Guest Cervelo Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 You may want to consider how many mammal discoveries over 200lbs in the past 100 yrs as a better indicator of those odds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 Correct Cervelo. I always have a good laugh when this line of reasoning is employed. What/When was the last large land animal catalogued in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 (edited) Hello Hellbilly, It would seem that we have a lot to learn still about our own habitat. One thing we haven't learned though is how to not be animals ourselves. The wars, the greed, the competitive tribal infighting. At the very least, WRT the subject of Bigfoot, what we DO know of animal behavior and how it translates to ourselves should easily transfer into a method of securing a representative of the species. If they don't exist then, of course, we can all go home. Edited July 6, 2013 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 ^ We do have a lot to learn about our planet. That is why I could never be as oblivious to the possibility of discovering new species. Cervelo, what about the Pizzly's(Polar/Grizzly Bear) that have been shot? Or the Mountain Gorilla? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 (edited) I'm not saying there aren't discoveries being made but you'll find the vast majority...I'll take a wag that 99% of them are fairly small creatures or some known species that has a sub-species/newly recognized as a result of DNA analysis. The mountain gorilla was discovered around 1900, that's kinda my point what large mammals have been discovered in the last 100 yrs not many. Much less a 400lb primate hanging out in backyards in the US. No offense but this is a really really old tired wore out position that has been offered up many times. But if that gets you out in the woods and having a good time....ROCK ON with whatever works for you Edited July 6, 2013 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 Def. a ancillary benefit of going in the woods for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest COGrizzly Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 What about the Colorado Blizzly? Alot of these theories are old, tired and wore out Cervelo. Wait....who the heck am I telling!? You know that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Aren't they trying to find the Bili ape in the Congo? You guys are definitely kill joys to hang around..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) Hello All, And in the Congo there is also the moleke-mbembe don't forget. Edited July 7, 2013 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Ohhh now you've done it....I've said many times there's as much "evidence" for dragons as Bigfoot heh-heh!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Hello there Cervelo, Thought you'd like that one. Yep, can't forget Puff now can we LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 I find your position astounding and offensive on many levels How so? Please start with why you found what I wrote "offensive" and then explain why it's "astounding" to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) I agree with you Cervelo on the Mountain Gorilla so how about: 1.The lesula 2. three toed pygmy sloth 3. Yes, the Bili ape is a good one Norseman. What about physicist Peter Higgs and his famous equation that was rejected in 1964 as "of no relevance to physics." ?? I am pretty sure no one on here (me included) has ever seen the Higgs particle but we now know they exist. Edited July 7, 2013 by Hellbilly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 I find your position astounding and offensive on many levels How so? Please start with why you found what I wrote "offensive" and then explain why it's "astounding" to you? Not starting with anything...ya can go pound sand for all I care Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Are we really comparing The Higgs Particle to bigfoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts