SWWASAS Posted March 25, 2016 BFF Patron Posted March 25, 2016 What Dogmen are not real?. I found one yesterday and took a picture. This one is chained to the front of the BIgfoot steakhouse in Seaside OR. Sorry about the rotated picture. This is Apple revenge for putting IPhone pictures on a Microsoft computer.
Guest Crowlogic Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 Heads of bears and heads of dogs are very similar. Even more then BF dogman resembles bear. Dogmen are laughably bad for anyone over age 11 to even consider real. Hey how bout them portals though?
norseman Posted March 25, 2016 Admin Posted March 25, 2016 I think that if you acknowledge Sasquatch as a real creature, biological and natural in every aspect, well you might have to be open to the possibility that other creatures, maybe not so explainable, could perhaps exist. The Dogman sightings definitely point to something, whether natural or other I don't know. Reputable researchers of Sasquatch have seen Dogmen or their tracks, I cannot explain how they could exist, but you have a problem if you dismiss them simply on the grounds of what seems possible. I agree with you that it makes zero biological sense from my perspective, but who knows what might account for bipedalism in a canine, we were all once quadrupedal creatures(well at least if you buy into evolutionary theory which I have problems with anyway), perhaps they have taken the first steps in that evolutionary process, pardon the pun. Melba can be questioned on the basis of much more substantial things than her claims to sightings or experience. Sykes himself can attest to strange experiences, just read his chapter on the Big Guy, who happened to live underground beneath a large evergreen....Lets face it, we cannot account for much of what we claim in regards to Sasquatch, how it survived, developed bipedalism, continues to thrive despite intrusion into its environment on every side. You can fool yourself living off in the mountains to think that Sasquatch is limited to these areas, if anything can be proven it is that Sasquatch, if real, live across the country in most forested areas, and many sparsely forested areas. Just because a sighting is in a large forest vs a small forest does not preclude the latter as being as legitimate as the former. I get why it seems irrational to accept Dogman as viable, but can I write them off based on what I think is rational? The short answer? ABSOLUTELY.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted March 30, 2016 Posted March 30, 2016 His answers are now posted if anyone's interested http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1110646/pg1
ShadowBorn Posted March 30, 2016 Moderator Posted March 30, 2016 Bigfoot is as scientifically unproven as I am Clubbedfoot What you trying to say there that you do not exist? Some thing Fishy with this statement !
Recommended Posts