Bigfoot Research – Still No Evidence, But Plenty Of Excuses To Explain Why There’S No Evidence

[Guest]

An animal with a huge body mass and a high metabolism wouldn't need a thick fluffy coat to live in the cold of North America. Look at moose, elk, and caribou. Bear have thick coats but they have slower metabolisms. They are built for conservation.

Small bodies animals (fox, rabbit, etc...)have thick fluffy coats to make up for their lack of mass.

[Guest]

An animal with a huge body mass and a high metabolism wouldn't need a thick fluffy coat to live in the cold of North America. Look at moose, elk, and caribou. Bear have thick coats but they have slower metabolisms. They are built for conservation.

Small bodies animals (fox, rabbit, etc...)have thick fluffy coats to make up for their lack of mass.

True..but

"The moose's long and hollow outer hair coat, with its dense soft undercoat, allows it to easily withstand the coldest of temperatures"

RE Caibou>>"The coat has two layers of fur: a dense woolly undercoat and longer-haired overcoat consisting of hollow, air-filled hairs."

Well they did live in frigid conditions, albeit it's a debate about how much they used fire, if they could start it, etc. And I don't think they are associated with clothing.

In my opinion this isn't as much of a stretch as you think it is.

like I said..Home Erectus could not live in frigid conditions without all the things (adaptations) I mentioned. Not gonna happen. BTW..I believe Homo Erectus migrated out of Africa..a creature not *made* for very cold climates.

Edited January 10, 2013 by ronn1

[norseman]

True..but

"The moose's long and hollow outer hair coat, with its dense soft undercoat, allows it to easily withstand the coldest of temperatures"

RE Caibou>>"The coat has two layers of fur: a dense woolly undercoat and longer-haired overcoat consisting of hollow, air-filled hairs."

like I said..Home Erectus could not live in frigid conditions without all the things (adaptations) I mentioned. Not gonna happen. BTW..I believe Homo Erectus migrated out of Africa..a creature not *made* for very cold climates.

I don't agree. It's true what you say that they originated in Africa, but they adapted to new environments in both Asia and Europe.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/archaeology/lower/roebroeks-villa-fire-2011.html

[Guest]

I don't agree. It's true what you say that they originated in Africa, but they adapted to new environments in both Asia and Europe.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/archaeology/lower/roebroeks-villa-fire-2011.html

Yeah..but they still would require all the *stuff* I mentioned if they were in mountains and snow..I think you'd agree. Apparently they did have fire..but would need clothing/pelts to venture out in freezing weather.

[Guest]

@ronn1

Since we're on this thing called BFF, humor me.

What's your view on BF and being able to live/survive/thrive in the colder climates of North America?

Do you believe that BF could not live in these cold climates without tools or fire?

Having a large body mass is not enough?

Curious.

[Guest]

@ronn1

Since we're on this thing called BFF, humor me.

What's your view on BF and being able to live/survive/thrive in the colder climates of North America?

Do you believe that BF could not live in these cold climates without tools or fire?

Having a large body mass is not enough?

Curious.

Well..these primates (should they exist)aren't moose..elk... caribou nor bear. Of course we don't really know what they are do we? The nature of their body coat hasn't been established, but it doesn't appear to be like those other creatures which have dense fur and hollow hairs. I don't think purported body mass ALONE is going to account for this primate thriving in the bitter freezing cold..foraging for food in winter snow (10,000 calories per day) and finding appropriate shelter..especially for the young. The ONLY primates who have demonstrated to be able to survive in snow are those in Japan...they have special fur and also use hot springs. I'm just not convinced of the viability of this creature in severe northern environments.

[norseman]

Yeah..but they still would require all the *stuff* I mentioned if they were in mountains and snow..I think you'd agree. Apparently they did have fire..but would need clothing/pelts to venture out in freezing weather.

Again, they habituated ice age Europe without fire and without clothing. There is not evidence of fire in the beginning of their habitation there. But eventually there was......so this trait was learned AFTER moving to colder climates. But I'm sure they used natural shelter and could have used animal skins as rudimentary clothing. But there is no evidence of clothing either....

But a Squatch could do the same thing........as far as animal skins and natural shelters.

[Guest]

Again, they habituated ice age Europe without fire and without clothing. There is not evidence of fire in the beginning of their habitation there. But eventually there was......so this trait was learned AFTER moving to colder climates. But I'm sure they used natural shelter and could have used animal skins as rudimentary clothing. But there is no evidence of clothing either....

But a Squatch could do the same thing........as far as animal skins and natural shelters.

"But a Squatch could do the same thing...as far as animal skins and natural shelters"

Yeah..COULD..which brings us back to>>>> SPECULATION

Edited January 10, 2013 by ronn1

[norseman]

"But a Squatch could do the same thing...as far as animal skins and natural shelters"

Yeah..COULD..which brings us back to>>>> SPECULATION

Ummm.......your point?

Look, I'm not asking you to cede the point that Sasquatch is real. Without a body? Don't believe it......safest way.

But I would like you to explore the "out of Africa" scenario for our earlier cousins. We are not as fragile as one things and I think this holds true for most apes. It is certainly plausible that a bipedal ape could occupy N. America from the standpoint of calories available and the ability to get out of the weather and survive.........I'm not suggesting it's a wonderful experience.

Another point I would like to make is that this ape could utilize food storage like a squirrel. Gathering in the summer and fall for the leaner times in winter. Leaves, Lichen, Berries, Nuts, etc all could be packed into a cave and kept for a later date.

[Guest]

Ummm.......your point?

Look, I'm not asking you to cede the point that Sasquatch is real. Without a body? Don't believe it......safest way.

But I would like you to explore the "out of Africa" scenario for our earlier cousins. We are not as fragile as one things and I think this holds true for most apes. It is certainly plausible that a bipedal ape could occupy N. America from the standpoint of calories available and the ability to get out of the weather and survive.........I'm not suggesting it's a wonderful experience.

Another point I would like to make is that this ape could utilize food storage like a squirrel. Gathering in the summer and fall for the leaner times in winter. Leaves, Lichen, Berries, Nuts, etc all could be packed into a cave and kept for a later date.

A far as I can determine..the only successful early humans to thrive in colder..mountain terrain is Neander.

They were very robust..had fire and protection of clothing. No evidence that Homo Erectus could thrive in this environment. If you can show me..I'm open. Having said this..this is straying from the topic...can a BF live in a very frigid environment? We don't know, because we don't know what a BF is do we?...but I say NO..it can't, given it's a primate without clothing and fire.

Edited January 10, 2013 by ronn1

[norseman]

A far as I can determine..the only successful early humans to thrive in colder..mountain terrain is Neander.

They were very robust..had fire and protection of clothing. No evidence that Homo Erectus could thrive in this environment. If you can show me..I'm open. Having said this..this is straying from the topic...can a BF live in a very frigid environment? We don't know, because we don't know what a BF is do we?...but I say NO..it can't, given it's a primate without clothing and fire.

I already HAVE shown you that they DID exist in the early Pleistocene without fire or clothes in Europe, and suggest you research it further for your own peace of mind.

And I don't think it's off topic at all, your hypothesis is that a primate cannot live in a cold climate without fire and tool use........i.e. modern humans or neanderthals. That's simply not true.

Another interesting tidbit is that Erectus suffered from tape worms......meaning he didn't have a hearth and sit down to a well cooked meal every night even after evidence of fire use. It's plausible that he was still eating meat in raw form.

[Guest]

I already HAVE shown you that they DID exist in the early Pleistocene without fire or clothes in Europe, and suggest you research it further for your own peace of mind.

And I don't think it's off topic at all, your hypothesis is that a primate cannot live in a cold climate without fire and tool use........i.e. modern humans or neanderthals. That's simply not true.

Another interesting tidbit is that Erectus suffered from tape worms......meaning he didn't have a hearth and sit down to a well cooked meal every night even after evidence of fire use. It's plausible that he was still eating meat in raw form.

Not talking just *cold*..I'm talking ARSES AND ELBOWS IN THE SNOW. Show me..give me a link that shows Homo Erectus

lived in the snow...without the benefit of all the things REQUISITE for doing so...

FIRE..CLOTHING.... SHELTER....

Well they did live in frigid conditions, albeit it's a debate about how much they used fire, if they could start it, etc. And I don't think they are associated with clothing.

In my opinion this isn't as much of a stretch as you think it is.

Here you just answered my question..no clothing? Not gonna happen in snow.

Edited January 10, 2013 by ronn1

[Guest Kerchak]

Once again, an animal with this distrubution....

can't avoid camera traps.

Once again, it likely DOESN'T have that distribution.

[Guest DWA]

All this back and forth about whether primates can live in places where it's cold without technology is doing nothing about:

1. The ones that definitely are;

2. The huge pile of evidence that there's another one we don't know about, which is not affected one bit by speculation otherwise.

Practically every kind of animal one can think of has temperate, tropical and polar representatives that aren't using technology to be there.

Primates are the only exception?

Logic would say not; and look at this. Evidence agrees.

[Drew]

So-called skeptics in this debate would make excellent criminal defense lawyers. You know what the job of the criminal defense lawyer is, dontcha? Right. Don't talk about the evidence the prosecution has, talk about the evidence the prosecution doesn't have. Never go off message. Never. Witness the conviction rate of most prosecutors. It is the only strategy available, most often, but a demonstrably poor one.

Let's play a little game, you, as the prosecutor give 5 pieces of evidence that you are going to use to convince a jury Bigfoot is real. I will show you exactly how I would show a jury that your evidence means zero in a court of law. If that is the wrong way to go about it, so be it. I think it is a slam dunk easy case for the defense. Bigfoot proponents would never want to have to meet the standard of a court of law with their evidence, it would never even get to a jury.