Bigfoot is real.

[Cotter]

 

[Twist]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

I bet most of us older humans are on so many medicines that we do taste bad.    Throw in the fact that most campers partake of adult beverages in camp and who knows what we would taste like.   

 

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

 

Uh, fermented chicken?

 

Hiflier beat me to it lol,  first thought was beer can chicken!  

[SWWASAS]

Ouch,     Only if the camper was careless about what he sat on.   

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, Arvedis said:

Realistically, how would a Bigfoot be eaten?.........

 

Like elephants; one bite at a time.

[SWWASAS]

I am not entirely convinced that BF avoids tool use.    I have seen enough that I think they may use tools of opportunity just like chimpanzees and gorillas are known to do.  The most common evidence of that is wood knocking.   When they see the need to knock they grab something close to make the knock.   This stick and rock glyph that was placed when I was present,  has some interesting rocks.   Those rock shards are very sharp edged.    There was absolutely nothing like that in the area of the stump so they were brought in.       Lack of weathering seems to indicate they were created fairly recently.   There was no dirt stain,  weathering or indication of use.    That suggests they were fabricated to me.    They are quite similar to rock shards used by paleolithic man as cutting and scraping tools.    I think not only should we be looking for bite marks on bones, but we should also be looking for scrapes on larger bones that might indicate rock tool use separating muscle from bone.   Of course they might have been created by local NA and found subsequently by BF.     They seem to have a bit of pack rat in their behavior.  

Edited November 13, 2018 by SWWASAS

[norseman]

2 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

I am not entirely convinced that BF avoids tool use.    I have seen enough that I think they may use tools of opportunity just like chimpanzees and gorillas are known to do.  The most common evidence of that is wood knocking.   When they see the need to knock they grab something close to make the knock.   This stick and rock glyph that was placed when I was present,  has some interesting rocks.   Those rock shards are very sharp edged.    There was absolutely nothing like that in the area of the stump so they were brought in.       Lack of weathering seems to indicate they were created fairly recently.   There was no dirt stain,  weathering or indication of use.    That suggests they were fabricated to me.    They are quite similar to rock shards used by paleolithic man as cutting and scraping tools.    I think not only should we be looking for bite marks on bones, but we should also be looking for scrapes on larger bones that might indicate rock tool use separating muscle from bone.   Of course they might have been created by local NA and found subsequently by BF.     They seem to have a bit of pack rat in their behavior.  

 

Now look at Acheulean hand axes made by early humans. Notice a difference in sophistication? 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Acheulean-handaxes-from-the-site-of-Boxgrove-England-which-dates-to-about-500-Ka-The_fig1_291516839

 

 

 

 

[Oonjerah]

My impression is that the NA are quite good with technology.

   However, when Columbus showed up,  they are going thru a low tech period.

So they gave us tobacco.  

[PBeaton]

I talked to one reluctant witness who described a sasquatch carrying a large stick, I recall another report from John Bindernagel, female with ducks if I recall. I do not recall a report of primitive tool use however. 

[gigantor]

2 hours ago, PBeaton said:

I do not recall a report of primitive tool use however

 

Do you consider a stick a tool?

 

ETA:  I mean wood knocking. If BF wood knocks, isn't that considered tool use?

 

 

[PBeaton]

gigantor,

 

Sure, a stick could be used as a tool...

 

Pat...

[norseman]

19 minutes ago, gigantor said:

 

Do you consider a stick a tool?

 

ETA:  I mean wood knocking. If BF wood knocks, isn't that considered tool use?

 

 

 

Yes, but only in the same way a chimp uses a twig to fish for termites. Very little manipulation of the natural resource to serve its purpose and then its discarded. Which is very very different from our early ancestors.

 

Flaking stone is not easy. One bad strike and the project is ruined.

 

 

[PBeaton]

Are there reports that describe tool use ? 

[norseman]

Throwing rocks and swing sticks is all I know about.

[gigantor]

12 minutes ago, PBeaton said:

Are there reports that describe tool use ? 

