information...........

 

I will suggest that government's power over Science is more about their control of money, which Science is every bit as interested in as everybody else.

[Huntster]

30 minutes ago, xspider1 said:

........I guess I should be watching more youtube videos...........

 

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)

[Backdoc]

13 hours ago, norseman said:

Not when it comes to military tech watching 1000s of miles of borders and coast lines. It absolutely does not explain it.

 

This is a very good point.  We assume the 1,000 of miles of border are so secured they could see easily anything from a lost dog to bigfoot (and clearly identify it).  Is that assumption correct?  Assuming that is the case, it's a strong point.  Are all areas of the northern border protected equally?   I don't know how good the tech is and if that tech is universally that good along the entire border.  Could good tech still so limited it looks like a blob on a scan resembling a hunter in the woods?   I don't know

 

 

 

 

Are there enough eyes to see?  How good are those eyes?  Finally, if Bigfoot is near extinct there are few encounter opportunities.  Patty probably lived her entire life in Bluff Creek and the surrounding area.  Unless she felt the need to travel, she may have never traveled more than X miles from home here entire life.  If so, that might be she never was near the Canadian border.   Granted that only might account for one specimin- Patty. 

 

 

Security cam from a store robbery:

 

 

 

Cheap cell phone:

 

 

 

 

 

 

13 hours ago, norseman said:

They know it’s there. They have to know it’s there. But they don’t want us to know it’s there.

 

 

Could be. 

 

For an event to be covered up the event first has to occur in the first place.   Then, assuming it does, there has to be a motivation for those coving up to cover up.

 

I can dream up scenarios for or against this idea.  I will keep an open mind for now. 

 

 

[Huntster]

33 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

........ When it comes to Bigfoot What one piece of evidence would be so convincing nearly every scientist in world would accept it?

 

The answer is obvious...........

 

What isn't so obvious to me is this:

 

Why let their incalcitrant demands dictate my beliefs and activities? Why must I drag them kicking and screaming into what I believe is true? Why not let them rest smugly in their offices and classrooms in proud denial? 

 

I'm not responsible to update biology or anthropology. My hope is simply to see a sasquatch in the wild before I die (which is becoming pretty unlikely to occur now).

[Backdoc]

30 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

What isn't so obvious to me is this:

 

Why let their incalcitrant demands dictate my beliefs and activities? Why must I drag them kicking and screaming into what I believe is true? Why not let them rest smugly in their offices and classrooms in proud denial? 

 

I'm not responsible to update biology or anthropology. My hope is simply to see a sasquatch in the wild before I die (which is becoming pretty unlikely to occur now).

 

 

You and I and most of the world don't get up every day of our lives and say, "Gee what do I have to do today to convince skeptics and the science community as a whole Bigfoot exists"

 

But, if for any reason we had a body and especially a capture live specimen that would convince the most convinced skeptic, and it would quickly shift a new truth to the science world.  

 

One day science said the panda didn't exist.  Sometime later, you can't find a single credible science who would say otherwise.  One body and a little time solved the issue.  That is all I am saying. 

 

 

We all have different standards to say, "I'm convinced"

 

For some they require little and others a lot.  Some I might say require too much. A body would convince all groups.

 

The weird thing to me is AI poisoning the well.  Back in the 1960's the PGF froze the encounter to a binary choice.  That is, it is either a real creature OR a man in a suit.   Now today if a great PGF like encounter occurred you might have another choice.  Is it a high tech AI hoax made so well it will convince most people.

 

 

 

And to think THAT was the 1990s.

 

 

Edited just now by Backdoc