BigTreeWalker Posted May 17, 2015 Author Share Posted May 17, 2015 Well, hopefully everyone who hasn't looked at our research posted here, will. I have addressed some of these more recent questions previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 IMO, now that this is published news, and considering it could be a very important piece of the puzzle, more exposure could be had by moving it back to the General BF Discussion forum. Just a suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Michael Rugg who runs the Bigfoot Discovery Museum in Felton, CA is in possession of what is possibly a bigfoot tooth. It was discovered in Scotts Valley and is apparently very similar to a Neanderthal tooth, except much larger. It's been looked at by at least 6 dentists. Just occurred to me that it might be interesting to compare the tooth with the data in this study. Not sure if Michael is a member here, but he was featured on the BFF blog a few years ago I believe. http://bigfootdiscoveryproject.com/is his website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted May 17, 2015 Author Share Posted May 17, 2015 Michael Rugg who runs the Bigfoot Discovery Museum in Felton, CA is in possession of what is possibly a bigfoot tooth. It was discovered in Scotts Valley and is apparently very similar to a Neanderthal tooth, except much larger. It's been looked at by at least 6 dentists. Just occurred to me that it might be interesting to compare the tooth with the data in this study. Not sure if Michael is a member here, but he was featured on the BFF blog a few years ago I believe. http://bigfootdiscoveryproject.com/is his website. Thanks for the idea. I seem to remember a short segment about that in a Discovery Channel program. If I remember right he made a cast of the tooth. Then the original was destroyed in the process of cutting it open for more study. Could be wrong, but that's what I remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Thanks for the idea. I seem to remember a short segment about that in a Discovery Channel program. If I remember right he made a cast of the tooth. Then the original was destroyed in the process of cutting it open for more study. Could be wrong, but that's what I remember. I'm pretty sure he still has the original. He was looking for someone to do a DNA test on it, but has not found anyone yet. He had sent a smal sample to Ketchum, but it was not included in her study. Sykes only wanted to use hair so wouldn't take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted May 17, 2015 Author Share Posted May 17, 2015 (edited) Big Tree Walker Is this your research being highlighted on Bigfoot Evidence? I applaud what you are doing. Looks like you are definitely onto something here. Sorry I kind of missed this in the shuffle. To answer your question, yes it is. Here is the link:http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2015/05/college-professor-is-close-to-proving.html#moretop Lastlaugh, thanks for posting the photo. I wish it was an incisor rather than a molar. Because incisors appear to be what the impressions in the bones were made by. But it could still be useful for a size comparison. Edited May 17, 2015 by BigTreeWalker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 If nothing else finding those bones blows holes through the idea that the acidic PNW soil causes bones to practically cause bones to instantly disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted May 17, 2015 Author Share Posted May 17, 2015 Sorry Crow. Never heard it said how long it takes. I do know if you don't find them in the first 2 to 3 years you probably won't. To scattered, to green, or just plain gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 If nothing else finding those bones blows holes through the idea that the acidic PNW soil causes bones to practically cause bones to instantly disappear. Though it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that finding the remains of one of thousands of lifetime meals vs finding remains of predator that did it is hugely more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 If nothing else finding those bones blows holes through the idea that the acidic PNW soil causes bones to practically cause bones to instantly disappear. nobody ever said you cannot find ungulate bones in the forest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 nobody ever said you cannot find ungulate bones in the forest. This has always bothered me. Deer and elk bones lay around for years in the Gifford Pinchot forest. The theory that bigfoot bones instantly disappear does not make sense. However, I have never seen cougar, coyote or bear bones, so where are they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted May 17, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted May 17, 2015 (edited) It is probably a matter of numbers. Elk and deer are far more common than cougar, coyote, or bear. Since the predators are more rare the chance encounter with a skeleton is smaller. Then again, deer and elk are not as leery of humans. I have deer in my yard all the time. So they do not avoid populated areas as much as the predators who fear man. Most of the PNW forest is relatively inaccessible to man. You can drive to the edge, but unless you do some serious backpacking with overnights, you are not going to get more than 10 or less miles from the road you drove in on. That is just a thin edge around all the area that is out there. Speaking of numbers, I had one bobcat and one cougar in my yard in the 20 years I have lived here, but more deer than I can count. Throw in the fact that cats and canines want to go off someplace and hide when they get sick and you get something that makes itself less visible when it dies. Just a whole lot of factors reducing the likelihood of finding a predator skeleton or body. Edited May 17, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17x7 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I once found what I believe to have been the femur of a black bear. Too heavy and short to have been much else. No other bones near that I could find. I also used to hunt in a area that had an elk femur on top of a large boulder. I assume that a cougar put it up there so it could dine away from other predators. Away from rodents, coyotes, bears, and most everything else, that bone just sat up there for years before it finally rotted away. All it had to contend with was sun, rain, and moss. 17x7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 (edited) If nothing else finding those bones blows holes through the idea that the acidic PNW soil causes bones to practically cause bones to instantly disappear. Edited May 17, 2015 by lastlaugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I occasionally go by an area where we stumbled on a very fresh cougar kill maybe 5 years ago. There are still a few of the elk bones remaining, they are now green. But they definitely haven't "disappeared" into the acidic soil. I wish bigfoot was real, but I suspect there will never be a definitive answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts