Bigfoot and Giants - What is Missing?

[Believer57]

When I entered this endeavor to understand what Bigfoot really is and why it is such a mystery, I would often come away with a weird gut feeling that something wasn't quite right. It went beyond trying to understand the superior capabilities of an apex predator in the woods. There was apparent conspiracy, cover-ups, and a general force that made it hard to find solutions or get to the truth. Further, people didn't work together and organizations generally disliked each other. Something felt off.

 

In some ways, I have an advantage from only doing this for about a year. When I look back through the decades on-line and from reading books, I can see progress in certain areas but sometimes scratch my head at the lack of solutions and general lack of government funding or research. Why has the weight of discovery fallen on the citizens? Shouldn't we be supported by government and science?

 

I recently re-watched a YouTube video called A Race of Giants and came away with the same "weird gut feeling" that I had with Bigfoot. Granted, some of the explanation for giants appeared to be religion-based concepts but there were real examples and evidence that seemed to corroborate many of the findings and passed down stories by Native Americans. Some of the biblical stories included characters like David and Goliath, King Gilgamesh, Humbala, and the Qumran Scroll (or Book of Giants). In North America alone, there were written stories from the 1800s to the 1950s. Jim Ferreira has pulled together about 1500 accounts from newspapers and books published in the 1800s and early 1900s. By the 1950s, the Smithsonian took possession of nearly all the giant skeletons found. There was even a federal lawsuit that occurred against the Smithsonian. The common issue here is that it would seem the government is hindering discovery instead of helping...just like with Bigfoot.

 

A few questions have arose:

 

 

• Have great efforts been exercised to suppress the knowledge and remains of Giants or Bigfoot?
• Is there a conspiracy to hide the true history of the Earth?
• Is evidence hidden by the Smithsonian Institute to back up Darwin’s theory of evolution?
• Would the discovery of Giants or Bigfoot cause people to question evolution?
• Why would the Smithsonian cover up documented examples like the Arkansas Chickasawba mound or other giant skeletons from Native American Indian mounds?
• What policy determines which information makes it to mainstream historical knowledge?
• Is Bigfoot or Giants knowledge interchangeable with each other or with Bible references?
• Are there any Bigfoot reports with extra digits in the hands or feet?
• Are there any Bigfoot reports with double rows of teeth?
• Is the cause of multiple rows of teeth (supernumerary tooth formation) genetic?

 

Some of the skeptic reasoning given was:

• Gigantism disorder
  • no evidence found
  • exceedingly rare
• Freezing and thawing makes skeletons look big
  • no evidence found

 

Granted, this was a mouthful to take in but I am curious if other BFF members have a similar weird gut feeling that something isn't quite right. Are we content with just buying the next piece of field gear to go out into the field or do we need other solutions to find our end game?

 

Cheers and good thoughts!

 

[MIB]

Sure, something isn't right. 

 

That said, I do not think there is any broad conspiracy to conceal.    I suspect at least one, probably several, grossly flawed assumptions that lead us to look somewhere besides where the answers lie.   One possibility is that there are 2 or more sources to the reports rather than just one.    So long as we insist on blindly looking for that one we perceive, we are looking in the gap where there is nothing between the two actual sources.

 

I think we need to review our data, return to the observations, discard the interpretations, and start over from scratch.   Instead of filtering evidence to support the answer we want to find, I think we should look at all of the evidence to see what it actually shows us.

[Wooly Booger]

Very interesting. I have always wondered if there is some sort of connection between the Sasquatch and the discovery of giant humanoid bones during the 19th and early 20th centuries. 

 

The North American Indians had legends of Sasquatch type creatures and a race of giant men and the stories do have several similarities. For one thing, both the hairy Sasquatch like giants and the giant men were described as cannibals. Both had hostile encounters with the native tribes. Several Indian legends claim the continent was inhabited by a civilized race of giants before they arrived. If Sasquatch are a type of hominid, then perhaps they were the ones responsible for the ancient burial mounds and left behind the remains of giant humanoid skeletons. If this is true however, the Sasquatch has certainly gone through a considerable process of de-evolution as they have not to my knowledge even been reported to use even stone age level of technology with the exception of clubs in a few reports. Though apes have been known to use blunt objects as weapons also. 

 

Still, I find it statistically unlikely that North America contained two unrelated types of humanoid giants. So I feel if the stories of human giants are true then there most likely is some sort of a connection. 

 

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this matter?

[MIB]

5 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this matter?

 

I try not to think about it.      I say that in the sense that you are interpreting and predicting rather than observing and concluding.   I think interpreting and predicting is what has gotten us to the standstill we're at because it leads us to look for data in certain places and overlook data from others.  We really need to start with the whole of the data and let it guide us rather than cherrypicking data that supports pet theories.

 

I hope that does not sound too harsh.   It is merely my honest opinion.   That your post follows mine warning of that trap shows just how insidious the trap truly is.  We seem to be "wired" to fall into it, to dive into it, even when we're saying we're avoiding it.

 

MIB

[Incorrigible1]

Evolution is self-evident. A revelation of existence of bigfoot or that giants existed in some form would not affect my appreciation of clear and ongoing evolution in the prehistoric and historic record.

 

A conspiracy of existence of giants from the record is a fascinating subject. I do often wonder that it seems that the history of the North American mound-builders seems haphazard, at best. And thus I wonder if that history is neglected or actively suppressed.

[Wooly Booger]

2 minutes ago, MIB said:

 

I try not to think about it.      I say that in the sense that you are interpreting and predicting rather than observing and concluding.   I think interpreting and predicting is what has gotten us to the standstill we're at because it leads us to look for data in certain places and overlook data from others.  We really need to start with the whole of the data and let it guide us rather than cherrypicking data that supports pet theories.

 

I hope that does not sound too harsh.   It is merely my honest opinion.

 

MIB

I suppose the only way to know for certain would be to examine the giant skeletons first hand. Which would prove difficult since nobody in recent memory has been able to locate them. There was a documentary series a few years back where these two researchers attempted to track down the alleged giant remains. But the search proved to hit a dead end. 

 

The best thing to do in my opinion, would be for an expedition to actively search for Sasquatch remains in known habitat. This is much easier said than done however, since the environment in which the creature is reported isn't exactly suitable for the long term preservation of biological remains. The soil of the Pacific Northwest is extremely acidic. Still, it is possible that an expedition may turn something up. 

 

Animals when they are sick and dying tend to hole up in difficult to access areas. Perhaps that would be a good place to start. 

[MIB]

^^^^ That is what many of us are doing as part of our field work.   

 

So far as the "missing" skeletons, can you imagine the questions that could be answered by running DNA tests on the marrow, etc that might remain in the bones?   Wow, treasure chest of answers.

[Wooly Booger]

Just now, MIB said:

^^^^ That is what many of us are doing as part of our field work.   

 

So far as the "missing" skeletons, can you imagine the questions that could be answered by running DNA tests on the marrow, etc that might remain in the bones?   Wow, treasure chest of answers.

That would be the Holy trail of Bigfoot research and the best result short of a fully intact body. I've been a Sasquatch enthusiast and am armchair researcher since 2008. I am just now starting to become active in the field. The wife and I are planning an outing up in Maine for that very reason this Summer. We will see what we turn up. 

[MIB]

5 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

Animals when they are sick and dying tend to hole up in difficult to access areas

 

Actually, animals are surprisingly different in their behavior near death.     I grew up in a bear preserve in SW Oregon.    We saw a ton of bears, sometimes many in a day, but though we had some big cats, seeing even one in 5 years was unusual.    However, so far as remains, I never found the remains of a bear that didn't have a (illegal) bullet hole in it but we found cat remains fairly often.   The reason is that bears, sick or dying, seek shelter and privacy, but cats, sick or dying, seek places where they have good visibility around them.   It's all a matter of their individual species' comfort zone.

 

So bigfoot ... well, we don't see them lying dead on the forest floor or in other open places.    That leaves two options.   They could, like bears, hole up in  incredibly nasty brush, etc when they are sick or dying.    Or the other possibility ... they bury their dead.   This behavior has been reported by a few witnesses who claimed to observe the burials happening.   Part of our search, then, also includes finding places where the ground is disturbed over an area large enough to put a sasquatch under.     This could be nearly anywhere but I'd expect it to be pretty private else someone would have noticed the ground being disturbed and dug one up by now.

 

So far, just guesses though, and no success at the end of any of them yet.  

 

It should be enough to make a person open-minded about some of the woo rabbit holes.   Not necessarily go down them, but at least walk around the hole and give it a good hard look.   Because, like I said, at least some of our assumptions have to be wrong else we would not still have an unsolved puzzle.

 

MIB

[MIB]

PS: Good luck in Maine.

 

My areas are under about 6 feet of snow right now.   I need to develop lower elevation "spots" but haven't gotten it done  yet.   I'm probably on the bench 'til July .. maybe late June if I'm lucky.

[Wooly Booger]

1 hour ago, MIB said:

 

Actually, animals are surprisingly different in their behavior near death.     I grew up in a bear preserve in SW Oregon.    We saw a ton of bears, sometimes many in a day, but though we had some big cats, seeing even one in 5 years was unusual.    However, so far as remains, I never found the remains of a bear that didn't have a (illegal) bullet hole in it but we found cat remains fairly often.   The reason is that bears, sick or dying, seek shelter and privacy, but cats, sick or dying, seek places where they have good visibility around them.   It's all a matter of their individual species' comfort zone.

 

So bigfoot ... well, we don't see them lying dead on the forest floor or in other open places.    That leaves two options.   They could, like bears, hole up in  incredibly nasty brush, etc when they are sick or dying.    Or the other possibility ... they bury their dead.   This behavior has been reported by a few witnesses who claimed to observe the burials happening.   Part of our search, then, also includes finding places where the ground is disturbed over an area large enough to put a sasquatch under.     This could be nearly anywhere but I'd expect it to be pretty private else someone would have noticed the ground being disturbed and dug one up by now.

 

So far, just guesses though, and no success at the end of any of them yet.  

 

It should be enough to make a person open-minded about some of the woo rabbit holes.   Not necessarily go down them, but at least walk around the hole and give it a good hard look.   Because, like I said, at least some of our assumptions have to be wrong else we would not still have an unsolved puzzle.

 

MIB

Either of those scenarios are distinct possibilities.  On the one hand, Sasquatch as large apex predators and omnivores seem to fill a similar ecological niche to brown bears.  So it is perhaps probable that they exhibit similar behaviors.  Intentional burials are also another possibility which at first glance would seem to infer hominid status on the species.  While it is certainly possible that the species is an unknown hominid, according to John Green apes and even elephants have also been observed to cover dead members of their species.

[Doodler]

Find a mound on private property and dig it? How illegal is it to disturb the mounds? Is it illegal if you own the land, or have permission?

[Arvedis]

 

3 hours ago, Doodler said:

Find a mound on private property and dig it? How illegal is it to disturb the mounds? Is it illegal if you own the land, or have permission?

 

If there are any undiscovered mounds left they should not be disturbed. Whatever historical authority should deal with it in it's own time and underfunded kind of way.

 

``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

 

• Have great efforts been exercised to suppress the knowledge and remains of Giants or Bigfoot?

My bet is no but regardless, good luck to anyone finding the freezer.

 

• Is there a conspiracy to hide the true history of the Earth?

How would the info be hidden?  Outside of dictatorships and communism, governments generally don't tell their schools what to teach. My experience with western academics is they are not good liars.  They are not paid off by anyone and want to get noticed for their ability to prove things. Freewheeling authors like Graham Hancock distort history more than the ivory tower.

 

• Is evidence hidden by the Smithsonian Institute to back up Darwin’s theory of evolution?

Personally, I don't think so. Too much turnover in personnel and authority over the years to keep secrets The Smithsonian makes no money for anyone. It just needs money to stay open. The Smithsonian is not a holy shrine of wisdom. It's really it's own educational thing which is why they identify with an .edu domain. It's a history junkyard.

 

• Would the discovery of Giants or Bigfoot cause people to question evolution?

Of course.

 

• Why would the Smithsonian cover up documented examples like the Arkansas Chickasawba mound or other giant skeletons from Native American Indian mounds?

Maybe it's not a coverup. Maybe it never existed or they lost or misplaced evidence or maybe things weren't well run when it happened. In the wild frontier days, things got destroyed and stolen  Sensationalist journalism is also unreliable.

 

• What policy determines which information makes it to mainstream historical knowledge?

Like a government policy?  That implies continual enforcement of policy despite changes in power over decades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by Arvedis

[wiiawiwb]

14 hours ago, Believer57 said:

Are we content with just buying the next piece of field gear to go out into the field or do we need other solutions to find our end game?

 

Doesn't it boil down to what one's personal objective is?  Personally, I have zero interest in understanding what a sasquatch is nor discovering the universal truths are about it's beginnings or origin. I am only interested in getting an unambiguous sighting in daylight. If a new piece of gear gets me there...mission accomplished!

 

My hopes are that is is never offically discovered and the questions linger ad infinitum. 

[Skinwalker13]

So this is a topic ive actually been writing a book about over the last 3 years (literally). As late as the late 90's the Giants discovered here in the mounds of WV were actually in our textbooks and taught as part of "West Virginia History". The "coverup" was conducted by simply using idiots to do the work guaranteeing misshandeling of artifacts and remains. There were 3 giants exhumed from the Charleston area, 1 in the Creil Mound, 2 from the Shawnee mound. Dont let the names fool ya, they were both constructed by the Adena here in the state around the same time that Moses was leading Israelites out of egypt. A vast majority of the artifacts went missing, there is a paper record of 1 of the Giants being returned, for re-burial, to the deleware. Once that return took place and the ceremony preformed the remaines are set to never be disturbed again. We also turned up what we believe to be the earliest bigfoot Effigy on historic record in a private collection of artifacts that had been removed from the mounds illegally, and had been found at artifact dump sites along the Ohio River (yep thats a thing, blew my mind but attests to the degree of misshandeling) the tribal lore of " the other tribe" "elder brother" etc began as peaceful and had elements of co-habitation. It wasnt until the tribes began to war with themselves that the stories of "red haired giants", "cannibal giants", and "wars with gaints" started poping up in their history.

 

So my big question Is 7-7.5 ft really a giant human or does that sound like something that were a bit more familiar with on this forum?