How Could An Animal As Big As Bf....so Easily Avoid Being Seen / Captured?

[Guest]

Nobody else got evidence for me, yet I was still able to believe until I got my own proof.

Many people have done the same.

Try getting your own. It's a lot more fun that way.

Sasfooty,

Any ideas as to how we may find the success you have enjoyed? Is there any particular method? Is it just luck? If it is primarily paranormal, would a skeptic have any success or must the skeptic believe first?

Also, have you ever found a photo or drawing of a sasquatch that matches what you have seen? I'm really curious about your sightings and what you are witnessing.

[Sasfooty]

Sasfooty,

Any ideas as to how we may find the success you have enjoyed?

Do you live in town or in the country? Is it an area that has had reported sightings?

[southernyahoo]

One answer could be the small number of sasquatch. Dr. Meldrum has stated that only about 1000 thousand individual sasquatch inhabit the country. He also thinks that, unlike gorillas, sasquatch are not social animals with extended and adopted families. He thinks sasquatch are nomadic, with individual sasquatch territorial movement approaching thousand of square miles. I don't know if the anthropologist supports such ideas with any evidence, or if such ideas are advanced to mask the fact that sasquatch are not a verified species.

Dr. Meldrum believes sasquatch are apes. Others believe sasquatch are what Native Americans have said they are: human beings. If a small number of extremely large, hairy native Americans live in the vast Pacific Northwest, we might have a better reason for the absence of capture and definitive proof.

Unfortunately for both possible solutions noted above, the sasquatch mongering of the entertainment media has been such a success that now we seem to have a full blown cultural virus and people are claiming to see the Hairy Giant everywhere, even Maryland. This cultural development has almost never been overtly criticised by the advocate community, professional or lay. So, serious consideration of the phenomena must contend with the implacable implausibility of an alleged animal seen by thousands in almost every state, yet never, ever meaningfully verified. Lesmore, yours is the $64000 Question that goes to the very heart of the Bigfoot issue.

Unfortunately for Dr. Meldrum and for any other Skeptic or Proponent, reason and belief yeilds to the eventual proof that dictates a different reality regarding population and distribution.

Being very conservative and proposing very low numbers residing in vast teritories limited to the pacific northwest to explain a lack of proof and gain acceptance as a plausable theory just doesn't work for me.

[bipedalist]

Ditto

[Guest]

Unfortunately for Dr. Meldrum and for any other Skeptic or Proponent, reason and belief yeilds to the eventual proof that dictates a different reality regarding population and distribution.

Being very conservative and proposing very low numbers residing in vast teritories limited to the pacific northwest to explain a lack of proof and gain acceptance as a plausable theory just doesn't work for me.

Given the fact you are looking for sasquatch in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Arkansas, I understand why you would resist the idea the Great American Ape is a only a pacific northwest phenomena.

Do you have a guess as to how many bipedal apes live in Texas or Oklahoma? I live in Texas, have traveled through east Texas on many occasions, as well as south eastern Oklahoma..

Are you convinced bipedal apes are part of the natural fauna of these states? If so, Lesmore's initial post should be troubling. No?

[southernyahoo]

Given the fact you are looking for sasquatch in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Arkansas, I understand why you would resist the idea the Great American Ape is a only a pacific northwest phenomena.

Do you have a guess as to how many bipedal apes live in Texas or Oklahoma? I live in Texas, have traveled through east Texas on many occasions, as well as south eastern Oklahoma..

Are you convinced bipedal apes are part of the natural fauna of these states? If so, Lesmore's initial post should be troubling. No?

Why would Lesmores post trouble me? The absence of proof is universal.

I've talked to a number of witnesses in Texas , Oklahoma and Louisiana. I've read their conviction and watched their actions towards finding evedence to validate their experiences. I've found and heard enough evidence that I should know, but haven't seen it myself, so my confidence level is elevated that they are here in Texas and neigboring states.

A guess is a guess is a guess. My guess is higher than most. Thats all it will be without evidence that shows the actual distribution. Guessing doesn't bother me, but it is no substituion for facts. I won't be guessing if and when I tell you where they do live.

[Guest ajciani]

I also do not like touting a low population as a reason for the lack of evidence.

If one considers the number of investigated, reasonably credible reports per year, and includes the evasiveness of the animal, there may easily be 50,000 of them living in the US. I think about 3,000 could live in Illinois alone, and remain reasonably well hidden.

[Guest Lesmore]

I also do not like touting a low population as a reason for the lack of evidence.

If one considers the number of investigated, reasonably credible reports per year, and includes the evasiveness of the animal, there may easily be 50,000 of them living in the US. I think about 3,000 could live in Illinois alone, and remain reasonably well hidden.

That's an awful lot. Quite a big number too.

[southernyahoo]

That's an awful lot. Quite a big number too.

