JanV Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 If it is the nature of BF to be shy and reclusive, why do you think that is so? Assuming it or some Asian ancestors came across one of the land bridges before or at the same time that humans did why did it move into the remote forests and adopt a primarily nocturnal existence? Did the animal self select for this after it got here or before? Is it's fear and avoidance of homo sapiens a driving factor and when did this occur? On the human side when did it become more a myth than an actual physical being in our collective consciousness? I would be interested in your thoughts and observations on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Ronn, I hope you don't mind, but you posted this on another thread and I thought it would be a good post for a new thread, so I'm going to copy it hear because I think it touches on some of the same things that Jan brings up. ronn1, on 20 Dec 2013 - 02:31 AM, said: There you go. There IS NO SAFE DISTANCE TO OBSERVE PEOPLE! *Believers* claim BF is extremely illusive and the only way to insure they don't EVER get *caught* is to AVOID people all together. How else could they have avoided getting caught and exposed by humans all these thousands of years of co-existence?? Most skeptics turn that statement on it's head and say>>>HOW IS IT THAT BF HASN'T BEEN CAUGHT YET (physical evidence in hand) by humans either searching or stumbling upon them for over 50 years? The answer is what *believers* say above...at least that's the rationale used. You can't have this creature trying to observe people AT ALL, because it would have been caught AGES AGO. Can't have it both ways folks. Either this creature is extremely reclusive or it isn't..and if it isn't.... it's in the cross hairs. It's NOT going to be reclusive if it's trying to *observe* people! Over 8ft tall 4 ft wide and 800 lbs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 This is one of those things that bugs me, but is just impossible to know. For instance, their avoidance of humans could be purely instinctual. It could be a learned behavior, passed down from the parents as well. It is possible that in the past these animals had very bad experiences with humans, who maybe tried to slaughter them since they looked like scary giants, and thus from that time forward the avoidance of humans has just been a survival mechanism. Their intelligence suggests that something of this nature is possible, as they can put two and two together. Other animals may instinctually avoid other animals out of fear, but they don't really comprehend what is going on to the same extent that sasquatch might. But that is just an idea or possibility. I do not actually believe that 100% at this point. But I definitely believe there is a reason for it. I also think that there may be both instinct and intelligence at work in such behavior. Other than that, I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I wish I could find the post that I read yesterday (or remember who wrote it) suggesting why possibly some BFs seem more comfortable with coming in closer to human habitats than others. It could be possible that some have figured out that they can find easier meals by rummaging thru trash, campsites, etc....while there are those that stay far back in the mountains that may have never even come in contact with humans. Unfortunately, it's a question we may never get an answer to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 If you really want to know why BF avoids humans, all you need do is go to Wal~Mart on Black Friday, or like I'm about to do, the mall the last Sunday before Christmas. That alone will tell you all you want to know about interacting with humans. Wish me luck. If i'm not back on the forums this evening please send a search and rescue team. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanV Posted December 22, 2013 Author Share Posted December 22, 2013 If you really want to know why BF avoids humans, all you need do is go to Wal~Mart on Black Friday, or like I'm about to do, the mall the last Sunday before Christmas. That alone will tell you all you want to know about interacting with humans. Wish me luck. If i'm not back on the forums this evening please send a search and rescue team.Hee, hee, hee!Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 If you really want to know why BF avoids humans, all you need do is go to Wal~Mart on Black Friday, or like I'm about to do, the mall the last Sunday before Christmas. That alone will tell you all you want to know about interacting with humans. Wish me luck. If i'm not back on the forums this evening please send a search and rescue team. Or the New York City subway system at rush hour. IQ drops by 30 points minimum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Hello Old Dog, Good luck then. And your right. But look on the bright side, two or three Sasquatch in ANY checkout line would really throw things for a loop. I mean, they WOULD take up a lot of space. As far as needing rescue: did you remember the flares? I never leave home without at least two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted December 22, 2013 Moderator Share Posted December 22, 2013 I have a theory that our ancestors decided to wipe them out a long time ago, so long ago that they receded into myth and legend. Trolls, goblins and all that whatnot may have some sort of basis in reality. The only ones that would have survived in this scenario would be the ones that were reclusive. IOW I am saying its built-in to their gene pool now as a result. I am basing this partly on that 'Them and Us' scenario described at this website: http://www.themandus.org/ On that site it is proposed that Neanderthal pushed us through a similar genetic bottleneck. What I am thinking is that we don't really understand our own history all that well; the Denesovians just got added to the family tree based on a finger bone and a toe bone. A lot of skeptics argue that there is no evidence of BF in the fossil record but I don't agree. I think we know that record by a different name. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) Hello salubrious, THAT is a very good point. How often does it happen in conversations that we get a name wrong when relaying a story. Then once corrected the one hearing the story suddenly understands what or who it is one's talking about. Not uncommon to have several names for things and places. It isn't really mis-labeling it's more like breaches in local ID's vs. universal ID's Edited December 22, 2013 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 If you give credit to the stories, they were more open with the pre-Columbian inhabitants. It's might be that they still are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 (edited) Hello JanV, In watching some of the better videos I've noticed something that is rather obvious. And it's obvious to all of us not just me. It seems apparent that during tree peeking Sasquatch only THINKS it's hiding. The creatire doesn't appear to be aware that it's body is larger than the tree it's using for cover. Face and head? sure no problem. Legs? Pretty much hidden. But the torso is another story. One would think that, at least from the tree peeking aspect, that Sasquatch would know it's torso is larger than say a 24" or 30" tree trunk by now. Back when old groth forests ruled it may have been easier to hide itself. But whether or not the behavior has evolved to adapt to the smaller trees or not could be part of the issue if not the solution (as far as proof goes). Edited December 23, 2013 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TexasTracker Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 well, let's see... If "we" are brave, we shoot at them with everything we have, and try to kill it... If we are not so brave, we return days later with a posse to hunt it down and try to kill it. It doesn't take a real smart animal to figure out it's better to avoid us. I believe many animals have figured this out. Have you ever seen a cougar just sit and watch people? The few habituations that I know of have come about after many years of observation on their part. They seem to do the choosing. CG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanV Posted December 23, 2013 Author Share Posted December 23, 2013 Aside from humans, were there or are there any potential natural enemies? The megafauna were hunted to extinction by humans but saber tooth cats were alive as recently as 11,000 yrs ago. BF could be an obscure remnant of homo something that could be still around due to its patterns of avoidance, proclivity for remote areas, and inbred caution when it comes to homo sapiens or perhaps European people's who came to the new world. Indiefoot has a good point about native peoples seeming to have more contact, at least in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Grifter9931 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 How does something so big hide in this day and age? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts