Jump to content
Celtic Raider

Why Don't We Have a Bigfoot Body Yet?

Recommended Posts

georgerm

Had a hard time trying to upload this report.  In 1883 a cowboy shot then killed a bigfoot with an ax.  According to the dead creatures description it sounds like a bigfoot. Click on the title after gigantor's picture and the full account will come into view. Enlarge the account to 250 percent to read. Many of the newspaper accounts are hard to read. Another case of a bigfoot never making it to the science lab but rotting away in the desert. When nay sayers laugh, remind them of reports like this one.  

 

 

 

this is just a duplicate

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by georgerm
correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn

Well I take this last story as " The Wild Man Killed  Idaho 1883 " as an actual person. I am not seeing this story as being a Bigfoot at all from what I read from the story. It just does not fit what witnesses are seeing or what I have seen in our forest.. I do see this as an actual event that did take place where this person should have been prosecuted by the law for murder.  This should have been properly investigated by law enforcement at the time. But this is just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm

 

On 10/10/2019 at 11:32 AM, ShadowBorn said:

Well I take this last story as " The Wild Man Killed  Idaho 1883 " as an actual person. I am not seeing this story as being a Bigfoot at all from what I read from the story. It just does not fit what witnesses are seeing or what I have seen in our forest.. I do see this as an actual event that did take place where this person should have been prosecuted by the law for murder.  This should have been properly investigated by law enforcement at the time. But this is just my opinion.

 

It sounds like a man or bigfoot. It was described as being tall and covered with two inch long black fir that made me to think bigfoot. The human part was a long beard, and hand stiched rabbit furs. I've never heard of Sassy having a cloak made of furs. Has anyone?  Below is a log structure that I found 4 miles south of Reedsport, Oregon. My friend Red is pictured here. Was it man made of a bigfoot nest? I'll go back and look for hairs.

 

post-447-0-33273700-1415843895_thumb.jpg

Edited by georgerm
add more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

There must be a dozen stories about BF captured, shot or found dead.    All wasted through ignorance or whatever.     If we could just locate where one was buried the skeleton would answer a lot of questions.     In the 1700s and 1800s a wild creature shot in the woods was no big deal.     Happened all the time.    If something seemed dangerous you shot it and wondered what it was later.  

Edited by SWWASAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7.62

Most likely some type of bushcrafting . I don't think any of these creatures build shelters .

If anything they seek out caves .

9 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

There must be a dozen stories about BF captured, shot or found dead.    All wasted through ignorance or whatever.     If we could just locate where one was buried the skeleton would answer a lot of questions.     In the 1700s and 1800s a wild creature shot in the woods was no big deal.     Happened all the time.    If something seemed dangerous you shot it and wondered what it was later.  

Have you ever found anything that looks like a grave in the woods? I've seen youtube guys find sites where it looked like a grave and I've even found one my self but I never really thought of digging it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo

Georgem, what did the inside of the structure smell like?   Opening looks small as does the interior volume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm
20 minutes ago, Catmandoo said:

Georgem, what did the inside of the structure smell like?   Opening looks small as does the interior volume.

 

 

There was no smell.  

40 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

There must be a dozen stories about BF captured, shot or found dead.    All wasted through ignorance or whatever.     If we could just locate where one was buried the skeleton would answer a lot of questions.     In the 1700s and 1800s a wild creature shot in the woods was no big deal.     Happened all the time.    If something seemed dangerous you shot it and wondered what it was later.  

 

Why Don't We Have a Bigfoot Body Yet?  

Bodies have been brought in during the 1700s and 1800s and they were an attraction in town, but were later discarded. I'm looking for a web page that had a list of dates and descriptions of such events. There are small pioneer towns that have buried bigfoots and some research may turn up where and when bigfoot was buried. 

 

 

The 1894 photo of bigfoot. (Author provided)

The Story Behind the Photo

The-1894-photo-of-nigfoot.jpg

The story that this photo tells us is that in 1894 in the wilds of western Canada some trappers and mountain men encountered a bigfoot and shot him. It may have happened near their cabin. They took a photograph of it. But there is more: the photo had some writing on the back of it.  https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/bigfoot-cryptozoology-conspiracy-0010179

This looks more like a cougar but don't see the long tail and the hind legs don't fit.  The photo is claimed to be bigfoot. Would bigfoot grow so much hair on the hands to manage in the freezing Canadian wilderness?  Were the hands cut off for keep sakes, and the furry forearms are showing? Looks like the arms were lashed with rope and the fur wore off. The features are simply not clear. Is the face pushed in the snow? 

 

The second picture for comparison shows a cougar that was hit by a car. 

 

 

 

Large cougar killed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist

In response to those eager to "exhume" putative bigfoot graves I will say this.  I really think this is a disservice to the BF community to start this line of endeavor.  I have personally witnessed settlers graves in the southern Appalachians marked by only field stones or in some case nothing more than daffodils growing near a quartz stone. I am sure Oregon trail unmarked graves are endemic too.  

 

 I have had the uncomfortable experience of knowing that someone that knew my area attempted to dig up what seemed like a settlers grave in part.  Thank God for a humongous red oak root that prevented total grave robbing.   Please do a rethink on this.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo

In response to Georgerm's post about the '1894'  image.  This keeps getting regurgitated from time to time. I remembered seeing this image on this forum so I went looking.  BFF member  Caenus posed the questions about the image on Sept. 21, 2018. The following quote is the response from WSA:

Anything with the B name in the chain of custody? Run, don't walk away from it. But sure, I'll play. .

 

The first suspicious detail is the existence of a glass plate photo in the first place.  Given the year of the purported photo, it would have been a "dry" plate technology...an improvement over the earlier "wet" plate process (Think: Brady and Gardner c. 1860 American Civil War). Although the dry plate method required a much  simpler method of preparing the glass plate "film", as compared to the wet process, the cameras were still large format and were large, heavy and required bulky and heavy tripods to hold a camera that still required long-ish exposure times.  All this by way of saying it seems unlikely this equipment would have been present in the remote BC wilderness in the late 19th century.

 

Another suspicious detail? The poor quality of the image. Silver gelatin dry plates take remarkably detailed and crisp photographs. This photo seems to have been deliberately manipulated to give an impression of age, or to disguise details.

 

The shape of the snowshoes are what is typically known as the "Huron" (a/k/a "Michigan) teardrop style. Styles of snowshoes are very particular to certain geographic areas, terrain and typical snow conditions. Somebody with knowledge of the style preferred in B.C. during the alleged time of the photo could probably offer an opinion on that."

 

That is a really good dissection.  I remembered the details on the snowshoes.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm
10 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

In response to Georgerm's post about the '1894'  image.  This keeps getting regurgitated from time to time. I remembered seeing this image on this forum so I went looking.  BFF member  Caenus posed the questions about the image on Sept. 21, 2018. The following quote is the response from WSA:

Anything with the B name in the chain of custody? Run, don't walk away from it. But sure, I'll play. .

 

The first suspicious detail is the existence of a glass plate photo in the first place.  Given the year of the purported photo, it would have been a "dry" plate technology...an improvement over the earlier "wet" plate process (Think: Brady and Gardner c. 1860 American Civil War). Although the dry plate method required a much  simpler method of preparing the glass plate "film", as compared to the wet process, the cameras were still large format and were large, heavy and required bulky and heavy tripods to hold a camera that still required long-ish exposure times.  All this by way of saying it seems unlikely this equipment would have been present in the remote BC wilderness in the late 19th century.

 

Another suspicious detail? The poor quality of the image. Silver gelatin dry plates take remarkably detailed and crisp photographs. This photo seems to have been deliberately manipulated to give an impression of age, or to disguise details.

 

The shape of the snowshoes are what is typically known as the "Huron" (a/k/a "Michigan) teardrop style. Styles of snowshoes are very particular to certain geographic areas, terrain and typical snow conditions. Somebody with knowledge of the style preferred in B.C. during the alleged time of the photo could probably offer an opinion on that."

 

That is a really good dissection.  I remembered the details on the snowshoes.

 

Thanks for the reply Catmandoo and Caenus's reply explained much about vintage cameras. So he concluded the picture was not as old as claimed. Regardless, it's a picture of some kind of animal, and my post had some questions in regards to what is shown. Is it a bigfoot and or what kind of animal is it? It looks like another example of a bigfoot being brought in but never adding to the proof column. Who took the picture, what kind of animal is it, and what's the story behind it? Someone knows, and if nailed down on another discussion, please provide the URL. 

 

Information for those new to the science of bigfoot. They need to be aware of hoaxers like Rick Dyer, that had the public fooled with a fake dead bigfoot, frozen in a block of ice. If bigfoots are brought in, let the experts test it first.   

 

Read the whole hoax story here:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Dyer_(Bigfoot)     Professor Don Jeffrey Meldrum at the Department of Anthropology at Idaho State University stated "The thing has clearly been fabricated to depict a specimen that has been dissected. It smacks of images of alien autopsy."[17] Responding to the controversy, team members working with Dyer on the touring and Bigfoot projects overall confronted Dyer. Andrew Clacy, a spokesperson for the project, wrote "I confronted Mr. Dyer in Daytona on my suspicions of authenticity, and he admitted to me personally that the body of 'Hank' was not a real body, but rather a construct of a company from Washington State which was paid for by Rick Dyer. I am available and willing to cooperate with any Federal or State law enforcement investigations should they arise." Clacy immediately flew back to Australia and abandoned both the project and Dyer.[21]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
22 hours ago, 7.62 said:

Most likely some type of bushcrafting . I don't think any of these creatures build shelters .

If anything they seek out caves .

Have you ever found anything that looks like a grave in the woods? I've seen youtube guys find sites where it looked like a grave and I've even found one my self but I never really thought of digging it up.

I found one near Mt St Helens.      It was a rectangular pile of rock  4 by 12 feet that was a couple of hundred yards from the Ape Canyon trail.  .      The rocks looked placed rather than random.    It was in the Lahar on the East side of the Mountain.     At one end was a delicately balanced rock that looked like a bird.   There was no way that was natural.      I took pictures from several sides but felt like I was being watched from the woodline and did not get closer than about 10 feet to it.    That was on one of my spring trips to see what is washing out of the banks of the stream that runs through the lahar.     The next spring I could not find any sign of the "grave"   Either the runoff or a bank collapse had destroyed it.  I went back hoping that whatever was buried was washing out of the lahar and I could avoid being a grave robber.      There was a big log near it and that was even gone.   I know BF are in the area because I found footprints near the lahar one day.    

Edited by SWWASAS

Share this post


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

I found one near Mt St Helens.      It was a rectangular pile of rock  4 by 12 feet that was a couple of hundred yards from the Ape Canyon trail.  .      The rocks looked placed rather than random.    It was in the Lahar on the East side of the Mountain.     At one end was a delicately balanced rock that looked like a bird.   There was no way that was natural.      I took pictures from several sides but felt like I was being watched from the woodline and did not get closer than about 10 feet to it.    That was on one of my spring trips to see what is washing out of the banks of the stream that runs through the lahar.     The next spring I could not find any sign of the "grave"   Either the runoff or a bank collapse had destroyed it.  I went back hoping that whatever was buried was washing out of the lahar and I could avoid being a grave robber.      There was a big log near it and that was even gone.   I know BF are in the area because I found footprints near the lahar one day.    

 

Sounds like a perfect area to conduct e-DNA testing. Could be interesting to see if any e-DNA research has been done in the area in the last three years by a university of some other institution. Wasn't Dr. Meldrum and Cliff Barackman getting together last summer a few times in Oregon to do some sample gathering?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
15 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

In response to Georgerm's post about the '1894'  image.  This keeps getting regurgitated from time to time. I remembered seeing this image on this forum so I went looking.  BFF member  Caenus posed the questions about the image on Sept. 21, 2018. The following quote is the response from WSA:

Anything with the B name in the chain of custody? Run, don't walk away from it. But sure, I'll play. .

 

The first suspicious detail is the existence of a glass plate photo in the first place.  Given the year of the purported photo, it would have been a "dry" plate technology...an improvement over the earlier "wet" plate process (Think: Brady and Gardner c. 1860 American Civil War). Although the dry plate method required a much  simpler method of preparing the glass plate "film", as compared to the wet process, the cameras were still large format and were large, heavy and required bulky and heavy tripods to hold a camera that still required long-ish exposure times.  All this by way of saying it seems unlikely this equipment would have been present in the remote BC wilderness in the late 19th century.

 

Another suspicious detail? The poor quality of the image. Silver gelatin dry plates take remarkably detailed and crisp photographs. This photo seems to have been deliberately manipulated to give an impression of age, or to disguise details.

 

The shape of the snowshoes are what is typically known as the "Huron" (a/k/a "Michigan) teardrop style. Styles of snowshoes are very particular to certain geographic areas, terrain and typical snow conditions. Somebody with knowledge of the style preferred in B.C. during the alleged time of the photo could probably offer an opinion on that."

 

That is a really good dissection.  I remembered the details on the snowshoes.

 

Great points--, the history of photography can be forensic in nature in proving/disproving evidence and claims in the early days of bigfootery for sure. 

Edited by bipedalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
georgerm

Nothing in the article indicates the 8' tall creatures were covered with hair like Sasquatch. Would hair be recovered after 600 years in a burial plot? Bigfoot was considered to be a tall human according to the northwest Native Americans. Bigfoot skeptics always point out no bigfoot bones have been recovered. This might be a reply to this question.

 

"Strikingly tall skeletons uncovered in the Ecuador and Peru Amazon region are undergoing examination in Germany, according to a research team headed by British anthropologist Russell Dement. Will these remains prove that a race of tall people existed hundreds of years ago deep in the Amazonian rainforest?

According to a Cuenca news site, since 2013 the team has found half a dozen human skeletons dating to the early 1400s and the mid-1500s which measure between seven and eight feet (213 to 243 centimeters) in height."

  https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/giant-7-8-foot-skeletons-uncovered-ecuador-sent-scientific-testing-004119

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7.62
10 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

I found one near Mt St Helens.      It was a rectangular pile of rock  4 by 12 feet that was a couple of hundred yards from the Ape Canyon trail.  .      The rocks looked placed rather than random.    It was in the Lahar on the East side of the Mountain.     At one end was a delicately balanced rock that looked like a bird.   There was no way that was natural.      I took pictures from several sides but felt like I was being watched from the woodline and did not get closer than about 10 feet to it.    That was on one of my spring trips to see what is washing out of the banks of the stream that runs through the lahar.     The next spring I could not find any sign of the "grave"   Either the runoff or a bank collapse had destroyed it.  I went back hoping that whatever was buried was washing out of the lahar and I could avoid being a grave robber.      There was a big log near it and that was even gone.   I know BF are in the area because I found footprints near the lahar one day.    

Wow that's pretty cool to find including the balanced rock . What we found wasn't  as elaborate but it wasn't that old either . It was maybe 8 feet long and the same around 4 feet wide,.

 

It had rocks piled on it and we both agreed it looked like a grave but I just didn't feel right testing the theory out . I still have it marked as a waypoint on my GPS but that's about as far as I want to go with it. We have visited it a couple of more times to see if there might be another one but found only the same one .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...