Yes, Thats why you won't see some of us posting about a dwindling population of squatches when they are apparently so distributed and making use of territory that would starve other predators of similar size without becoming a complete nuisance.

[gigantor]

If one considers the number of investigated, reasonably credible reports per year, and includes the evasiveness of the animal, there may easily be 50,000 of them living in the US. I think about 3,000 could live in Illinois alone, and remain reasonably well hidden.

Show the math please.

What do you consider a "credible report"?

[Guest]

Do you live in town or in the country? Is it an area that has had reported sightings?

Sorry for late reply. I live in a big city in Texas, apparently only an hour or two drive east or north to woodlands populated with sasquatch.

[Guest]

Why would Lesmores post trouble me? The absence of proof is universal.

I've talked to a number of witnesses in Texas , Oklahoma and Louisiana. I've read their conviction and watched their actions towards finding evedence to validate their experiences. I've found and heard enough evidence that I should know, but haven't seen it myself, so my confidence level is elevated that they are here in Texas and neigboring states.

A guess is a guess is a guess. My guess is higher than most. Thats all it will be without evidence that shows the actual distribution. Guessing doesn't bother me, but it is no substituion for facts. I won't be guessing if and when I tell you where they do live.

I would think Lesmore's post question would be especially pertinent since east Texas and southeastern Oklahoma are not especially dense and not as vast as the pacific northwest and have much more population density than, say, British Columbia.

Do you have any problem with sighting reports from, say, the outskirts of San Antonio or open land in central Oklahoma, west of OK City? Is your major criteria for accepting Bigfoot reports the apparent conviction of witnesses, as well as sounds and other circumstantial evidence?

Where I'm aiming at here: Remember a couple of years ago in Oklahoma it was reported that a casino video camera recorded a seven foot tall sasquatch apparently scrounging around a grease pit at night. The video was never released to the public. But in considering this report, would you ever consider the obvious implausibility of the account on its face, given the open farmland and lack of deep forest to conceal such a large animal for any length of time?

[southernyahoo]

I would think Lesmore's post question would be especially pertinent since east Texas and southeastern Oklahoma are not especially dense and not as vast as the pacific northwest and have much more population density than, say, British Columbia.

Higher human population density + presence of sasquatch = multiple sightings. You wouldn't expect anything else.

Do you have any problem with sighting reports from, say, the outskirts of San Antonio or open land in central Oklahoma, west of OK City? Is your major criteria for accepting Bigfoot reports the apparent conviction of witnesses, as well as sounds and other circumstantial evidence?

When I can talk to the witness in person and on site where the sighting occured, I'll know if they are full of it. Good evidence to go with it would be great but not common.

Where I'm aiming at here: Remember a couple of years ago in Oklahoma it was reported that a casino video camera recorded a seven foot tall sasquatch apparently scrounging around a grease pit at night. The video was never released to the public. But in considering this report, would you ever consider the obvious implausibility of the account on its face, given the open farmland and lack of deep forest to conceal such a large animal for any length of time?

Sometimes perception of what is plausable needs to be challenged, but sure the plausability is considered, multiple witnesses from that area, plus the tracks found, the casino video, and later come to find out about photos and hairs found, the fact that the TBRC, BFRO, MABRC, NABS and multiple independent researchers had been there investigating all generally gets your interest up.

What would you say is plausable if proof comes from there?

[Sasfooty]

Sasfooty,

Any ideas as to how we may find the success you have enjoyed? Is there any particular method? Is it just luck? If it is primarily paranormal, would a skeptic have any success or must the skeptic believe first?

Sorry for late reply. I live in a big city in Texas, apparently only an hour or two drive east or north to woodlands populated with sasquatch.

I am going to assume that you live in or near Dallas, & if so you aren't too far from prime BF habitat. It won't be as easy as sitting on your back porch & waiting for them to drop by, but if you want to invest the time & effort, you should be able to find a group, living not too far away. The Trinity River would be a good place to start looking.

Check your PMs.

I found this list of reports on the TBRC website here. Seems like East Texas is crawling with them.

[Sunflower]

The area around the casino is not as wooded as some would think but there are a many spots in the vicinity of Concho, where it's quite thick with woods. I used to live not far from Concho and have gone on midnight bike rides with hubby on Highway 81. We avoided the interstate as much as we could, we referred to it as "Death by Semi." Also, we did lots of riding up and down the section lines, just to see what there was to see.

And I will tell this, if a herd of elephants went through the area at nite, it's very possible that they would not be seen. So I find it very, very possible that this happened and agree with the tribe not to expose the video.

Jerrywayne, try what Sasfooty suggested, go out and get your own experiences, it might surprise you. Keep an open mind, because an open mind is a terrible thing to waste. Good luck and let us know. There is a lot of info here on the forum as different people use different tactics. Whatever works for you is what you will become comfortable with and don't give up after one or two attempts.