Bigfoot: Does It Exist? Or Not?

[Guest]

JDL,

I guess we've moved on to tracks now but I just wanted to say, even though it made you sigh, that was proper posting, some of those were good links that backed up your claim.

That is how it should be done, make a claim and provide a link.

[JDL]

Thanks, Nakani.

 

Roguefooter, I think there are people better qualified than I am to respond to you.  I will say that there is big difference between a 300 pound human and an 800 pound bigfoot with regard to the potential for impact-related deformation.

Edited September 17, 2015 by JDL

[norseman]

 

It makes sense that there would be some variance in the tracks, surrounding a core that is consistent.  This is a species that weighs 800 pounds and goes barefoot all its life.  There will be injury and deformation.  A subgroup that has lived in swamps for hundreds of years will likely have feet and tracks that are shaped by that environment.  Another group may be inbred to a large degree and have genetic deformities.  And I won't rule out the hoaxing of some samples.

 

That said, I'm not qualified to question Dr. Meldrum, Krantz, or any other true expert in the field of biomechanics.

 

Why don't we see these variations in human feet? We have lots of people weighing several hundred pounds, walking barefoot, living in bayous for hundreds of years. Cajuns don't have webbed toes or 3 digits.

 

There are also bears that have been living in extremely different environments from forests to rocky mountains to swamps, and their feet aren't completely changing shape. Why only Sasquatch?

 

Even the Fouke Monster has his own special foot that's completely different from his neighbor the Honey Island Swamp Monster or any other Bigfoots in the surrounding areas.

 

 

I beg to differ.....have you ever hear of the Ostrich people of Africa?

 

http://www.victoriafalls-guide.net/zimbabwe-culture.html

[roguefooter]

^It says in the article that it's a genetic defect that only effects a portion of the tribe. They're not feet that are shaped by the environment. Like I said before there are always anomalies within a species, but those are not the standard of the species. Bigfoot tracks are so varied that there doesn't seem to be a group of specific details that would be the definitive standard, aside from that they're big and most have 5 toes.

[roguefooter]

 

You know what?  I DON'T CARE WHAT MELDRUM THINKS ABOUT FREEMAN AND WALLACE.

 

About pretty much everything else:  HE'S RIGHT.

 

Know what's at work there?  Science, and critical thought.

 

 

Okay, how about another Bigfoot scientist then? Grover Krantz? He thought Freeman and Wallace tracks were real too..

[AaronD]

It has been pointed out by Meldrum and Bindernagel that the sasquatch foot is much closer to an ape's than it is to ours.  That flexibility alone is going to lead to much variance in tracks that still exhibit marked consistencies.

 

IDK, I think the sasquatch foot looks way more like ours than the ape's...maybe I'm missing something?

Edited September 17, 2015 by AaronD
spelling error

[JDL]

So the bigfoot foot structure is a blend of human and ape characteristics.  Perhaps if we had evolved to be 800 pounds we would also have retained the mid tarsal break, and such a conformation would be considered human.

[norseman]

^It says in the article that it's a genetic defect that only effects a portion of the tribe. They're not feet that are shaped by the environment. Like I said before there are always anomalies within a species, but those are not the standard of the species. Bigfoot tracks are so varied that there doesn't seem to be a group of specific details that would be the definitive standard, aside from that they're big and most have 5 toes.

Hold on here..... your not squirming out of this one. A good percentage of this tribe displays abnormalities with their feet, because of inbreeding. You said nothing about the environment you simply stated you do not see three toed cajuns running around.

It is entirely plausible that pockets of Sasquatch cut off from the rest of the gene pool are losing digits based on the fact they are forced to inbreed. It could be the whole population or a good portion thereof.

I disagree that Bigfoot tracks are varied outside the norm of a single species other than tracks that display three toes. And I think I've given a reasonable explanation for why those are found as well.

It has been pointed out by Meldrum and Bindernagel that the sasquatch foot is much closer to an ape's than it is to ours.  That flexibility alone is going to lead to much variance in tracks that still exhibit marked consistencies.

apefoot.pngmeldrumfoot.png

 

IDK, I think the sasquatch foot looks way more like ours than the ape's...maybe I'm missing something?

Flexibility.

[Guest DWA]

The apparent resemblance is not only superficial, but varies pretty greatly...in ways that one would expect a far more flexible foot than ours to do.

 

One thing that makes me think some of Freeman's tracks may be genuine is that there's no way Freeman would have hoaxed something looking that much like an ape's foot.

[dmaker]

"One thing that makes me think some of Freeman's tracks may be genuine is that there's no way Freeman would have hoaxed something looking that much like an ape's foot."

 

Why not?

[Guest Crowlogic]

Then there is that pesky double ball thingy.  Arron posted  Dr. Jeff holding one of his favorite casts and it's a  single ball foot.  Double ball is known to be an invention of hoaxer deluxe Raymond Wallace sooooo why and how can some folks accept double ball foot at all?  BTW this is a great view as well as a wake up call..

 

Edited September 17, 2015 by Crowlogic

[Guest DWA]

yeah yeah I know I know, and if you were more conversant with the evidence you might be able to make some points.

[dmaker]

I believe he just did.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Where is this coming from?  Freeman?  Wallace?  How 'bout just throw those boys out...and explain the rest?

 

Come ON PEOPLE!  What are folks doing coming here without parsing the syllabus or buying the books?  Sasquatch tracks ARE CONSISTENT.  Please read up.  The midterm is 50% of the grade.  Get on the stick!

Come people throw out everything that might indicate that bigfoot is a hoax.  That's really great.  Only see what the man tells you to see.  But no Sasquatch tracks are not consistent.  Some show mid tarsal break, some don't, Some in the olden days showed a double ball,  other's have three toes and yet some have 4 toes.  Yessir bigfoot tracks are anything but consistent.  But hmmm deer tracks are consistent, raccoon tracks are consistent, duck prints are consistent, Mountain Lion prints are consistent as are fox and Bobcat.  Get the idea now?  But not bigfoot.  Bigfoot gets to be all things to everybody and carries a morphology as varied as the day is long.  And yet this does not concern the bigfoot believer it's just one more thing that makes the mystery that much more mysterious and worthy of the chase.  Sighs............... 

[dmaker]

yeah yeah I know I know, and if you were more conversant with the evidence you might be able to make some points.

It's precisely a familiarity with the evidence (including the lack of evidence) that makes some of us skeptical. The evidence just does not hold up well to scrutiny. Unless, of course, like you, we put on our bigfoot glasses and ignore or toss out anything that doesn't fit our bigfoot wishes.