You Are Sasquatch (New Book/theory)

[Guest MikeG]

It is incredibly bold to come out with this theory and book now, when they knew that their premise could be falsified instantly and within weeks by the publication of the Ketchum report. One thing the DNA analyses will certainly do is place the unknown creature in relation to known ones, and if it turns out to be a relative of ours, then we'll know immediately if the authors are right or wrong.

Mike

[Guest wudewasa]

bipedalist,

I respect the accounts that you have related to me, and by no means am I calling you a liar. However, I have to either see the animal to verify it's existence or read about it in a peer reviewed journal describing the species by both DNA and a type specimen.

I don't drink the kool aid until I can read the ingredients and make sure that is deemed safe by the FDA.

[Guest Kronprinz Adam]

The book is now available on Amazon Kindle. In the near future, it will also be available on Nook, and then in a paperback edition.

I was consultant and editor on this book, and although I do not know if the theory is true, I do think that the authors have put forth a plausible case. I'd love to hear others' views.

Interesting!!!! From time to time comes interesting theories (aquatic apes, initial bipedalism, predator neanderthals)...I think we seriously not know what happened exactly what happened during human evolution and if some apemen species survived hidden from us...

Some people have theorized that Bigfoot can be feral humans...I still have some doubts and questions.how does a feral human may evolve so big and strong and develop the "midtarsal break" and become nocturnal and just be devoided of any civilization? How does a feral human may develop stealth techniques which may surpass the skills of a ninja master? (and some say that they move in groups and use the whistles and wood knocks to coordinate their movements).

We are still waiting the DNA results, some people think that finding human DNA on these will be conclusive. But I'm still thinking that samples may simply have some contamination...

Best regards.

K. Adam.

[Guest poignant]

Okay I've just finished the book. I can understand that the writing style has been toned down a couple of notches to cater to a general audience, that's fine. I read enough technical literature at work to fray the living edges off my neurons.

LIKES:

Overall an interesting read and I must say it is a novel (to me at least) and daring postulation that we are the social, diminutive, self-domesticated descendents of sasquatch. I would definitely like to see eventual DNA evidence backing up that claim.

The wolf + dog analogy is useful, but I have read that dogs did not necessarily descend from wolf ancestry, but rather multiple canid-type ancestors. Nonetheless the parallel is understood. Are there more analogues we can think of? Swine? Cats? Pigeons?

The book scratches on the theory of multiple intelligences and that humans were selected for language and social intelligence rather than perceptual and 'strategic' intelligence, resulting in qualities in sasquatch which to us humans, would appear savant-like (I don't think they should've used the word 'autistic' although I know what was meant by it).

Interesting that Gimlin noted that Patty RAN once she got into the woods, opening up her stride from 5 to 10 ft. That's news to me.

Also, regarding the thumbnail collage noted below, the images in yellow circles are not immediately familiar. Anyone able to identify the sources? Chris?

DISLIKES:

I have a list of over a dozen non-sequiturs, typos, and grammatical errors which I will compile and forward to the errata email address (or should I PM you, Chris?).

With reference to the woodpile thermal, I'd also like to point out that a 50% reduction in eye distance does not correlate to a 50% reduction in skull size (715/2268).

Self-aggrandization by one of the other authors was not appreciated though, but I can let it slip as being an ego issue or an insecurity (1412/2268).

The use of '1000x more'. Really? A thousand times? Was it measured? What units were used? (1637/2268). Quit using that phrase, it's juvenile.

Having perused all the FB/FB videos, the middle section of the book was mostly a rehash of said videos.

CONCLUSION:

There are a few more likes and dislikes which are at the cusp of my consciousness but haven't quite thought through (leave it for later discussion I guess).

We need the damned DNA sequenced (or a body).

To the authors, I'm glad that you've acknowledged that this is a work in progress and that you would like to be the authority and curatorial agent on the subject of sasquatch. This is a high bar, so up your game if you want to be taken seriously - correct your typos and narrations.

That being said, I look forward to the second book.

[Guest BFSleuth]

I finished reading the Forward, Intro, and first chapter for free here:

https://kindle.amazon.com/work/you-are-sasquatch-ebook/B008CALN9C/B008CALN9C

I think the concept of humans "self domesticating" is very interesting. Ties in with recent ideas about how the structure and thickness of bones in our feet have changed when we began wearing shoes. Many aspects of the modern human body just don't make much sense when I try to figure out what possible advantage there might be for thin hairless skin, delicate feet, etc. We've adapted to our self made environments: clothing and indoors.

[Guest]

Thanks for the feedback, folks! Much appreciated. And yes, if anyone finds any typos, etc., please PM me with them, so that we can incorporate the corrections.

[Guest thermalman]

I finished reading the Forward, Intro, and first chapter for free here:

https://kindle.amazon.com/work/you-are-sasquatch-ebook/B008CALN9C/B008CALN9C

I think the concept of humans "self domesticating" is very interesting. Ties in with recent ideas about how the structure and thickness of bones in our feet have changed when we began wearing shoes. Many aspects of the modern human body just don't make much sense when I try to figure out what possible advantage there might be for thin hairless skin, delicate feet, etc. We've adapted to our self made environments: clothing and indoors.

But we still have indigenous and aboriginals in the outbacks and deep jungles who still only exist with barefeet. Even kids in our own neighborhoods, who run around barefoot, develop thicker and tougher soles. So I don't know where we would draw the line for domestication?

Edited June 19, 2012 by thermalman

[Guest]

"It is incredibly bold to come out with this theory and book now, when they knew that their premise could be falsified instantly and within weeks by the publication of the Ketchum report."

True enough, the DNA results will likely either refute or support this theory.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Christopher Noel

[Guest]

So far, reading the first (free) chapters, has me interested enough to want to read the rest.. which I will, soon enough. It will give me something to read and ponder, while being off work for a few weeks.

It is just well thought out theory, which is the case with most of this mystery.. besides what has been actually experienced. The giganto ( That BF, is somehow it's descendant ) teeth and jaw bone theory (big yawn) has never done a thing for me, and is grasping for straws, along with the rest. Another good theory to consider, is refreshing ( Thanks ! ). If You (or I) am Sasquatch.. it's no wonder it usually just stares, and walks away.

Edited June 19, 2012 by imonacan

[georgerm]

READ THE BOLD REPLIES BELOW

Thanks, Chris. My Fire doesn't deal well with large posts. I tried to add the remaining description via edit, along with my thoughts on the description, but it appears I ran out of time.

Here are my thoughts based on the description:

Assuming the above description comes from the authors, they seem to me to be confused.

First, assuming life arose once, all extant species are still-surviving representatives of our own earliest ancestors. In other words, all species, both extant and extinct, have a common ancestor. This is Biology 101, Biology for Jocks, hardly an astonishing theory.

THIS IS A STRONG THEORY. AGAIN IT'S A THEORY AND HARD TO PROVE

Second, use of "progenitor" implies that humans are direct descendants of bigfoots. That is something entirely far more specific than stating that our two species share a common ancestor.

HUMM............THIS IS ANOTHER THEORY, AND IT COULD BE SHOWN TO BE FALSE IF THE KETCHUM PROJECT PANS OUT. HUMM......IS THIS WHY I KEEP GOING BACK TO THE WOODS FOR PEACE AND QUIET?

Third, Homo sapiens (i.e., wise man) has plenty of original character, and more wit, wisdom, and genius for survival than any other species that has ever inhabited this planet. By any meaningful biologic measure H. sapiens is far more successful than bigfoot.

THIS REMAINS TO BE SEEN. IF WE RUIN THE PLANET AND SPREAD RADIATION ALL OVER SO NONE OF US SURVIVE THEN WE COME IN LAST BEHING THE SNAILS. WHAT A HUMILIATING DEFEAT!

This book might contain entertaining fantasy, but it appears not to be rooted in biology or any other logical framework. OF COURSE THIS IS A VALID OPINION. WHEN THE TWO DNA PROJECTS COME OUT YOUR OPINION MAY BE VERIFIED........MAY BE.............WAIT AND SEE..........OH THE LONG WAIT

Edited June 19, 2012 by georgerm

[Guest Darrell]

"It is incredibly bold to come out with this theory and book now, when they knew that their premise could be falsified instantly and within weeks by the publication of the Ketchum report."

True enough, the DNA results will likely either refute or support this theory.

Thats assuming the report comes out. As I see it, another book containing content based more on speculation and less on fact. True believers will love it, those who are skeptical wont. Yawn.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Darrell

[JanV]

I noted a reference to a new book from Chris Noel - Sasquatch in Focus 2012 in the book.

Is this a continuation of Impossible Visits?

Chris, can you give us any preview? What is the publican date?

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

I had no idea I was a Sasquatch

[Guest]

Yes, this book incorporates all the material from Impossible Visits, but it's about twice as long, with lots of new content, including much more from habituation sites. I'm holding off on releasing it until the Ketchum Report comes out, so that I can quickly include that topic and the world's preliminary reaction to the DNA data. Given this...expected release date for my book: 2017.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Christopher Noel

[JanV]

Yes, this book incorporates all the material from Impossible Visits, but it's about twice as long, with lots of new content, including much more from habituation sites. I'm holding off on releasing it until the Ketchum Report comes out, so that I can quickly include that topic and the world's preliminary reaction to the DNA data. Given this...expected release date for my book: 2017.

*Sigh* I was hoping for 2012!