Strongest And Weakest Evidence For Bigfoot.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

I hope it's not the tent video.

Edited April 22, 2013 by OntarioSquatch

[Guest]

Never heard of it, Ontario.

The videos I'm alluding to have to do with historical events that get tangled up in conspiracy theory rot. Which is why I doubt that it's appropriate to discus them here.

[norseman]

for me the strongest evidence for bigfoot is the trackways that exhibit traits not capable of being hoaxed by a human.

usually in snow but not always.....

its easy to point to a film or picture and say that its a dude in a monkey suit. thats not nearly as easy to do when your tracking a 84 inch stride and there are no roads or tire tracks anywhere around. or its stepping over logs you have to crawl over, etc......

the weakest evidence is a tie between a blobsquatch photo or a really cool story

Edited April 23, 2013 by norseman

[Guest]

plussed your comment ThePaige...and it looks like most have a similar take...and can't deny we have done a poor job of demonstrating the claims..

Edited April 23, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I think that the best evidence for a non-believer would be the numerous sighting reports, including the Native American legends/stories, as you mentioned. The fact that so many tribes have a name for this animal is something that should not be taken lightly, as many of these tribes did not mix or mingle in any fashion, and the odds of all of them developing a mythical animal independent from one another is astronomical. Aside from that, I think the plethora of track casts. Something is obviously leaving the tracks, and it would be illogical to assume they were all faked. Anyone can look at them and see they are not misidentifications, so they are either hoaxes, legitimate, or were left by a big-footed human traipsing around much of the time in horrible terrain, with no shoes on at that. The hair samples are also good, seeing as how many of their morphological characteristics cannot provide a match to known species.

I will not really include DNA results, as too many will not accept this as legitimate. As far as video, I do not think it is any one video, but rather the combination of many similar videos, depicting the same thing. It is virtually impossible for a piece of video to be proven 100% legitimate in that it shows a real bigfoot, but there are videos where the hoax option is just so unlikely that it makes more sense to assume they are real. So aside from seeing one yourself, I say the sighting reports should provide enough evidence. There are just too many. And I am quite certain that only a fraction of actual sightings have ever been reported. I am talking a very low number here, like under 15%, off the top of my head. Especially when you go back a couple or more decades. And what most non-believers do not like to talk about is that the majority of the sightings, not the minority, were given by credible individuals or groups of people and there is no indication of hoax present. And then there are all the correlations between these sighting reports. I think that if the testimony of one person can carry enough weight to sentence someone to life in prison, then this many sighting reports should wake the mainstream up.

[dmaker]

Edited to remove comments

Edited April 24, 2013 by dmaker

[Guest DWA]

Strongest evidence:

 

- Footprints (volume and consistency).  Krantz considered these alone tantamount to proof, and I wouldn't wanna argue science with Krantz.

 

- Eyewitness testimony (likewise.  One story is one story.  Thousands of them, from which a guidebook description could be written:  Compelling.  Curiosity demands proof of what is causing that to happen).

 

- Consistency between what Native and European cultures are reporting (which doesn't happen generally speaking with "native legends" in any part of the world).

 

Weakest evidence:

 

Look at any Bigfoot website.  One can detect, if one is savvy, an almost directly inverse relationship between evidence strength and viewership/posts.  The more attention, the more tossable the subject of discussion (e.g. Smeja; Dyer; Ketchum; videos...see what I mean...?)

[Old Dog]

The strongest is your own personal, undisputed, unobstructed sighting, that doesn't need explaining.

 

 

 

Yep.

[norseman]

The strongest is your own personal, undisputed, unobstructed sighting, that doesn't need explaining.

Yep.

I would not count that as evidence at all.

[Guest DWA]

Oh, I would.  Know why?

 

It's proven to Me.  And I'm the only one that matters.

[norseman]

Oh, I would. Know why?

It's proven to Me. And I'm the only one that matters.

Thats fine but by definition self knowing is not evidence. Evidence is something you can show ir buddy.

[Old Dog]

You know, this old argument of what is or isn't evidence is only relevant to those trying to scientifically prove the existence, or to basically argue for one side or the other.  Some people have all the evidence they need, others will believe one way or the other regardless.  We all have our own standards of what is actually evidence and what isn't.

[Guest]

For me, here is the strongest evidence.  I've posted this elsewhere, but this is my shortened, edited version with only what I consider to be the strongest potential evidence, besides the things I've personally experienced, which is mostly of value only to me.

 

Video Evidence 
Patterson-Gimlin Film http://www.google.co....41248874,d.cGE
PGF breakdown by NatGeo â€œThe Truth Behind Bigfoot†- http://channel.natio...behind-bigfoot/
The Munns Report breakdown - http://themunnsreport.com/

Audio Evidence
Mongahela - https://sites.google...site/mongahela/
Stan Courtney - http://www.stancourtney.com/Bigfoot_Sounds.html
Miscellaneous – The Ohio Howl http://sasquatchbioa...-ohio-howl.html ;

Physical Evidence
Footprints – specifically, the London Tracks - http://www.northamer...London Trackway ;

Meldrum’s infohttp://www.isu.edu/~.../fxnlmorph.html ;

Bossburg Tracks http://www.bigfoothu...pple_foot.shtml

 

Historical Evidence
Native American stories - http://www.bigfooten...com/legends.htm ; http://www.native-la...nds-bigfoot.htm ;http://www.bfro.net/legends/ ; David Thompson 1811http://www.bigfooten...vidthompson.htm ; the Ape Canyon incident http://www.bigfooten...assics/beck.htm ;  1884 Wildman http://bigfootchicks...etery-1884.html; Series of wild men info http://bigfootchicks...men-series.html ; European stories of wildmen - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_man ; http://www.bfro.net/...OL/kirtley.html ;http://www.wisegeek....-a-woodwose.htm ; http://www.isu.edu/r...Bayanov_rev.pdf; Zana the Almasty - http://www.bigfooten...icles/zana2.htm

Archeological & Anthropological Evidence
The “Hairy Man†pictograph - http://www.isu.edu/r...ctographs-1.pdf ;

the work of Kathy Moskowitz Strain http://www.amazon.co...66565739&sr=1-1 ;

Commentary from another paleanologist on the “Hairy Manâ€http://accpaleo.word.../tag/sasquatch/ ;

Dr. Jane Goodall’s transcript on why she thinks they might exist - http://www.bfro.net/...lTranscript.asp 

Edited May 15, 2013 by madison5716

[norseman]

You know, this old argument of what is or isn't evidence is only relevant to those trying to scientifically prove the existence, or to basically argue for one side or the other. Some people have all the evidence they need, others will believe one way or the other regardless. We all have our own standards of what is actually evidence and what isn't.

I would suspect that if somebody asked me " what is the best evidence for sasquatch?" that they are not asking me about my own experience. Maybe the OP can clarify.

[Guest DWA]

 

You know, this old argument of what is or isn't evidence is only relevant to those trying to scientifically prove the existence, or to basically argue for one side or the other. Some people have all the evidence they need, others will believe one way or the other regardless. We all have our own standards of what is actually evidence and what isn't.

I would suspect that if somebody asked me " what is the best evidence for sasquatch?" that they are not asking me about my own experience. Maybe the OP can clarify.

 

Well I can clarify, about what I said at any rate.

 

I bet I'm speaking for BobbyO too when I say that, to you personally, a personal sighting is proof.  You know bigfoot's real.  You don't need anyone to tell you (although a lot of people now want the world to know so they won't feel crazy and alone). 

 

Now when I'm asked that question...well, my first post on this thread answered it.

 

But you can bet that, if I'd seen one, that sighting would be front and center, with the understandable caveat that that won't work to prove it to anyone else.