Bigfoot Is Nearly Everywhere Is An Untenable Pretense

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Regarding road crossing pics of BF or chance encounter pics of BF.....

 

I'm driving down the road, I see something "weird" crossing the road ahead, the first thing I do is grab my cellphone to take a pic????

 

I don't think so, especially with the "no hand-held cellphone use while driving" laws.  I would probably keep on driving to get out of there.

 

I'm walking my dog, a loud screaming/roaring sound comes from the bushes 20 feet away, the first thing I do is grab my phone to take a pic?

 

Ummm....no....the first thing I do is get the heck outta there, FAST.

 

I think the majority of photographic or audio documentation of  BF would be from people who are purposefully looking for BF or from witnesses who record the event because the event is occurring over a period of minutes, not a few seconds while the creature crosses the street.

[norseman]

A comment about the population map. I live in one of the blue areas of that map. And I can tell you that within that area, the population is concentrated around the metropolitan area. It's so concentrated that our state wide elections (US senator, state governor, comptroller, attorney general) are determined by the voters of 1 city and 2 counties because the populations of those 3 areas combined are greater than the remainder of the state. While  it's unlikely that BF would live in the inner city or the suburbs, there are less populated, forested and under developed areas that could support BF.

The premise that hundreds of thousands of them are running down and killing deer daily in urban-suburban areas without being seen is ludicris to me.

[Guest DWA]

I don't think that anyone has ever put it that way.  And I think we've gone over this:  thousands of eyewitnesses clinch the argument that "being seen" essentially means nothing.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

The premise that hundreds of thousands of them are running down and killing deer daily in urban-suburban areas without being seen is ludicris to me.

 

Hundreds and thousands, maybe not. A few hundred in an urban-suburban area is possible, imo, it they're active when people are not. My suburban neighborhood is virtually empty on weekdays between 6 AM and 6 PM because people are at work or at school. And they have a tendency to stay indoors. You rarely see a kid playing outside or riding bikes in the neighborhood because their parents have "the kidnappers waiting at the corner" phobia suburbanites have these days.

 

. If a Big Foot family lived in the wooded area surrounding my neighborhood, I doubt anyone would really notice unless the BFs did something destructive (like home invasion, upturning cars, breaking windows, etc.)  But BF yelling in the woods would be chalked up to some annoying teenagers annoying the neighborhood just to be annoying. Even things like trash cans being rummaged through, garden sheds broken into, rocks throw at houses would be chalked up to the local annoying teenagers. And dogs or cats disappearing? We've had instances of "dog nappers" who steal those little yappy dogs to resell or  large breeds to be used for dog fights. And cats, well, there are enough of them smashed on the roads to assume what happens when Fluffy runs away and never returns.

[indiefoot]

The premise that hundreds of thousands of them are running down and killing deer daily in urban-suburban areas without being seen is ludicris to me.

Maybe some have traded hunting for scavenging? Kind of like BF welfare.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Maybe some have traded hunting for scavenging? Kind of like BF welfare.

 

I could see BF scavenging food and living in abandoned homes/buildings. We waste tons of food in the US. Spending an hour or two digging through a dumpster behind a supermarket is a more efficient use of time and energy than chasing after a deer. Squatting in an abandoned building is more efficient than building something from scratch.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Even though most people are inactive at certain times and certain days law enforcement is always active.  But before anyone embraces bigfoot raiding dumpsters and shadowing human populations the precept of bigfoot will do anything and everything to avoid human contact must be dispensed with.  So which is it.  Are they opportunists or are they recluses staying away from us?

 

Living in abandoned buildings?  Has anybody ever found bigfoot evidence at an abandoned building?  Tracks leading in or out?  Hair, bones, afterbirth, anything?  Let's get them driving cabs or let's get a handle on reality. 

Edited May 21, 2015 by Crowlogic

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Even though most people are inactive at certain times and certain days law enforcement is always active.  But before anyone embraces bigfoot raiding dumpsters and shadowing human populations the precept of bigfoot will do anything and everything to avoid human contact must be dispensed with.  So which is it.  Are they opportunists or are they recluses staying away from us?

 

Living in abandoned buildings?  Has anybody ever found bigfoot evidence at an abandoned building?  Tracks leading in or out?  Hair, bones, afterbirth, anything?  Let's get them driving cabs or let's get a handle on reality. 

 

1. I don't know where you live, 'cuz where I live "law enforcement is always active" on the interstate and major highways where they can ticket people for speeding and other traffic violations. Unless it's a high crime area, they are not "always active" in neighborhoods.

 

2. Who said they live in abandoned buildings? I wrote that I could see (meaning: I could imagine) a Big Foot would live in an abandoned building. And it would be for the same reasons feral cat colonies live in abandoned buildings, rats live in abandoned buildings, homeless H. sapiens live in abandoned buildings. And I could see them dumpster diving for the same reasons why raccoons, homeless H. sapiens, or freegans do it.

 

3.  " Are they opportunists or are they recluses staying away from us?" As I've written in another thread, it's illogical to attempt to answer a logical fallacy. In this case the logic fallacy you put forth is False Dichotomy.

[Guest DWA]

Right.  They could be bold elusive shy reclusive opportunists staying away from us with exceptions.  Or not.

 

They're animals; and a good read of the reports makes this pretty solid.  Animals are individuals.  

[Guest]

Fruit could attract them... https://earlycareerecologists.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/the-tug-of-war-facing-urban-wildlife-when-to-forage-on-human-foods/

 

I am pretty darn positive that ape noses can pick up ripening fruit 10s of miles away downwind of it.

[WSA]

There are plenty of credible accounts of BF taking shelter in abandoned, derelict, partially constructed or unoccupied buildings, and possibly using them long-term.

[Guest DWA]

And again:  just like other animals (including primates).

[Guest]

What if they were snatching purses and using the cash in vending machines? That would be too ludicrous right? No real animal would ever do that?

[BigTreeWalker]

In a way I agree with Norseman, if there are bigfoot they have to eat. As Indiefoot suggested they may be scavenging. They may be dumpster diving. There may even be enough pets in the area to sustain them. But I think deer are their most likely food source. Since from what I hear about eastern urban areas deer are becoming a scourge. I don't think they need to chase them down though. Evidence I have seen suggests bigfoot is very good at ambush.

I would suggest to those who live in these areas to walk the greenways that connect these areas if it is possible, and I know it may not be. Look for evidence of feeding. If a deer kill is found, become a forensic scientist and try to determine the cause of death. Actually look for hard evidence.

There should be something there more quantifiable than just sightings.

[Guest DWA]

There is a significant body of evidence of an accomplished ambush predator.  I'd expect it.

 

I'd also expect most that come across deer kills not investigating in depth to determine cause of death.