georgerm Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 I don't know that bigfoot science has stalled so much as it has never really started. When of I think of "Science", I think of ongoing studies and their published results in recognized and respected journals. There are no bigfoot studies published in any recognized journals. So, where is the science? There are a lot of amateurs claiming to do science, but those results are not published in any recognized journals. Even the professional scientists that have demonstrated an interest in bigfoot, Jeff Meldrum for example, publish no bigfoot papers in recognized journals. So, what bigfoot science is Dr.Meldrum doing, exactly? I don't see evidence of any. The jaguar in Arizona was mentioned up thread a little bit. This is an interesting piece of footage, for sure, but it does not help the bigfoot claim at all. There may be only one jaguar wandering around Arizona and it showed up on a trail cam. Bigfoot sightings are claimed in the thousands and yet we have no clear trail cam images or footage of any bigfoot. No reasonable explanation is offered that does not include special pleading like bigfoots know what trail cams are and avoid them, or wild speculation about footage that exists, but is kept secret. Don't you think enough information has been collected in regards to bigfoot to supply and support several journal quality papers? These papers may not be accepted at first, but if enough quality scientist began to submit papers, eventually mainstream science will need to look. These papers would cover a variety of hypotheses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 No, I do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted February 4, 2016 Admin Share Posted February 4, 2016 Contrast Sasquatch with the Bili ape. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili_ape If a skull was found? Science would probably start listening to alot more reports and supposed traits of Sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oonjerah Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 If a skull was found, what's to show it was a bigfoot skull? How would an anthropologist make that connection? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) DNA testing, I assume. And unusual morphology most likely. Edited February 4, 2016 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) If a skull was found, what's to show it was a bigfoot skull? How would an anthropologist make that connection? Any anthropologist with graduate training, presented with that skull, would be able to find out more than enough to say "this is an unrecognized extant species of large hominid." The questions are (1) whether a find would get into such hands; (2) whether that person would make that pronouncement publicly; and (3) what would happen next. All would be legitimate concerns, given that there is more than enough evidence on the table right now...that the mainstream is ignoring. Edited February 5, 2016 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oonjerah Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 ^ Yes! So the skull finder would want a list of the most reliable anthropologists and DNA labs. That would be those who already work in the Bf field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Do not under any circumstance give the hypothetical skull to the bigfoot community. A find of that magnitude would be best served in the mainstream. It would have to remain free of all the negative press that bigfootism causes itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 ^ Yes! So the skull finder would want a list of the most reliable anthropologists and DNA labs. That would be those who already work in the Bf field? Wouldn't have to be...but chain of custody (see: Minaret Skull) is critical. One wants to make sure this doesn't get "lost" along the way. Whatever the finder does the finder doesn't let go of that skull; nobody gets to pull a disappear on it (which, if you haven't read about Minaret, is what happened there). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Insure it for a million dollars and then if someone doesn't return it you still have a million. Have it examined in your presence and don't travel by yourself. Remember what happened to the Phillip K. **** android head. OK that was silly, **** was his actual name... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted February 5, 2016 Author Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) Take the skull to a PHD in primate science and don't leave it. Would an insurance company insure it for a million? That would cost $10k probably. Don't you think enough information has been collected in regards to bigfoot to supply and support several journal quality papers? These papers may not be accepted at first, but if enough quality scientist began to submit papers, eventually mainstream science will need to look. These papers would cover a variety of hypotheses. If not, what is lacking? Yuchi, thats a chance I'm willing to take. Because I'm convinced its not a member of the genus Homo. I would welcome any evidence to the contrary such as evidence of butchering game with stone tools or cooking their meat on a fire?Regardless we will be cutting new ground and after its discovery I would be at the forefront of pushing legislation through to get the species protected. But I think its imperative to prove the species real at any cost first. Problem (for you) is the absence of evidence they are not of the genus Homo. Of well, I'm sure your family will be there at the greybar hotel on every visitation Sunday. Can you show me where legal rights where given to a creature outside of our own species in US law? Homo Sapien Sapien?And can you please answer my question in the kill club thread? I hate mucking up every BFF thread with our own vendetta for each other. Thank you. Sometimes we take ourselves too seriously. I'm guilty too. We are all frustrated but someday the mystery will be solved so let's enjoy it while it lasts. I went out late afternoon to hang some baits and there were three areas a mile apart that had elk skeletons. hmmmm................. cougars, poachers, or bigfoots? No foot prints. I never see foot prints ..................... they must try real hard not to leave them. Several BF sightings in the area. Edited February 5, 2016 by georgerm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Wish I could have seen them georgerm. In the premium research section I've been discussing what to look for in the field. If nothing else please take some good closeups of the bones and PM me if you don't want to post them here. A reasonable determination can be made as to what did it. I would appreciate it. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted February 5, 2016 BFF Patron Share Posted February 5, 2016 If a skull was found, what's to show it was a bigfoot skull? How would an anthropologist make that connection? There are numerous descriptions of large skills with double rows of teeth that are associated with giants that could possibly be BF. The skull sutures in modern humans are certainly typical of our species. Than again there are descriptions of skulls that are nearly twice the size of human. If Patty is typical of a BF, her skull would have the skull to support her appearance and the sagittal crest feature. You have to know what is normal of humans to know what is abnormal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Algonquian native speakers where known as the stutterers as tribal history would have it the spoke like they had a double set of teeth. Double teeth might be a recessive characteristic left over from when we evolved replacement sets of teeth around puberty, the initial genetic adaptation might have been a double set of teeth at the same time that later evolved into two sets that replaced each other sequentially. Algonquians in my area could have huge skulls, the most famous person up here was Passaconway and his skull measured 2 feet tall and is kept in France. He was also the mightiest first contact Shaman. Shamanism is also an outgrowth of schizophrenic and autistic like spectrum behaviors, so supernatural like abilities, ancient evolutionary adaptations, early hominoids and homonids could all have a high degree of associations. Natives tell of earlier men and believed they had great powers and were much stronger physically and psychically as well as spiritually, than modern man. May have ramifications for BF as well depending on the degree of relatedness and common inheritances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts