My Perspective and questions for you all

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, James33 said:

.........and you'd think that if they had access to a farmer's field of readily available food, they'd take advantage of it to the point of the farmer noticing.

 

But some reports say they do and they do get seen doing it. One was caught holding a calf in a barn. and there are accounts of them being seen carrying corn from a field, bothering livestock in a corral, standing behind or next to barns, and engaging in other activities around farms.

[James33]

24 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

But some reports say they do and they do get seen doing it. One was caught holding a calf in a barn. and there are accounts of them being seen carrying corn from a field, bothering livestock in a corral, standing behind or next to barns, and engaging in other activities around farms.

 

Ok - did the farmer shoot it?  Or at it?  Or do anything to stop it?  If not, then the animal would continue to come back to get the easily available food. After all, bigfoot doesn't seem to be afraid of humans at all. Even if it was shot at, odds are an animal would continue to try to get the food unless it was killed or eventually frightened off.  But it seems that once a bigfoot is seen, it's OUTTA THERE!  Permanently. Like it's smart enough to know not to come back.... Which I doubt.  Just like I doubt that a farmer has seen them but has zero evidence to prove it. 

 

 

[MindSquatch]

40 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

But some reports say they do and they do get seen doing it. One was caught holding a calf in a barn. and there are accounts of them being seen carrying corn from a field, bothering livestock in a corral, standing behind or next to barns, and engaging in other activities around farms.

They seem to have no problem going after sheep, especially when the ranchers always seem to think it was coyotes who killed their sheep. I remember some years back not far from this bfro report how ranchers were blaming coyotes for killing their sheep. Now seeing this report, maybe it's not always the case. Interesting how two Bigfoot's worked together which enabled them to effectively kill more sheep than maybe if it was just one of them. 

 

http://bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=8059

[hiflier]

32 minutes ago, James33 said:

 

Ok - did the farmer shoot it?  Or at it?  Or do anything to stop it?  If not, then the animal would continue to come back to get the easily available food. After all, bigfoot doesn't seem to be afraid of humans at all. Even if it was shot at, odds are an animal would continue to try to get the food unless it was killed or eventually frightened off.  But it seems that once a bigfoot is seen, it's OUTTA THERE!  Permanently. Like it's smart enough to know not to come back.... Which I doubt.  Just like I doubt that a farmer has seen them but has zero evidence to prove it. 

 

 

 

Oh I understand completely what you are saying, James33. I really do. And of course you or I weren't at any of those encounters and , too, I doubt farmers watch their fields 24/7 so who know if a BF comes back. And farmers have shot them and at them. But if you were really interested in this subject beyond poking holes at then you would be interested enough to read reports regarding BF's menacing farmers. Some farmers have sometimes reported on going issues but again, you appear to be not aware of such things. Your last statement (bolded) seems to read as a contradiction but I know what you meant  

[FarArcher]

On 10/4/2018 at 3:45 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

 

 

 

 

 

 

James33,

 

All those are really good questions that I fear will go unanswered for a long time.  I was in the camp that it was fun to think of such a creature - but it just didn't exist., and even then, it would only make me think about it when it would be mentioned by someone else or some reference in passing.  I never gave them a thought.

 

When I came face to face with one - all that changed.  

 

Since I've come to that realization - I recognize that most of these questions come from those who don't KNOW.  They're trying to believe something, but can't get there because it makes no sense.  They get to worrying about how many there are, how they keep from being found, no bodies found in the wild, how do they possibly eat being so large, if they migrate - why aren't they more easily detected, how to they make do without tools, how do they survive harsh weather, etc., etc., etc. 

 

They want to believe - they may think they believe - but belief is BS.  Belief is entirely in your head - a mental condition.

 

So they worry over the facts like a dog worries over a bone.  They want to believe, but they have doubts - they want the answers to questions that can't be answered.

 

Because of one thing.  They assume this thing is like them - or the opposite - very unlike them.  They can't mentally accept these things for what they actually are - without measuring it against human limitations, preferences, and requirements.  Thus the calorie analysis - which means crap.  Population sized - based on human needs and perceptions - which means crap.  Food sources - based on human needs and requirements - which means crap.  Why don't they use tools - like we'd find useful - which means crap.

 

Their measuring post is wrong.  The foundation for comparisons - is wrong.  These are NOT human, and while some will blow that off and say "obviously," they continue to compare their needs and capabilities by human needs and capabilities.

 

I got some bad news.  They're not human - and their needs or abilities - are nothing like human needs and abilities.

 

Cows, horses, etc., can eat and get fat on grass - only because they have a different digestive system - AND enzymes we don't have.  Termites can eat wood - cellulose - and break it down quite well - and there's more BTU's of energy in wood than BTU's in grass - although the 'calorie count' wouldn't compute.

 

What they eat, what they can digest - we don't know - and to do a calorie requirement based on size in relation to a human calorie requirement is just BS.

 

I've lived and worked for extended times in polar conditions, arctic conditions, tundra conditions, alpine conditions, savannah conditions, southern swamp conditions, eastern forest conditions, triple canopy jungle conditions - anything you can name - I've worked and lived, and functioned under those conditions.  I did without what most everyone would consider necessary.  I've been without water for three days and three nights.  I ate every third day - not three times a day.

 

I've gone a full seven days and nights with not one bite to eat - only water.  And that's just me -  and you adapt, you get by.  You make it work.

 

Their large size does not constitute a significant disadvantage in getting noticed.  Their hair reflects zero light.  In combat, we'd come upon a larger force - and once all we could do in the moment was to bend forward at the waist.  It was enough to break up our "normal" silhouette.   We've had these 8-foot critters hide from us completely undetected in 14-16" mountain flowers.  Only to note them when we turned our back, when they'd take off.  Masters of hiding.

 

A lot of what worries others - aren't even factors to consider.

 

They are what they are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pdub]

Great thread. I’m in the camp that if they exist they have to be in small numbers. I haven’t personally seen one so I don’t know, just one strange experience in the BWCA. Until we have a body on a slab I will continue to struggle with the lack of observable environmental impact of 600+ lb  eating machines. I won’t even guess the daily caloric intake a creature of this description would require...similar to a grizzly?

 

I did just just look it up, here in Minnesota there is about 17.4 million acres of forest land. Most of that is in NE part of the state and in SE MN bluff country along the Mississippi. That is a lot land to hide in, especially in NE MN. Relatively few people live up there (you have to be a bit crazy to live in Northern MN in winter which is a good 5 months long). I guess if the known wildlife can survive/thrive in that ridiculous cold, Bigfoot could too. If they do live up there what are they eating in winter? They would have to be storing/gathering food, would be slim pickings in winter. 

[James33]

I find the subject fascinating on several fronts - but I don't think my questions of where do they go in winter, what do they eat, where do they sleep, how do they evade discovery, how large is their population, do they have groups/tribes, etc to be BS or trite/ridiculous.  The answer to these questions are not "it is what it is" and just go with it because they are real.  They are not supernatural - sorry, but that's just beyond ridiculous. They aren't from space ships or other dimensions either.  IF bigfoot exists, it is simply an undiscovered animal that is a close relative to us or other apes. That assumption is based on footprints and the eye witness accounts, neither of which prove anything. 

 

It's fascinating to me

• That a large ape like creature with a large enough population to be viable could exist  and remain hidden for hundreds/thousands of years.
• That with all of the eye witness accounts and those who claim to have seen them many times, know where they live, where they are, etc but they have zero evidence to bring to the table besides blurry photos, dark blobs, recorded noises, and some plaster casts of prints. 
• That all of the big reveals (i.e. bodies, DNA, etc) have all been fake, hoaxed, or so poorly done that they are worthless.
• That some people believe it to be a supernatural creature of some kind or able to "cloak" or enter other dimensions. 
• That even if I discount 95% of the sightings, what about the other 5%?  This is what keeps me hooked. I'd LOVE to see one.  

[norseman]

Here is my caloric intake thread. It attempts to flesh out what a large animal would need per day.

 

 

[Rockape]

On 10/31/2018 at 10:10 PM, norseman said:

This is exactly why the Soviets s**tcanned you guys!!! All you guys are good at is chasin skirts and stuffing your face!

 

I don't mind a little personal chaffing but the missus didn't like that remark. I'm having to hold her back.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not only would they have to be a very small population, that very small population would have to be very good at staying away from humans. The hide and seek champs as they say.

 

 

[salubrious]

49 minutes ago, James33 said:

• That even if I discount 95% of the sightings, what about the other 5%?  This is what keeps me hooked. I'd LOVE to see one.  

I saw not one but two, real close up and in good lighting (the brights of my truck).

 

I can tell you that my inability to get a photo or any sort of evidence that it happened, in a word, sucks. All I have is my memories which I will take to my grave- no-one will ever sort out what it is that I saw, least of all myself (I know what I saw, just don't know what they were, or what they were doing).

 

Its the sort of thing that if you talk about it, you're a nutbag in most company. So you have to keep your mouth shut unless you don't mind being branded as an idiot. Its not actually that great, but oddly, I would not mind seeing one again...

[norseman]

12 minutes ago, salubrious said:

I saw not one but two, real close up and in good lighting (the brights of my truck).

 

I can tell you that my inability to get a photo or any sort of evidence that it happened, in a word, sucks. All I have is my memories which I will take to my grave- no-one will ever sort out what it is that I saw, least of all myself (I know what I saw, just don't know what they were, or what they were doing).

 

Its the sort of thing that if you talk about it, you're a nutbag in most company. So you have to keep your mouth shut unless you don't mind being branded as an idiot. Its not actually that great, but oddly, I would not mind seeing one again...

 

You saw TWO! Sorry! You have to go to the back of the line now!

22 minutes ago, Rockape said:

 

I don't mind a little personal chaffing but the missus didn't like that remark. I'm having to hold her back.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not only would they have to be a very small population, that very small population would have to be very good at staying away from humans. The hide and seek champs as they say.

 

 

 

*tips hat*

 

Sorry Ma’am....... I think.

[James33]

38 minutes ago, salubrious said:

I saw not one but two, real close up and in good lighting (the brights of my truck).

 

I can tell you that my inability to get a photo or any sort of evidence that it happened, in a word, sucks. All I have is my memories which I will take to my grave- no-one will ever sort out what it is that I saw, least of all myself (I know what I saw, just don't know what they were, or what they were doing).

 

Its the sort of thing that if you talk about it, you're a nutbag in most company. So you have to keep your mouth shut unless you don't mind being branded as an idiot. Its not actually that great, but oddly, I would not mind seeing one again...

 

I'm intrigued.

 

Where did you see them?  

What month and year and time of night?

Were you by yourself?

What was the weather like? 

Any chance you are mistaken due to being tired, under the influence of anything, or hallucinating? 

Did you stop to check for any evidence? 

Attempt to follow them? 

 

[hiflier]

2 hours ago, James33 said:

It's fascinating to me

• That a large ape like creature with a large enough population to be viable could exist  and remain hidden for hundreds/thousands of years.
• That with all of the eye witness accounts and those who claim to have seen them many times, know where they live, where they are, etc but they have zero evidence to bring to the table besides blurry photos, dark blobs, recorded noises, and some plaster casts of prints. 
• That all of the big reveals (i.e. bodies, DNA, etc) have all been fake, hoaxed, or so poorly done that they are worthless.
• That some people believe it to be a supernatural creature of some kind or able to "cloak" or enter other dimensions. 
• That even if I discount 95% of the sightings, what about the other 5%?  This is what keeps me hooked. I'd LOVE to see one.  

 

James33, you are actually in good company here on those points. But here's the thing, and I say this respectfully to someone who has thought a lot about this subject (you), what do you think the solution is for discovery? I mean, beyond just saying, "Well, we need to bring one in", or, "We need to find a skeleton, or a body, or shoot one". When I ask about a solution for discovery I really mean WHAT do you think is the best way to bring about discovery- HOW would you do it, if discovery is what you are interested in? How would one go about accomplishing such an end so that questions like yours and so many others could actually get answered.

 

It goes to the root of how badly do you want your questions answered?

 

The whole entire reason I am here is to find out as much as I can from others' experiences in order to formulate a PLAN for discovery. Because that is the real work that I have been doing: Designing a plan for discovery. The SRN is one of those plans. It is now off to a very slow start after initially gaining some local momentum before people disappeared after explaining the concept to them. Another plan is that I wrote a small book that introduces a plan to actually go out and look for the body, skeleton or, barring that, shooting one. The secondary plan for the book is to use the monies from its sale to fund a method for discovery.

 

So for me, discussing the subject of Bigfoot and our failings at proving the species to be real is just that- Discussion. My efforts are going pretty far beyond discussion and the same is true for others here as well. Efforts have been made and ARE being made outside of this Forum to somehow find a way to answer your questions. But there is a question that yet remains and that is what do you think would be a good very specific plan for discovery of whether or not this creature called Sasquatch is extant in North America? Is it even a fair question to ask? IDK, you tell me.   

Edited November 2, 2018 by hiflier

[James33]

2 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

James33, you are actually in good company here on those points. But here's the thing, and I say this respectfully to someone who has thought a lot about this subject (you), what do you think the solution is for discovery? I mean, beyond just saying, "Well, we need to bring one in", or, "We need to find a skeleton, or a body, or shoot one". When I ask about a solution for discovery I really mean WHAT is the best way to bring about discovery- if discovery is what you are interested in. Just how would one go about accomplishing such an end so that questions like yours and so many others could actually get answered?

 

The whole entire reason I am here is to find out as much as I can from others' experiences in order to formulate a PLAN for discovery. Because that is the real work that I have been doing: Designing a plan for discovery. The SRN is one of those plans. It is now off to a very slow start after initially gaining some local momentum before people disappeared after explaining the concept to them. Another plan is that I wrote a small book that introduces a plan to actually go out and look for the body, skeleton or, barring that, shooting one. The secondary plan for the book is to use the monies from its sale to fund a method for discovery.

 

So for me, discussing the subject of Bigfoot and our failings at proving the species to be real is just that- Discussion. My efforts are going pretty far beyond discussion and the same is true for others here as well. Efforts have been made and ARE being made outside of this Forum to somehow find a way to answer your questions. But there is a question that yet remains and that is what do you think would be a good very specific plan for discovery of whether or not this creature called Sasquatch is extant in North America? Is it even a fair question to ask? IDK, you tell me.   

 

Well the first thing I can think of would be to get with those researchers who claim to know where they are (Todd Standing and the like) and get them to take scientists, trackers, wild life photographers, marksmen/snipers with good gear (night vision,  top of the line cameras/lenses, high powered rifle with scope, thermal imaging, etc) to where these creatures are supposed to be all the time. If Todd and the like balk at it, I call them out as fake/hoaxers.  These people who say they have seen them multiple times need to put up or be called out as hoaxers. We all want the same thing - proof.  Proof can be a body or part of a body, bones of one, clear high resolution photos and or videos corroborated by those on the team (but if they see it, they should shoot to kill it- period). 

 

Failing that, it would take extreme luck.  Maybe find the location in the US with the most sightings in the last 6 months. Surely they are grouped by date and area.  Maybe have analysis on the data done to see if there is a migratory pattern at all over the course of a year. You'd have to limit your search to the most active region for an extended time. Barring that, it boils down to the right person being in the right place with the right equipment at the right time. But you'd think after all this time and eye witness reports, that would have happened in at least ONE of the sightings. 

[FarArcher]

6 hours ago, James33 said:

I find the subject fascinating on several fronts - but I don't think my questions of where do they go in winter, what do they eat, where do they sleep, how do they evade discovery, how large is their population, do they have groups/tribes, etc to be BS or trite/ridiculous.  The answer to these questions are not "it is what it is" and just go with it because they are real.  They are not supernatural - sorry, but that's just beyond ridiculous. They aren't from space ships or other dimensions either.  IF bigfoot exists, it is simply an undiscovered animal that is a close relative to us or other apes. That assumption is based on footprints and the eye witness accounts, neither of which prove anything. 

 

It's fascinating to me

• That a large ape like creature with a large enough population to be viable could exist  and remain hidden for hundreds/thousands of years.
• That with all of the eye witness accounts and those who claim to have seen them many times, know where they live, where they are, etc but they have zero evidence to bring to the table besides blurry photos, dark blobs, recorded noises, and some plaster casts of prints. 
• That all of the big reveals (i.e. bodies, DNA, etc) have all been fake, hoaxed, or so poorly done that they are worthless.
• That some people believe it to be a supernatural creature of some kind or able to "cloak" or enter other dimensions. 
• That even if I discount 95% of the sightings, what about the other 5%?  This is what keeps me hooked. I'd LOVE to see one.  

 

I was trying to say that by using HUMAN standards, and applying HUMAN standards to these things - that's the error.

 

This large creature in fact, has not exactly remained hidden for hundreds or thousands of years.  Google "Woodwose."  Then, pull up "Images."  They've been know for hundreds and even thousands of years.

 

If you've ever seen one - it's probably what we'd call in the military a "meeting engagement."  In other words, you don't have a camera in your hand, and you can't take your eyes off it, and you are stunned at what you're looking at.

 

The DNA taken to date - was obviously not taken from a critter.  They'd find hair, relics of rumor, and therefore - no real DNA.  I'd go so far as to suggest that some labs will pooch the test.  Their reputation relies on integrity - and finding a new species of man would shoot their reputation right in the O-ring.

 

Well, some people think they've had cameras implanted behind their eyes.  Usually, the same people that go supernatural or speak of cloaking also saw a UFO at the same time.  What are the chances  .  .  .  ?

 

If BF has additional enzymes - their source of calories is immediately accelerated on lower grade foods -