Different Types Of Bigfoot

[Guest]

Huh. I actually never thought of them crossing the landbridge before... for some reason... but that makes a lot of sense.

[Guest Druid]

That's the theory behind the gigantopithics (sp) and one other I can't even begin to spell without one of my anthro. books handy..

[Guest]

There is the southern ones, skunk ape, smaller generally, and the Northern ones. Not sure about Texas, with no swamps.

There are black, brownish, orangish (juviniles) blond, white, grey. Black flesh, grey flesh, pink flesh. Stringy hair, straight groomed hair. 7-9 ft tall average, 10-12ft+ alpha males.They change color over time, but Smeja said the juvies were black, (but probably the same species).

Southern BF are also inbred or something because they sometimes have only 3 or 4 toes.

Also, redish hair is the best color for amature hunters-Ive heard, it hides best at dawn and dusk. That Juvies are sometimes red makes sense in that respect.

Smaller in the South false, Texas has swamps yes, 5 toes in South same as anywhere else, believing Smeja??? Why

Inbred in the South ....based on mysterious 3 toes tracks that nobody ever finds because they find 5 toed tracks. Hair color variation IMO is just normal variation in a species,, it applies for us  and dogs and cats and horse and cows...etc

[Guest SquatchinNY]

I say at least two main types, the northern big black ones, and the southern, smaller, reddish-brown ones. The southern tending to be more aggressive.

[Guest]

I'm still not convinced that the three toed tracks being found in Florida arent from large birds of deteriorating Alligator tracks.

[Cotter]

if there has to be thousands of individuals of one species for a population to exist and not crash,

 

There doesn't.  There can be as few as 3 or 4 hundred to maintain a population.

 

(See wolverines).

 

I think that's a misunderstanding regarding the requirements for BF existence. 

 

But the rest of your statement (multiple species works against the existence) I do agree with somewhat, so I figure that BF may be more diverse through what we call races.

Heck, put a new yorker next to a ragin' cajun, and you would swear they weren't even from the same planet.  And that's just the diversity seen in a few thousand mile difference in location.

[Guest Druid]

As far as depth of the gene pool required for a sustainable population, science and nature contradict each other (again).. I do believe that more abnormal variations

will be apparent with a smaller gene pool, It's hard to tell if a wolverine is" genetically broken" by observation unless it manifests physically. All animals at some point

behave like they need to be on the short bus.. The three toe tracks pose a problem for me, it is unusual for a physical trait to regress to a less efficient structure. For a bipedal animal to "limit" its locomotion (ie: less stability, less surface contact) seems improbable. Sloths are the only mammal that comes to mind as a three toed species, and they are arboreal specialist. Humans have subtle sexual dimorphism, chimps and gorillas more so; BF may as well. That could address size variation,

so could diet and size of habitat. Personally I find it improbable that there are population numbers in the tens of thousands Short of dedicating several regiments of experienced LRRP ( Long Range Recon. Patrol) troops to saturate  an area for months on end. we're chasing our tails. Sorry the soap box is comfortable today...anyway I think this is a great thread and am enjoying the exchanges!

[NathanFooter]

In the last couple years I have heard and found things that make me think there are at least 3 types of these creatures.

 

One thing that had always bugged me about the ,, one type of BF ,, theory is that a creature going from a ape like slotted flat nose to a structured hooded nose, that to me seems to be an extreme change.  

 

I also have other reasons to believe there is several types out there.

[Guest DWA]

All I can say, based on my read of the evidence, is that it points to the significant possibility of more than one unlisted species of North American primate.

 

This isn't really remarkable.  It should actually be expected.  Think of gorillas (several species).  Think of chimps and bonobos.  Shoot, think of gray and red foxes; of bobcat and lynx; of whitetail and mule deer.

 

The naive perception seems to persist that more than one species means "lots and lots more individuals than if there's only one species."

 

Not really, gang.

[norseman]

 

How many different types of BF do you know of?

 

As of today, not a single "type" has been proven to exist, let alone two or more.  In order to prove different "types", I assume there would need to be a sample of each for comparison.  There lies the problem.

 

Remember what Frank Zappa said "The crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe."

 

 

Plussed.

 

At this point the existence of Sasquatch is conjecture........to then propose there are more than one species out there? Is simply adding conjecture on top of conjecture. 

 

A type specimen would give us a base line to work with.

[Guest]

I personally don't think there are any subspecies of Sasquatch; other than the Yeti of Nepal. I think the differences in size are just relative to their age. Obviously younger individuals are going to be smaller in size and mature males are going to be massive. Also, I think hair color is no different than hair color in humans. Some sasquatches might have dark brown or black hair, while some might have lighter colors such as blonde or reddish brown.

[NathanFooter]

Norseman  for the people like me here who have seen them it is not a question if sasquatch exists , it is now shifted to the questions of what are they,  are there other types/races and what is their behavior like. 

 

I do agree that in the scientific sense you are correct , we cannot say there is several types/races let alone a single type/race { yet }.

 

I simply add that there is an extreme variation in size, face, head shape and foot structure according to the reports. 

 

.

[norseman]

Without a scientific inquiry? We layman can guess all we want. But without discovery no inquiry

Edited June 21, 2013 by See-Te-Cah NC
Please don't quote the post directly preceding

[See-Te-Cah NC]

Why couldn't there be different "races" (for lack of a better term) within a species like Sasquatch? I find it not only to be completely possible, but completely within the realm of probability.

 

Assuming the creature actually exists, that is.

[Guest Druid]

I think folks may be getting caught up in terms of reference. race is probably (without our baggage) the most accurate term for us laypeople. Subspecies is the correct term for science once classification has begun.