Guest wild eyed willy Posted September 9, 2011 Posted September 9, 2011 Hi Huh ! i read that whole thing while eating a bowl of chocolate chip vanilla ice cream with chocolate syrup on top and nothing even happened Tim ~ Your a rebel snake
Guest Biggie Posted September 9, 2011 Posted September 9, 2011 A possible solution to absence of dung. Read on empty stomach: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprophagia Good point. I didn't think of that. My dog would have ate bf dung for sure considering all the kitty munchies he ate.
Guest Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Hi Huh ! i read that whole thing while eating a bowl of chocolate chip vanilla ice cream with chocolate syrup on top and nothing even happened Tim ~ You da Snake!
Guest Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 LOL reminds me of a warning I heard when I was young. "Dogs eat what cats Bury." So I guess that would become "Dogs eat what Bigfoot Buries!"
Guest Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 If sasquatch are like gorillas and occasionally consume their own offal, Ostman escaped fortuitously before the French kissing foreplay began.
Doc Holliday Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Hi Huh ! i read that whole thing while eating a bowl of chocolate chip vanilla ice cream with chocolate syrup on top and nothing even happened Tim ~ not bad, but lets see ya throw in a handful of peanuts & some corn.........
Guest RedRatSnake Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 You sick SOB you know how scratchy and colorful that would be going down and coming back up ~ why didn't ya just tell me too eat a box of painted tacks. Tim
Doc Holliday Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 gotta save those tacks to sprinkle around the campsite so we know when bf comes sneaking inthen we can see if its man,monkey or sea monster.
Guest RedRatSnake Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Sea Monsters come from the Ocean ~ Silly Tim
Doc Holliday Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 well,if it not a primate of some sort, its gotta be something. i saw in another thread folks were tossing around an aqua squatch swimming underwater theory, thus the sea monster part. might have to set up camp on the beach
Guest RedRatSnake Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Maybe the ocean is the answer in the ever long quest to find the hairy primate we call Bigfoot, there have been sightings and ocean Bigfoot's have there own movies just like land based Bigfoot's, fiction or non fiction the score is the same, land Bigfoot's zero, ocean Bigfoot's zero Tim
Guest Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Well by definition Bigfoot has to be a primate, A primate is characterized by refined development of the hands and feet, a shortened snout, and a large brain. The question really is what order is it? Is it a new order other that of simian (gorillas chimps humans), prosimian (lemurs, tarsiers and loriforms -highly doubtful) or something entirely different?
Guest RedRatSnake Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Hi Based on the seemingly total lack of a Bigfoot body or parts of, or any hard realistic evidence, Maybe a definition change is well Overdue Tim ~
Doc Holliday Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 (edited) excellent point rrs, while i guess that primate may be the most likely choice , i have wondered if preconceived ideas might have folks looking in the wrong direction. idk. Edited September 10, 2011 by slicktrick
Guest Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Thinking twice: W E W's opening post is conceptually flawed, methinks. W E W noted that some scientist stated (paraphrased) "BF is not characteristic of what you would expect of a large primate living in the woods." Of course, the scientist was not arguing that Bigfoot exist and it is not a primate; she is implying instead that certain alleged facts about the creature are unlike a primate, and since the creature must be either a primate or nothing, it is more likely nothing (i.e., a folk-lore) instead of real (a primate). Which proposition makes more sense: Bigfoot is a living folk-lore, or Bigfoot is a alien from another world, or Bigfoot is a highly evolved warm-blooded reptile, bipedal and hairy? These are the types of propositions we would be forced to consider if we seriously need to jettison sasquatch as a primate from the discussion.
Recommended Posts