Jump to content
Cali209otherworlder

What is the biggest you believe Sasquatches can get? (They get bigger than you think)

Recommended Posts

norseman
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, Catmandoo said:

 

I disagree with your initial disagreement and your upcoming secondary and tertiary disagreements.

 

It evolved large molars to grind bamboo. 

I want you to extrapolate the jaw bone of mastiff/bull dog types to a 'working dog'. They are not terribly big dogs.

Bodies in science do question the size. The debate ranges from 9.8' to 6.6' with the females being half the size of the males. A skeleton has not been found yet. Until that time, it is a questionable guess.

 

Lack of skeletons in Giganto regions puzzles me. Bones can be used as food as in marrow. Bones can be tools/weapons. What about burning bones for fire?  The peoples of the arctic regions burned bones for lack of woody shrubs and trees thousands of years ago. Explorers of the 18th century learned to burn bones. It was a life saver. Did the Asians of the era burn bones?

 

Orangutans eat bamboo as well. Their molars like Gorillas are dwarfed by Giganto. Which is why science believes its the biggest ape that ever lived. Much more likely than a small ape with a disproportionate giant mouth.

 

Not touching the Dog analogy with a ten foot pole.....

 

Ape fossils are rare, because jungles do not bode well for fossil creation. Lot more fossils of human ancestors in the rift valley after we left the jungle trodding out on two legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Human fossils in the African Savanna are the result of an arid climate and probably flash flooding from thunderstorms covering the bodies before the scavengers got to them.       SE Asia is mostly limestone Karst topography with the acidic rains eating it away making huge sink holes and numerous caves.     The largest caves in the world are located there.         Bones are not much different than limestone in an acidic wet environment after the bacteria have done their thing.     So fossils are even more rare in that environment.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DoninLouisiana

Has anyone taken a look at Blayne Tyler's Land of Giants video? He has a pic of what he says is a bigfoot close to 15ft tall.(Taken in Canada) Go to the 5:00 mark and begin there if you just want to see

the creature. 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Fuzzy blob to me.   I guess he stripped it from a video which results in poor resolution.      His front and back Gopro's harness was interesting.   Did not want to miss one stepping out to look after he past by it.   

Edited by SWWASAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo
BFF Donor

Typical You Tube audio-visual clutter. He talks too much, has his face in view more than the field work. Poor resolution. He will not have stabilized recordings. He stated that Sasquatch use molecular vibration as a method of avoiding  detection.  Funny, molecular vibration is 'heat'. The molecules of a very cold object vibrate less than a hot object. Must be a real hot Sasquatch there at the Bigfoot Barn.

 

Odd that he uses feet and inches instead of the metric system, eh.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Yes and the incessant camera panning really helps see something.     He did use the term molecular vibration so I am surprised he did not mention dimension hopping or quantum physics.      After all like a subatomic particle,    the position of BF cannot be determined until it is observed.   :D

Edited by SWWASAS
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor
9 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

After all like a subatomic particle,    the position of BF cannot be determined until it is observed.   :D

 Then BF would have to abide by the laws governing quantum entanglement as well. Which means if someone shoots on Pluto then the one in front of you on Earth will drop like a sack of potatoes. WOW! I need to run and go tell Norseman! ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo
BFF Donor

Hollow hairs factor was mentioned. He proposes a Chameleon like ability to change color,  like being green while hiding in grass. So now we have a Hulk-Predator-Bigfoot in Canada, eh. I am staying out of Canada and sticking with the black haired Sasquatch in the PNW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor
2 minutes ago, Catmandoo said:

He proposes a Chameleon like ability to change color,  like being green while hiding in grass

 

Why do all that when shape shifting would all that is required, EH! :D But if shape shifting AND having Chameleon also? Man, we don't have a snowball's chance of EVER getting one. QUICK, everyone with a gun, get to Pluto!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
44 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 Then BF would have to abide by the laws governing quantum entanglement as well. Which means if someone shoots on Pluto then the one in front of you on Earth will drop like a sack of potatoes. WOW! I need to run and go tell Norseman! ;) 

Only if BF on Pluto was paired with the one on earth previously.     I hate to bring it up but that reminds me that one possible but unlikely explanation for BF is that it is extra terrestrial.   That would explain the lack of fossils,   no ancestral history,   interest of the government,   invisibility,  inability to photograph etc etc.     Probably the star gate can only transport biological entities so they end up on earth without their clothes.    I hope they click like the Predator did so you know where they are.   Note to self:    get a good supply of mud to smear all over me so it cannot see me.      Don't suggest any of this to the Land of Giants guy or it will end up featured on his next video.     

Edited by SWWASAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor
27 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

 Don't suggest any of this to the Land of Giants guy or it will end up featured on his next video.

 

Uh.....ok......don't worry SWWASAS. Mum's the word.....(snicker)......promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spacemonkeymafia

Gotta love all the self proclaimed "experts" in the field....:jester:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Old Dog
On 12/3/2018 at 11:52 AM, MIB said:

That multiplier is 1) for humans and 2) an average.   

 

I have never claimed 15.5 feet.

 

Sadly they don't have a multiplier for Sasquatch, human is all we have to go by.

 

I never said you claimed it was 15.5 feet, only that by using that multiplier it would come out to that size.  

 

Don't take my comment as a judgement or my inference that you are lying.  I believe in the truth of all accounts until I am given proof to the contrary, so your sighting is just as valid as any others.  Wish I had seen what you saw.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David NC
BFF Donor

MIB your friends calculation would be pretty close IMO. The track I found was a 20" L x 10" w (at the ball of the foot). I was thinking it was taller than what I later measured from a friend that had a tall dead stump to measure from that it was seen next to. I was using the proportion for humans and was getting 12'  when I did the measurements at the old stump the height was closer to 9' =- an inch or 2. Very likely the 24" track maker was around 11'-12'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB

Thanks.   I see her logic and yours, I'm just trying to stay conservative.    I was told bigfoots top out at 9 feet or less so I spent a very long time trying to shoe-horn that guy into 9-1/2 feet ... and he just doesn't fit with the "yardsticks" that were present.   10.5 is about the bare minimum if all the factors came together perfectly for minimum.    That's what I'll stick with though you, and she, may well be closer to right. :)   

 

MIB 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×