 

Here is one which I've always been impressed with if you consider wood knocking in order to hunt - tool use.  It was posted on BFF 1.0 by member Bigfootie back in July 2005.

 

https://bigfootforums.com/topic/19119-i-saw-wood-knocking/?tab=comments#comment-303107

 

Quote

....

 

September 23rd 1999. Sunny, low 70’s, a fresh steady fall breeze, approximately 3:00 pm, Adirondack State Park in the town of Whitehall N.Y. within 5 miles of the location of the infamous “Thumping in Whitehall†thread. I was bird watching for migrating Raptors along the western facing ridges of a favorite Mountain top. I was about 300 feet below the summit on the top of the cliffs. The idea is to watch the migrating raptors, local red tails and vultures catch the late afternoon thermals rising from the forest floor and with the right wind direction hitting the rock face of the ridge the birds will “pop†up within 20 feet of the edge of the cliff for some close and spectacular views. It was a great day and I was absorbed with the acrobatics in front of me.

Note: I believe my scent must have been carried behind me to the area that the sighting occurred because the breeze was steady into my face for a few hours prior. I had to have been scented.

My attention was focused in front of me and out into the sky for a mile. After the sighting I theorized that the sounds I heard behind me for 10 or 15 minutes prior were not hikers as I thought. The sounds were relatively benign sounds you would hear from a hiker clumsily approaching. Branches snapping, rocks “gently†clicking, rolling or moving as they are walked upon. About 5 or 6 instances of sounds were heard. Since I was not paying close attention I can only theorize this and if that is true the animal was closer to me at that point, perhaps 20 yards. When the sighting took place these types of ancillary sounds could not be heard due to the distance and interference of other sounds produced by the breeze itself and wind rustled leaves. But based on the observed movements I believe sounds were being made.

I heard a clear loud single “whack†not unusual in it’s self but my instinctual reaction was not that of being annoyed by another human invading my peace, but a feeling of concern. I was already sitting between 2 large rocks concealing my profile from the birds so I turned around and watched and listened. There was movement 90 yards distance, as determined by my 20x spotting scope. The woods were too shadowed for good light transmission to use my 20x60 spotting scope and I could not manage the attached tripod with out chancing excessive noise. I did gain a good focus at the point of movement and left the scope in that position and viewed it on a local football field on the way home to determine the point of focus. (after duct taping the focus ring in place prior to the hike down the mountain.)

I switched to my very bright 10x50 binoculars. The sun was to my back, the forest foliage was thick with approximately 70% deciduous trees, ground cover was sparse to non existent but the rise in the terrain caused the foliage of the trees in the forefront to partially obscure my view, the shadows were strong.

This is what I saw. Initially I saw a large upright animal dark in color approximately 6.5 feet in height, extremely wide in the shoulders and narrow in the waist with thighs that appeared very large in proportion to the body. It’s arms were relaxed at its side and long beyond the knees. My observation lasted about 10 minutes and the remainder of the time the arms did not again relax to be at the side but were held in front or active in whacking the tree. My impression or gut feeling was that of a young, robust, agile animal. It was fur covered but shadows and obstructions were too heavy to allow me to see too much detail. I determined the 6.5 foot height by measuring a glacially cleaved rock with a flat face that the animal was next to that later measured 3 feet and 3 inches. I “eye balled†the animal to be twice as tall as the rock. I estimated the weight to be 400+ lbs. I was 5’10 and 220 muscular lbs. at the time and it was easily twice the mass as I was. Through out the sighting it was mostly moving and active with it’s back to me and facing uphill so details of hair length, facial features were not obvious. And, I actually quite interested and focused on it’s behavior. I'm more an amateur behaviorist than a taxonomist .

 

I will summarize what happened next. The animal held a large stick in it’s right hand (paw ?) and hit a tree in front of it (up hill) very hard. The tree was about 14 inches in diameter and the animal swung the stick with all arm, no body twisting. It stopped and looked up the tree waiting about 2 minutes and then hit the tree again. This time quickly moving to the next tree about 6 inches in diameter and vigorously shook the tree. It was then that I saw there was an animal in the tree acting quite frantic as it tried to climb higher in the tree but was knocked loose by the shaking and fell about 5 feet and was able to grab another branch. It then made a drastic jump back to the original tree which was immediately whacked again 1 time. I realized it was a raccoon as it jumped back to the 2nd tree which was immediately shook again. The raccoon fell to the ground in a manner that was partially behind the larger tree. There was some rapid movement and the animal stooped and somewhat scooted or shuffled in a squatting position a few feet behind the tree and stopped. I couldn’t see if the raccoon was grabbed as it fell or whacked with the stick but there was little movement for almost 5 minutes as the animal remained in a squatting position. It then stood up and walked into a tighter stand of trees that made it even more difficult to see as it steadily moved south parallel to the ridge line and disappeared into the distance. I waited 20 minutes and approached the area. I didn’t find the stick used to hit the trees and I didn’t see it carried away, but it could have been and I didn’t see it. I did find the right hind foot of the raccoon and ¾ of the tail along with a patch of fur about 2x3 inches in size that I believe came from the top of the raccoons head. That’s all I found. The ground was hard and very rocky, there is not much substrate suitable for holding impressions but I did see some scuff marks that were made. I did look for hairs although quickly as I felt compelled to leave.

I felt in danger to a small degree, but only to the extent one feels in danger in the presence of something massive that could be destructive. Like standing 10 feet from a passing train, no outward threat or escalating danger as long as no one moves. That’s what it felt like. I have been back a number of times … but with my shorty 12 ga. pump in my pack.

Additionally, I did not hear or see any people in the woods that day where I was for approximately 8 hours. Which is precisely why I like this area. There had been minor traffic on the access road 1 mile away during the day as evidenced by “car†sounds. I believe I was the only person actually “in the woods†that day for at least 2 miles in all directions. During the time of the sighting I heard no other sounds from the animal. No calling, walking sounds, grunting, raccoon squealing, limb breaking. No unusual smells. At one point as the animal was squatting partially hidden behind the tree. It abruptly stopped and leaned back to look directly at me for about 3 seconds. Then resumed what it was doing. I am certain that it scented me at that time, I slowly checked wind direction with the “lick the finger method†and it was right on for delivering my scent. In case everyone doesn’t know. Put your index finger in your moth getting the tip wet and hold it up, the side that feels cool as the breeze evaporates the saliva will be the direction the wind is coming from. Rudimentary but effective. At no time did the animal walk on all fours, actually it appeared cumbersome at the point that it moved while close to the ground ie. stooped, scooted, shuffled. It was definitely “built†for 2 feet and it did have a general humanesque (my own word) nature about it’s movements as apposed to a great ape. I have not misspoken concerning my use of 10x50 binoculars and not seeing greater detail in the animal, that is accurate. The shadows, foliage and 90 yards of tree trunks in this healthy forest prevented me from seeing detail.

As a personal opinion I would characterize it’s movements as smooth, deliberate, efficient, powerful and balanced as beautiful an example of a survivor as nature has to offer. I was in awe.

Before you even ask. It was not a bear, I’ve seen many and it was not a bear. It was not a human, I’ve seen a lot of them too, even 7 foot tall ones and it was not a human.

Thank you for your time. I have made this such a long post as to give you as much information as possible and maybe answer the more obvious questions thereby facilitating more detailed questions.

Bigfootie

 

 

 

 

 

[SWWASAS]

Much of mans early history he used tools of opportunity.    There is a lot of contention in the scientific literature about very early tool sites.    Other than subtle signs of use, since there is no fabrication,   and campfire remains in the sediments,   it is difficult to tell what was used as a tool or if they had anything to do with early humans.      Rocks were probably initially used to break open large bones to get the marrow.    I can see BF doing this and only the broken bones would be evidence it had happened.    The bones do not last long waiting to be found.       The scientific contention is about how far back that pushes tool use in human ancestors.     Science is reluctant to push things back earlier and earlier.   BF seems stuck in the tool of opportunity period of development.   .