Rockape Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 On 10/9/2018 at 8:47 AM, Huntster said: Recently the opinion of the occasional stink associated with sasquatches might be assiciated with them caching meat What are they doing? Sticking it under their armpits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, Huntster said: I can accept that. I resemble that description. No, but your answers were confusing to me. I just wanted to understand how you came to believe that. Fair enough. I'll answer any questions as best I can, but when it comes to my beliefs they are not always grounded in logic, more of my gut. I feel what I feel because it feels right to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 No, but any touching it will get that stink on their fur, then it’s hard or takes time to get it off. Haven’t you had a dog roll in dead meat? Or, as if them rolling in a dead moose isn’t bad enough, we get mounds of dead salmon washing up here and there. If your dog rolls in that and comes home, it’s tempting just to shoot the SOB, lasso him, and drag him down the road. Skunk smells better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, Huntster said: No, but any touching it will get that stink on their fur, then it’s hard or takes time to get it off. Ok, I see. First time I'd heard that one. Quote Haven’t you had a dog roll in dead meat? Mine likes to roll in cow dung, the wetter and fresher the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Twist said: ....... when it comes to my beliefs they are not always grounded in logic....... Belief can be based upon many things: experience, education, faith, testimony, evidence, proof, scientifically tested methods, etc. Some beliefs appear stronger than others because of the basis of said beliefs. For example, my belief that coyotes inhabit California is much stronger than my belief that sasquatches inhabit California. 2 minutes ago, Rockape said: ........Mine likes to roll in cow dung, the wetter and fresher the better. I never could understand how an animal with such an acute sense of smell like a dog can like to roll in such stinky stuff, but they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Huntster said: Belief can be based upon many things: experience, education, faith, testimony, evidence, proof, scientifically tested methods, etc. Some beliefs appear stronger than others because of the basis of said beliefs. For example, my belief that coyotes inhabit California is much stronger than my belief that sasquatches inhabit California. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 12 minutes ago, Huntster said: I never could understand how an animal with such an acute sense of smell like a dog can like to roll in such stinky stuff, but they do. I have always thought it was ingrained in a predator animal, even a domesticated one, to lose their own scent by trying to smell like their surroundings. A dog rolling in dead fish will certainly make them smell like their surroundings- until ya get it home that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 Or maybe mask their own scent with the smell of death? But, frankly, I don’t see how the smell of dead meat beats the smell of a dog in any scenario.........unless he’s trying to bait a grizzly bear.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvedis Posted October 17, 2018 Share Posted October 17, 2018 (edited) On 10/9/2018 at 6:47 AM, Huntster said: Recently the opinion of the occasional stink associated with sasquatches might be associated with them caching meat fir future dining. Brown bears do this, and it would also help explain food resources for them in winter. On 10/11/2018 at 7:51 PM, Rockape said: What are they doing? Sticking it under their armpits? On 10/11/2018 at 7:55 PM, Huntster said: No, but any touching it will get that stink on their fur, then it’s hard or takes time to get it off. Haven’t you had a dog roll in dead meat? Or, as if them rolling in a dead moose isn’t bad enough, we get mounds of dead salmon washing up here and there. If your dog rolls in that and comes home, it’s tempting just to shoot the SOB, lasso him, and drag him down the road. Skunk smells better than that. The type of stench varies quite a bit when "witnesses" report it. Everything from the deadliest body odor you can ever possibly imagine, some chemical concoction that seems produced by rotting garbage, etc. It's a deadly force that saps the oxygen out of the area like you are in a phone booth. How does something that intensely stenchful not get noticed except occasionally? I would speculate the stench is their toxic metabolism. If any rotting meat is in their vicinity of course that would only amplify it. They don't seem to mind ingesting toxic substances (cooking grease for example) in whatever form they can obtain it and consume it. There have been crude lean-tos discovered with rotting meat but never confirmed if it is the work of a someone living in the deep woods or some creature. They prefer dwelling in inhospitable landscapes that humans have a hard time enduring in for any stretch of time. That seems to be a clue perhaps how they are able to remain undetected. On 10/4/2018 at 1:45 PM, James33 said: First, a brief background. I've been fascinated with bigfoot since the 6th grade, as well as interested in all cryptids (Loch Ness, mothman, chupacabra, UFO sightings, abductions, etc). I've read and watched just about everything on the subject but have never seen or experienced anything at all. I'd love to believe that bigfoot is real but I have many reservations resulting in questions I'd like to get some feedback on. From a scientific perspective, a habitat has to have the ability to sustain the population of the animals that live there. Based on what I've read and heard, sightings of multiple bigfoot (families, herds, clans, etc) are super rare to non-existent. It's always a single animal sighted. There has to be a number for a viable population in an area - 200? 300? Let's break it down a little into separate questions. 1. How many animals would it take to produce a viable population, and over how many square miles would that population likely be scattered? For instance, juvenile and infant bigfoots would most likely stay with their mothers or family unit for protection for some time. You'd have to have "groups" of these animals at least for some time after a birth. They all can't be loners all the time. Also, in order to breed they'd have to located members of the opposite sex. Do they migrate to a specific spot or "home" location? Wander across a mate by luck and have a quickie behind a tree? Everyone always says they are extremely intelligent. Does anyone have any insight as to how they breed, raise their young, and if there is any family or clan type structure like in other apes? 2. What do they eat? They are HUGE and super muscular according to reports. Are they vegan? Omnivores? How many calories a day would they have to consume to live and grow? Seems like a lot based on how they look. Multiply that by the viable population for the habitat they are in and see if it's even possible the area could support such a creature. Some wild animals spend all of their time hunting and eating. Seems like all bigfoot does is bang on trees, holler, and occasionally walk by someone. If they are eating berries and the like, what do they do in winter? Are competing for meat with other predators? Does one hunt and bring it back for the others or is it every squatch for itself? 3. Where do they sleep and care for their young? I've seen the "nests" people have posted. Not very convincing of anything to me. Do they simply constantly walk around and sleep wherever each night or day? Do they migrate back and forth but never stay in one area? Maybe they have to in order to not starve. These questions are what lead me most to believe it simply isn't real. We aren't talking about a bug or a small mammal or reptile that's hidden in the rain forest. We are talking about a 8 ft creature that has to have a huge supply of water and food, some sort of social culture to allow it to breed and raise it's young, and be smart enough to avoid detection of it's existence. Seems like quite the stretch to me. James They seem to operate in small groups. We don't know how often they travel solo. Presumably they do it but it is not uncommon for witnesses to think their encounter involves just one but then others randomly show up. We have limited insight into their family structure. We do know they protect their young. They tend to be territorial in general but especially when their young are in the area. They migrate according to an agenda only they know and dwell wherever humans aren't. They have no natural predators so they can pretty much sleep wherever they want. I think they find caves, any natural cavities in the ground or they just make nests to sleep in out in the open. All animals and probably birds, reptiles, insects and plants, can sense their funky vibe and avoid the species at all costs. So at top of the food chain they can exist wherever they want. No doubt they foul our rivers and streams! They have been known to have an affinity with water so we know they come into contact with it. They are aggressive with pursuing food sources and apparently, human-animal ecosystems are sustaining them somehow. We know some of them selectively eat pets in remote areas. Also, like their habitats, they are capable of eating things humans do not like feral pigs, tubers, burrowing rodents and insects. Plus, anything they can root out of trees, tree stumps, roots, and plants. There is lots of agriculture in the wild. Berries, nuts, seeds and so forth. Is it enough to sustain such massive creatures? Well, they have been known to leave ginormous piles of feces in their wake so apparently they are eating well. Edited October 17, 2018 by Arvedis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted October 17, 2018 Admin Share Posted October 17, 2018 Apes have scent glands that secrete a foul odor when they are distraught. https://seaworld.org/animal-info/animal-infobooks/gorilla/physical-characteristics So they may not go around stinking their whole life. Its only when they bump into screeching humans or honking cars that they emit a foul odor. Presumably of course. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvedis Posted October 17, 2018 Share Posted October 17, 2018 2 hours ago, norseman said: Apes have scent glands that secrete a foul odor when they are distraught. https://seaworld.org/animal-info/animal-infobooks/gorilla/physical-characteristics uh...no Apes are not comparable to BF. Different species. And...the range of different experiences people have had with BF and stench covers far more than simply a deterrent as an animal would use. 2 hours ago, norseman said: So they may not go around stinking their whole life. Its only when they bump into screeching humans or honking cars that they emit a foul odor. Presumably of course. Incorrect. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 17, 2018 Share Posted October 17, 2018 4 hours ago, Arvedis said: Apes are not comparable to BF. Different species. Different group, too? Personally, bigfoot is indeed a great ape, as are humans. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James33 Posted October 17, 2018 Author Share Posted October 17, 2018 I'm seeing posts about bone piles, large amounts of feces being found, possible birthing areas, and areas with "very high activity". Yet none of this is evidence of bigfoot. Even if it's not hoaxed, not knowing what caused it or where it came from doesn't make it bigfoot. That, to me, is simply a huge leap to where you want to be. A lot of you here are obviously very educated - I appreciate the scientific approach to my questions. I just can't understand how no one can get a good photo or video of this animal, given that so many are looking for it and so many people supposedly see it or have a close encounter with one. There are a lot of sightings all over the U.S. - from Florida to Washington. There are professional expeditions that spend time in the deep woods. There are those who supposedly "know where they are" but can never produce anything. I've heard about encounters that include bone piles where it looks like they "have dinner" on a regular basis. Yet these people who report it never go back or show someone else where these are located. I've heard where people are terrified it would kill them during an encounter, yet no one has ever been killed by one or even physically attacked. Unless there are only a handful across the country (which I doubt if they are real), they would not be able to hide all the time. We have night vision, infrared cameras, drones, game cameras, and more. Yet still this sub-human creature stays hidden from the smartest, most advanced life form on the planet, unless you happen to be out in the woods without a camera, gun to shoot it with, or other means to capture evidence. Then it walks past, hangs out, strolls in front of your car, etc. The whole subject is totally fascinating to me - I really enjoy the discussion!! And to quote one of my favorite TV shows, "The Truth is out there..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatFoot Posted October 17, 2018 Share Posted October 17, 2018 This is what perplexes me as well. We have people who know quite a bit about these things because they've observed them or been around them quite a bit, but none have ever produced a body. If that's the case there's really only two options: 1) They're too human to the person having the interaction. If that's the case it's hard to imagine that some lucky SOB, who hasn't had an interaction before, hasn't just shot one at a quick glance and produced a body. 2) They aren't putting themselves out there to people who they perceive to want to cause them harm. This puts them out of the flesh and blood territory which I have a hard time believing. I guess the third could be they are a flesh and blood ape and there's a massive conspiracy to keep their existence hidden, which is still hard to believe. All very interesting and confusing at the same time. Just my 2 cents as I go back and forth all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 17, 2018 Share Posted October 17, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, James33 said: And to quote one of my favorite TV shows, "The Truth is out there..." One of my all time favorites as well. And you (and they) are correct: The truth IS out there....somewhere? Are there enough private resources thrown at the issue? Is science researching the enigma? Is government? Is there enough in the way of history and reports to get any of those entities seriously involved? I would say yes, and there have been some investigations in the past even from groups like National Geographic apparently to no avail. Has that stopped people from believing or looking anyway? Not really. So what is the plan for discovery that is somehow better than anything so far? That's my question and basically always has been my question: How does one solve this issue. A dozen researchers in the woods in say Washington State hasn't done it. Or anywhere else either. IS there a solution or plan that would have a better chance for success even if very different than what has and is being tried so far? These are the types of things that run around in my brain and have done so nearly every day for the past five years. IS there a way through to this truth without throwing up one's hands and accepting that 'yes' they exist or 'no' they don't? Or what I think is worse- living with the big question mark of 'what if'. I mean if one is serious about this then just what IS the solution that would gain the answer? A lot of people may have an opinion on that but I would like to see one that beats everything that so far has not worked. I have presented my ideas along those lines but I sure would like to hear what others suggest beyond a dozen years in the woods with little or nothing to show for it. Harsh? Yeah, maybe, but if there needs to be a different methodology outside of throwing money at Dr. Todd Disotell to do the Olympic Project's nest sample testing then I would like to hear what that new methodogy might be. Edited October 17, 2018 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts