Looking for Bigfoot in Open Areas

[norseman]

6 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

A species that large and mobile should be dropping DNA all over the place. Scientist that run biodiversity studies are either ignoring the sometimes odd data they're collecting, or they aren't getting any data. If some samples show primate DNA but it isn't from a Great Ape, as that would be pretty much impossible to find in North America, then the only alternative is Human DNA, right? It makes me wonder about the methodology being used. I really doubt that the type of sampling and testing can even distinguish the difference between two closely related species, like what Humans and Sasquatches are suspected to be. To make those kinds of distinctions, a completely different kind of protocol needs to be deployed.

 

Scientists by and large usually cast a wide net in order to register as many different kinds of animals as possible. Like in the WA nests' samples. It was a metabarcoding protocol which picked up everything: bear, deer, elk, raccoon, birds, squirrels, etc. The problem, I have learned, is that if Humans and Sasquatches are closely related Like maybe 50% closer to us than Chimpanzees are) then metabarcoding might not be the method to use for showing BF existence. But it's still a method that almost every scientist uses. For example, a scientist might not use metabacoding to determine closely related lemmings living within a region, but it will tell a scientist that lemmings are present.

Who is routinely testing for unknown primate DNA in North America? Who is digging past 20,000 years ago in the anthropology dept?

 

Short answer? No one.

 

Bigfoot is a myth. The narrative is clear.

[wiiawiwb]

8 hours ago, Madison5716 said:

Agreed, Wooly Booger. Every time NorthWind and I head way out, we are humbled by the vast forests. 

 

What is more amazing? Those forests at NIGHT, when there are no humans anywhere but in their homes, cabins, trailers and tents. It's a whole different place, and their habitat increases when you figure all the places they can access in the dark that they won't consider in daylight.

 

I've commented before how forests have people who hike by day and clear out before the sun sets. At night, you can have it for yourself.  I don't know what dynamic is in play but I think people are more concerned/fearful about staying overnight in the woods than in years past. 

 

While there may be more pressure on a sasquatch by day, I suspect there is less pressure by night.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

7 hours ago, norseman said:

Who is routinely testing for unknown primate DNA in North America? Who is digging past 20,000 years ago in the anthropology dept?

 

Short answer? No one.

 

Bigfoot is a myth. The narrative is clear.

Actually, I think that they are willing to admit that humans were here 30,000 years ago.  They pushed it back a bit once the Clovis First lie was finally exposed enough that they could no longer sustain it.

 

Seeing how the scientific community blackballed people for challenging Clovis First tells you all that you need to know about the possibility that there has been evidence covered up concerning Sasquatch.  If evidence doesn't support the current narrative, it goes away and is ignored.

[hiflier]

8 hours ago, norseman said:

Who is routinely testing for unknown primate DNA in North America?

 

My whole push is to see if I can find a scientist who will listen up on that point. Because if this creature is out there then people ARE getting DNA from it. So the idea is to open someone's thinking enough, based on possibility, to take a closer look at samples that get brought in that say Human on the metabarcoding scale, but may show something else using a method that determines closely elated species. The issue with that is that when one does that then it means one needs to target for Human DNA in the environment which, by design, will disregard all of the other normal animals. If a scientist will do that then we may have a shot at seeing something very similar to Human but not Human.

 

So you're right, Norseman, no one is routinely (or otherwise) testing only for primates, with Humans being the only target species one is sampling for.

Edited February 10, 2021 by hiflier

[John B]

9 hours ago, Wooly Booger said:

The forest is certainly amazing.  There are many places for an elusive animal to hide that would make discovery difficult.  My fiance and I are planning an excursion in northern Maine this summer.  We are going to camp out for a few days and hopefully collect some evidence. I will keep everyone informed.

The forests of North America believe it or no are expanding. Replanting has done so well that mush lumber is now taken from 3rd or 4th generation planting. That has caused some biodiversity issues but not too bad. That means massive areas remain virgin territory. The ultra rich have not decided they are good places for housing estates yet.

[Wooly Booger]

1 minute ago, John B said:

The forests of North America believe it or no are expanding. Replanting has done so well that mush lumber is now taken from 3rd or 4th generation planting. That has caused some biodiversity issues but not too bad. That means massive areas remain virgin territory. The ultra rich have not decided they are good places for housing estates yet.

Exactly.  The argument that an unclassified species of megafauna couldn't exist in North America because it would have been found due to logging is absurd.  Animals are mobile, they are not stationary like trees.

 

Speaking of trees, a species of pine tree presumed extinct for 200 million years was recently discovered in a remote area of Australia.  The tree is 115 feet tall.  If an immobile species of tree can remain hidden from modern science, what does that say about an elusive and highly intelligent primate?

 

http://www.wollemipine.com/faq.php#:~:text=The Wollemi Pine is one,outside Australia's largest city%2C Sydney.

[John B]

2 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

Exactly.  The argument that an unclassified species of megafauna couldn't exist in North America because it would have been found due to logging is absurd.  Animals are mobile, they are not stationary like trees.

 

Speaking of trees, a species of pine tree presumed extinct for 200 million years was recently discovered in a remote area of Australia.  The tree is 115 feet tall.  If an immobile species of tree can remain hidden from modern science, what does that say about an elusive and highly intelligent primate?

 

http://www.wollemipine.com/faq.php#:~:text=The Wollemi Pine is one,outside Australia's largest city%2C Sydney.

Never say never as they say.

[MIB]

On 2/7/2021 at 10:38 AM, Foxhill said:

I'd suggest you do a little research on the timber industry in the US, over the past 200 years.

I found it to be a real eye opener as to the issue of what's remote and how any creature over 5lbs could remain undiscovered in the US.

 

You are simply wrong.   Even if what you imply were true for the bulk of the continental US, the history of the timber industry is a red herring so far as implications about bigfoot in my area.    In my state we have just over 2.5 million acres of land designated as federal wilderness ... never logged.   Much of this lays along the spine of the Cascade range.  While "broken" by narrow strips where major highways cross the range, much is functionally contiguous.   (And, as if it should be any surprise, there are concentrations of reports along those highways.)   The Coast Range is similar though less is federally protected.    Southern Oregon's wild areas are contiguous with those in Northern California.   Those in NE Oregon adjoin similar areas in SE Washington and Idaho.   The NW piece of Oregon, and north Central, are contiguous with similar areas in southern Washington with only the Columbia river, I-84 and Washington route 14 separating them .. again, each having a significant number of road/river crossing sightings and trackways reported.   

 

This claim you make suggests you don't have a boots-on-the-ground feel for what you're talking about, no experience.   Go out there.  In person.  Look around.   Get away from the roads.   See things for how they really are rather than how you imagine them to be.   It is .. educational.    You will see old clear cuts if you fly over, but look around them .. miles of forest.   The bigger issue today, more important than past logging, is the recent history of large fires that have cut off potential travel routes in ways that logging never did.

 

Statement of fact: there is plenty of room, plenty of opportunity for a creature over 5 pounds to remain undiscovered, particularly if it is a sapient creature willfully remaining undiscovered rather than accidentally remaining undiscovered.  

 

MIB

[BlackRockBigfoot]

1 hour ago, Wooly Booger said:

Exactly.  The argument that an unclassified species of megafauna couldn't exist in North America because it would have been found due to logging is absurd.  Animals are mobile, they are not stationary like trees.

 

Speaking of trees, a species of pine tree presumed extinct for 200 million years was recently discovered in a remote area of Australia.  The tree is 115 feet tall.  If an immobile species of tree can remain hidden from modern science, what does that say about an elusive and highly intelligent primate?

 

http://www.wollemipine.com/faq.php#:~:text=The Wollemi Pine is one,outside Australia's largest city%2C Sydney.

I would up vote this comment, but I am out of votes already at 11 am.  That posting spree in the ufo and the reality show threads late last night wiped me out. 

 

[hiflier]

Ditto on being out of votes. We need more 

And I'd like to take the opportunity here to clarify this DNA thing can and cannot do.

 

Pros:

Can eventually tell us whether or not it exists. And at this point, that's all I, or anyone else, should really care about.

If it does, it will show the general region that it is either currently in, or had visited.

It will tell us how close to Human it is.

 

Cons:

Won't pinpoint exactly where it is.

Won't tell us how many there are.

Won't give us size, age, maybe gender, or other physical attributes.

 

Edited February 10, 2021 by hiflier

[norseman]

4 hours ago, Wooly Booger said:

Exactly.  The argument that an unclassified species of megafauna couldn't exist in North America because it would have been found due to logging is absurd.  Animals are mobile, they are not stationary like trees.

 

Speaking of trees, a species of pine tree presumed extinct for 200 million years was recently discovered in a remote area of Australia.  The tree is 115 feet tall.  If an immobile species of tree can remain hidden from modern science, what does that say about an elusive and highly intelligent primate?

 

http://www.wollemipine.com/faq.php#:~:text=The Wollemi Pine is one,outside Australia's largest city%2C Sydney.

Nice find! Actually the tree resides in a park just outside Sydney the largest city! 

[Wooly Booger]

1 minute ago, norseman said:

Nice find! Actually the tree resides in a park just outside Sydney the largest city! 

That is awesome!  Even more reason why cryptozoology needs to be taken seriously.  A giant species of pine tree that was contemporary with the dinosaurs was presumed extinct for centuries despite the fact that it was located just outside of a major metropolitan area.  This proves that it is certainly possible that an unclassified species of bipedal primate can remain hidden in North America's wilderness areas.  

[hiflier]

Wishin' I had some more upvotes for these last few posts. Lately, I think could easily sprinkle around about a hundred a day. Why I'd be 'DA UPVOTE MONSTAH'. This is a great Forum.

Edited February 10, 2021 by hiflier

[Wooly Booger]

1 minute ago, hiflier said:

Wishin'I had an upvote for these last few posts. Lately, I think could easily sprinkle around about a hundred a day This is a great Forum.

Yeah, I'm out of upvotes for today myself.  We should have a quota of at least 10 per day lol. 

[hiflier]

I know, huh? But even if I had, say, 30, I still think I'd run short on some days