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

[kbhunter]

Zoala, question for you.....if someone you knew very well and trusted totally told you they saw a large hairy bi-pedal man-like creature and it was in plain sight, what would you say?

KB

[Guest]

Assuming the sketch is even slightly accurate and to scale. (you'll need to click the image to see segment c)

More like ~12'. The length of the body must follow the articulation points of the skeleton. The length of A (spine) is too long and not aligned correctly and which bone is segment "a" supposed to be? Also, segments "b" & "c" seem to miss the knee. Rather than measuring angles, it's much simpler to define the articulation points and the top of the head, bottom of the foot, then connect the dots and measure the distances between them on your screen with a ruler. Take that total and divide it by the distance representing the 6' sitting height. But as you say, this is all providing everything was drawn correctly to scale. So maybe 12' +/- 2'.

[salubrious]

It was pretty big alright. But we are getting OT.

How about address the issue of skepticism??

Edited August 28, 2012 by salubrious

[Guest]

and which bone is segment "a" supposed to be?

Not a bone, but rather the Gluteus Maximus. Based on the PGF, it's quite large, massive and protrudes rearward.

[Cotter]

Good afternoon Marlboro.

Do you feel all BF (if they exist) will look like the subject in the PGF?

[Guest Particle Noun]

People report stuff such as ghosts, zombies, unicorns, vampires, dinosaurs etc all the time. It doesn't mean they actually saw the thing. This applies to bigfoot as well.

Are you assuming this, or do you actually see these reports? With bigfoot sightings, there are actually databases where one can go and read sighting reports, and get some sort of survey of sighting characteristics and volume. I can grant that there are a similar number of 'ghost' sightings, but vampire, unicorn and dinosaurs? Respectfully, can you back up that claim at all?

[Rockape]

So are all these people either lying or mistaken in what they saw?

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/

[Guest]

People report stuff such as ghosts, zombies, unicorns, vampires, dinosaurs etc all the time. It doesn't mean they actually saw the thing. This applies to bigfoot as well.

According to a survey performed in the 2009, 23% of Americans believe they have either seen or were in the presence of a ghost.

http://www.cbsnews.c...162-994766.html

[Guest Particle Noun]

Right, that is why I was willing to give Zoala that one. At this point I have seen no evidence anywhere that there are anywhere near the number of vampires, unicorns dinosaurs or zombies reported as sightings of Bigfoot. It strikes me as a claim that is easy to make when you are of the opinion that Bigfoot is as fictional as those other creatures, but which doesn't actually come from any sort of actually sighting data.

[Guest poignant]

Assuming the sketch is even slightly accurate and to scale. (you'll need to click the image to see segment c)

Going to 2 decimal places on a sketch is an exercise in futility. Have to account for posture / stooping which will invariably bring down the final height.

I can't verify Salubrious' sighting, but I think it's one of the cooler ones. Nevertheless, my point above still stands. No pun intended.

[Guest]

Not a bone, but rather the Gluteus Maximus. Based on the PGF, it's quite large, massive and protrudes rearward.

Yeah, but you can't use the butt to measure height. Bones only.

[Guest]

Good afternoon Marlboro.

Do you feel all BF (if they exist) will look like the subject in the PGF?

Hows it going Cotter:

the problem is, there's not too many BF pics out there that don't require special instructions, arrows or red circles to show where the BF actually resides in the photo. So using the PGF wasn’t by choice eventhough it was just for illustration purposes. But since I don’t think they exist, the answer to that question would be “not applicableâ€.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Keep in mind Patty is a female Sasquatch! The one salubrious saw could have been a large male. And I think it's possible they look different from location to location.

[Guest toejam]

Sometimes red circles are needed considering most can't see the forest for the trees.

Anyone that's in the field persisting knows full well that their best bet is to look amongst the foliage where they hide, not out in the open waving their arms for the camera.

[Guest]

Keep in mind Patty is a female Sasquatch!

So that's why "segment a" is so big.