Jump to content
Celtic Raider

Why Don't We Have a Bigfoot Body Yet?

Recommended Posts

ShadowBorn

Do not keep on going on and on or be naive that the Gov. and science does not have a body. Cause they do have one in their lab and might even have one that is alive. But they will deny that they do since it is only best to do so. We can question them all we want and they will deny it since this is the best course of action. After all they do not care if you do question them since they do not really have to answer to you or us any how. Unless you are in that position to know what they know then we will never know whether they have a body or a live specimen . You are either in the know crowd or you are in the out crowd. Either way the know crowd is so small  that no one will never know the truth since it was made this way to prevent leaks from the inside . I am really speculating  on this and the way I figure ,it would be a tight unit that accomplished this feat.

 

This data will not be located anywhere and I mean it's DnA. I feel like the search for this creature should just be a  closed case . Any DnA that gets tested will just come back with the same results that we have seen in the past. Even if you were to throw a dead body in their face it will be denied it's existence. Try proving me wrong .     

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7.62

I agree for the most part except about the part being 100 % sure they have a body .I think it's strongly possible they do but as I also posted there is no up side for them to confirm  it.

Edited by 7.62

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn

Yes, you are right that I should not go with being 100% sure that they have a body.  But I cannot confirm it nor deny it either nor can I go into details  but things change. It is whether we except it or not that leads us to that end. I have just come to except it. I have come to an end that started in 2000 and I am good with it. I am sure that there are others who have reached the same conclusion that I have . They are just a silence amongst them selves who have no need to speak about it. It almost seems like closure . Like that need to search for them is no longer an issue in my case  There existence really does not have a meaning since I have l have learned that they exist amongst us. So you can understand why it is difficult to understand why to deny why our Gov. might not have a creature dead/alive. The question would be where would it be kept ? How isolated would it have to be to be kept under raps. My thoughts are North or South Poles underground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

If these creatures exist, it is difficult to believe that government does not have a body or bones, even if they don't know (or don't want to admit even to themselves) what it is. It's important to realize that a Denisovan jawbone was in a Chinese university collection since 1980, and wasn't identified as such until 2010.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
1 hour ago, Huntster said:

a Denisovan jawbone was in a Chinese university collection since 1980, and wasn't identified as such until 2010.

 

^^ How was that determination made? DNA? Bone composition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm

 

The Smithsonian has hundreds of skulls and bones from all the primates. Maybe they have Bigfoot, Yowie, Almasty, or Yeti stashed in boxes.   check it out   http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/3d-collection/primate/modern-human-tc-638        We need Adobe Flash Player to see the skulls.  Why don't we have a bigfoot body yet. Maybe we have some bones.

 

 

image.thumb.png.45c651e0f1f72e03670b6b1996e90e39.png

 

 

 

image.thumb.png.a01385553084cb11fe42ae9bbf936489.png

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
1 minute ago, georgerm said:

The Smithsonian has hundreds of skulls and bones from all the primates.

 

This is a good point.   'tis said the Smithsonian took the Lovelock Cave skeletons.   They're probably on a shelf somewhere awaiting examination.   I forget how many things they have awaiting processing but it's truly stupifying.   Simply not enough staff to do the work so the backlog is many years long.   Bigfoot bones could indeed eventually be "found" right there in the museum's "in box".

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm
1 hour ago, MIB said:

 

This is a good point.   'tis said the Smithsonian took the Lovelock Cave skeletons.   They're probably on a shelf somewhere awaiting examination.   I forget how many things they have awaiting processing but it's truly stupifying.   Simply not enough staff to do the work so the backlog is many years long.   Bigfoot bones could indeed eventually be "found" right there in the museum's "in box".

 

MIB

 

Quote

To others, the uncovering of 15” sandals at Lovelock Cave is proof enough that the Paiute tale is real.  In an article published in the Nevada Review-Miner in 1931, in February and June of that same year, it was reported that two very large skeletons were found in the Humboldt dry lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada.  One measured 8.5-feet tall and was later described as having been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similar to Egyptian mummies.  The other was supposedly nearly 10-feet long.   https://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends-americas/lovelock-cave-tale-giants-or-giant-tale-fiction-003060

 

Where are the skeletons?  Are they in someones attic?  Were they bigfoot skeletons?

Edited by georgerm
add more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Those dry alkaline areas of the SW are excellent areas to find well preserved artifacts and bodies.      Perhaps other caves have had evidence of BF but the caves have not been discovered?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier

But this is where the science needs to be deployed. In caves using e-DNA. Has that already been done? Is it being done or planned to be done. These are the questions we need to be asking academia. Stories and speculation is getting us nowhere.

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Being wrapped in a gum covered fabric seems to take away from the idea of it being a BF, IMO.  I’ve heard or read in the past that some of these “giants” are not as tall as originally reported, that it was a mistake based on the bones being spread apart giving the appearance of great height.  

Edited by Twist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
1 hour ago, georgerm said:

Where are the skeletons?  Are they in someones attic?  Were they bigfoot skeletons?

 

Where?  Reportedly collected by / delivered to Smithsonian Museum staff.    Understand that John Wesley Powell was head of the Smithsonian.   He was also front and center for "Manifest Destiny" and is said to have deliberately hidden OR DESTROYED anything that contradicted the notion that the Native Americans were mere savages, not "people" with rights, etc.    One of our members saw the skeletons, I believe, so we have to believe that such did exist.   Do they still exist or were they destroyed?    Then the question is .. what were they?   Could have been huge people, could have been bigfoot, could have been something else.    We won't know until they can be examined in detail.   We have to remember to consider the social setting of the time .. many of our bigfoot stories were presented as wildman, monster, etc.   When we read the reports today we have to get inside of the heads of those who wrote them, try to unwrap the facts from their interpretations, and then maybe re-wrap them in our interpretations to see what those old timers were really describing.    Without the actual artifacts ... skeletons ... we need to be very cautious of interpretation.  

 

Frankly I don't know what they were but I trust the word of the BFF member who shared his experience.   Huh .. haven't seen him signed in in a while.   Hope all is well with him.

 

MIB

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
4 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

^^ How was that determination made? DNA? Bone composition?

 

DNA comparison to the Denisova Cave discovery. Now how that comparison effort was inspired, I don't know, but Homo denisova was only "discovered" in 2010. Perhaps there was "something" about the jawbone that inspired the Chinese university to compare their 1980 fossil to the Homo denisovan dna. 

 

Maybe that "something" was the magical "discovery" of the new homo species?..........

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NorthWind
1 hour ago, Twist said:

Being wrapped in a gum covered fabric seems to take away from the idea of it being a BF, IMO.    

 

And 15" sandals. I can't say I have ever heard of a sighting of a bigfoot who was wearing homemade Tevas. That would be a human trait, I would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolfjewel

Thanks, Georgerm, for that Smithsonian link. Would be interesting in terms of bigfoot to learn more about sandal-wearing “giants,” the 6-foot-plus individuals. If I had the time to delve into the website I sure would like to know what other bones are at the Smithsonian. Even though it looks like the Lovelock bones are not related to Bigfoot,  I strongly believe that studying these archaeological mysteries brings fresh ideas and unexpected connections to the search for BF in the fossil or bone record.

P.S., Northwind — gotta love those sagebrush bark Tevas in the photos from the Smithsonian!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...