If Bigfoot Were Real.

[hiflier]

SWWA, man I wish I could plus you 10 times for that one- tell you what, over the course of a month or so you'll  get those 10 plusses. So yes, I couldn't agree more with what you said. The "dumb ape" mentality is something I've always been curious about. Sure I say "animal" and "creature" a lot but never have I thought ape. Sasquatch is much further along than that and if I were to place it on an evolutionary development line I put it at the halfway point between us and the Great Apes. But neither ape nor Human. It is......something other.....not as developed as we are brain-wise but superior to apes. Most of the physical dexterities of  a Human but without the capacity for imaginative  thought.

 

If I were to put my finger on the difference I'd say that BF does not have a right brain advantage. I think that about sums up the mental acumen it may possess- it just may be an entirely left-brained construct; i.e. it thinks but without its right brained imagination available to it like we have available to us. It's body is in the Human world- it's brain is in the animal world. I've said it before: A bear in a Human's body. Smarter though because it IS in a Human's body. Its physicality has taught and allowed it much more and so it does do much more. 

 

Imagine a bear inside such a body. Because it's dexterity in the wild would be upped a thousand fold it would become what it is that people have reported. It really does make the most sense. Before I had said Bear/Human hybrid but I never meant in the true hybrid sense as being a product of a Bear/Human coupling. Only that it had what both worlds could offer as a combined species. A Sasquatch. 

Edited August 12, 2016 by hiflier

[sheri]

Why is a bigfoot smarter than an ape hiflier ? What makes you think a bear is smarter than an ape or a bigfoot hiflier ?

[FarArcher]

Narratives, including narratives personally told to me, indicate clearly they have tactical excellence in their family/clan groups.  That is indicative of a reasonable amount of intelligence.

 

Other narratives, indicate they are aware of what would happen if they began killing humans wholesale.  We have narratives of past fights between these things and humans, and clearly, while BF has had some victories and has lots of nocturnally superior abilities, humans once they feel really threatened, will hunt an opponent almost to extinction - at least in their own backyard.

 

It may be a bit of genetic memory as well.  

 

But for whatever reason, they elect to not embrace a general confrontational mindset - something that to me indicates a bit of prudent reasoning.

 

And THEN, with scores, and hundreds of endeavors to look for them and plant hundreds of trail cameras, they seem to be able to avoid the traps and drives of a supposed "superior mind."

 

In truth, most BF hunters have no idea what they're up against, much less how to succeed.  And that's proven every day that passes.

[hiflier]

sheri it may very well be smarter but only in that it has been able to perform better than an ape so it level of experience and ability is greater. That makes it seem smarter. You and I have the same intelligence perhaps but you may be smarter in doing some things that I am because of training or experience. And I do not think that a bear is smarter that an ape or a Bigfoot. But a Bigfoot as a species of bear will make it a more versatile bear since it has a primate body. Bears and Sasquatches are equally smart but the physical body of the Bearsquatch will allow it to things a typical bear cannot do so of course it will be smarter. Not necessarily more intelligent which might have been a better word for you to use? different animals are differently smart according to their natural shape. They make do with what they have. Intelligence is a different kettle of fish and I think most higher life forms on this planet share similar intelligence levels, Intelligence is a capacity for learning. Bears learn to balance on balls, Chimpanzees learn to tie shoes. Both animals are extremely intelligent.

Edited August 13, 2016 by hiflier

[sheri]

Your bigfoot bear theory that you pulled out of thin air is utter nonsense. you have been listening to, to many theoretical scientists haven't you.  Just because you say it, doesn't make it so. come back to earth hiflier.            

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

[hiflier]

Listening to too many theoretical scientists? I have not watched TV in nearly 5 years and RARELY listen to radio. I don't read Meldrum, or hardly anyone else either. I also didn't pull this "out of thin air". This came from asking real questions and doing research on the "habits" if you will that I've gleaned from the reports and databases. So why don't you please stop attacking the messenger here. It's in poor taste. Attack the message instead as there's certainly enough there to keep you occupied for a while unless you choose to not participate.

 

Can you explain eye shine? I mean other than it's biological make up and  function can you explain how it came to be a reported feature in many reports? Lemurs on Madagascar) are the only primate that possesses eye shine. Making the leap that Sasquatch therefore must be of Lemur descent is huge stretch. But bears DO have eye shine.- usually it reflects as red. Sasquatch eyes reflect red along with other colors. Now you may say , "Well if Sasquatch reflects other colors then it proves it isn't a bear". but the fact that there IS eye shine says it is. We've seen a lot of Sasquatch hair samples come back bear. Now why is it they we accept things that rule out Sasquatch but refuse to allow a concept that would RULE IN Sasquatch- especially where hair is concerned.

 

Most if not all Sasquatch hair samples come back bear. I really have been questioning those outcomes as a means to rule out Sasquatch simply on the basis that ...wait for it... the hair doesn't say primate. So we just toss out all of those the hair samples and go on our merry way? NOT ME. I question why, if they were submitted as coming from a Sasquatch, do they test as bear. There's something going on there and it's been this way with samples for years. Dr. Sykes' Yeti hairs- oh, that shows that a once thought to be extinct polar bear is evidently now still alive. Sorry but everything just seems a little off with all of this. But you are right, just because I think this doesn't make it so. That's why I started this thread- to discuss the possibilities whether you think there are any or not.

 

Your position seems adamantly opposed to this and so now that you have stated you opinion.....well, you can still stick around if you wish of course.     

Edited August 13, 2016 by hiflier

[FarArcher]

Humans even have a bit of eye shine, and we've all seen it in photographs with red eye.  It occurs in low light when the eye is somewhat dilated, and then a flash photo is taken.  It even occurs with actors on stage, but due to the relatively small size of the eye and the small size of the possible reflective angle in the human eye, usually only the spotlight operator can see it.  Same thing with infrared light - it reflects too.

 

The critter I saw - his eyes must have been three times the size of mine - and I certainly didn't see any eye shine - but with eyes that large, I can see how that could happen.  And the fact that the BF is definitely gifted in nocturnal capabilities, that would indicate an even wider dilation of the eyes, more likely to show eye shine.

[hiflier]

Red eye in Humans is a fact for sure, we've all at least seen it in images. It where light reflects off of red blood cells and not a result of a tapetum lucidum as is found in nocturnal or crepuscular creatures. Bears definitely have the tapetum lucidum going for them. Sasquatch eyes have been reported reflecting red, green, orange, yellow, and even blue. I would say therefore as others do that it has a tapetum lucidum as well. 

[JDL]

22 hours ago, FarArcher said:

Narratives, including narratives personally told to me, indicate clearly they have tactical excellence in their family/clan groups.  That is indicative of a reasonable amount of intelligence.

 

Other narratives, indicate they are aware of what would happen if they began killing humans wholesale.  We have narratives of past fights between these things and humans, and clearly, while BF has had some victories and has lots of nocturnally superior abilities, humans once they feel really threatened, will hunt an opponent almost to extinction - at least in their own backyard.

 

It may be a bit of genetic memory as well.  

 

But for whatever reason, they elect to not embrace a general confrontational mindset - something that to me indicates a bit of prudent reasoning.

 

And THEN, with scores, and hundreds of endeavors to look for them and plant hundreds of trail cameras, they seem to be able to avoid the traps and drives of a supposed "superior mind."

 

In truth, most BF hunters have no idea what they're up against, much less how to succeed.  And that's proven every day that passes.

 

100% agree.  I look back on the old Jack the Giant Killer stories and wonder....

[sheri]

hiflier, how do you know bears and sasquatches are equally smart ? Why would a bear have a primate body ? I have read hundreds and hundreds of sightings and encounters. There were no bears traits. They rock clack like chimps, they throw rocks and sticks like chimps. They hoot like chimps. They are omnivores like chimps. They build nests on the ground like gorilla's, they grunt like gorilla's {which I encountered myself }, they bend trees like gorilla's, they bluff charge like gorillas, many have the sagittal crest as a gorilla, and some have the same hair  coloring as orangutans. So why again are they more like bears ?

 

Edited August 17, 2016 by sheri

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

12 hours ago, sheri said:

hiflier, how do you know bears and sasquatches are equally smart ? Why would a bear have a primate body ? I have read hundreds and hundreds of sightings and encounters. There were no bears traits. They rock clack like chimps, they throw rocks and sticks like chimps. They hoot like chimps. They are omnivores like chimps. They build nests on the ground like gorilla's, they grunt like gorilla's {which I encountered myself }, they bend trees like gorilla's, they bluff charge like gorillas, many have the sagittal crest as a gorilla, and some have the same hair  coloring as orangutans. So why again are they more like bears ?

 

They have a lot bigger brain than a bear.

Here is a side by side to help you out.

You will notice the proportions are all different.

Evolution does not get you from point A to point B here as there is no common starting point.

We were all reptilian but we are not all hominids.

 

Edited August 17, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[SWWASAS]

You don't have to go back to reptilian ancestry, they are both mammals.   That is a fairly recent commonality in the animal world.     Bipedalism is a fairly recent development in human development.     There is no reason to discount that  BF and humans had common ancestry at some point and developed bipedalism independently of each other, possibly at very different times.      If I had a vote,  I would vote that the BF line was bipedal before humans were, just because BF walk seems more efficient.   That would be a good question to ask Meldrum.   I would imagine that he has studied the efficiency of protohuman walk compared with modern human and could compare the human and BF efficiency.   

Edited August 19, 2016 by SWWASAS

[norseman]

I would say the Sasquatch gait is way more inefficient. They have a mid tarsal break instead of a longitudinal arch. Which allows us to have some spring in our step.

[guyzonthropus]

Perhaps it's inefficient in terms of our needs over our past, but maybe quite effective for theirs in that they utilise climbing far more than do we, at least at some stages of their lives.

[norseman]

I'd say it's effective in mountainous terrain but not as efficient as our bipedal step.