Anyone have any recent photos of a Bigfoot they took ?

[NorCalWitness]

2 hours ago, 7.62 said:

Reasons like this we are thought of by many as fools and crazy . 

Agree with you, just putting this here for some bantz

 

this ontario sasquatch guy has been thoroughly debunked, btw. I am glad you call it how it is. As does @norseman  He is someone I look up to for wisdom on the topic. Very knowledgeable and called it a fake in seconds. 

Edited August 3, 2023 by NorCalWitness

[norseman]

2 hours ago, NorCalWitness said:

Agree with you, just putting this here for some bantz

 

this ontario sasquatch guy has been thoroughly debunked, btw. I am glad you call it how it is. As does @norseman  He is someone I look up to for wisdom on the topic. Very knowledgeable and called it a fake in seconds. 

I don’t know how much wisdom I have, but I appreciate people like yourself going out onto the inter webs and dragging content back here to share. That’s what keeps our forum interesting and fun. So my critique of the video wasn’t a reflection on anyone here. 👍

 

As I have stated earlier, photos, videos and audio will never cut it. It will take a body. 

 

 

[NorCalWitness]

I am in the hominid camp, so I hate the idea of a body being needed, but the more I research on the topic, the more I agree that it will never be acknowledged until there is a body (that the gov't doesn't silence). I won't be the person doing it, but kudos to those that do. 

[hiflier]

4 hours ago, norseman said:

As I have stated earlier, photos, videos and audio will never cut it. It will take a body.

 

Or a piece of one- no matter how small.

[hiflier]

43 minutes ago, NorCalWitness said:

I am in the hominid camp, so I hate the idea of a body being needed, but the more I research on the topic, the more I agree that it will never be acknowledged until there is a body (that the gov't doesn't silence).

 

To date, as far as I can tell, all DNA studies concerning Sasquatch have pointed to genus Homo. Even studies that no one here knows about but which I do know about. And since the Sasquatch has such a physically advanced body shape, more like a Human than a Chimp, then having it's DNA align closely to Human shouldn't be a great surprise.

 

So it all comes down to brain type more than anything else.

 

Edited August 3, 2023 by hiflier

[norseman]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

 

Or a piece of one- no matter how small.

No. It will still take two bodies.
 

One male type specimen and one female type specimen.

 

But a positive DNA sample of a novel primate? Would be stellar spectacular!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[hiflier]

56 minutes ago, norseman said:

No. It will still take two bodies.
 

One male type specimen and one female type specimen.

 

But a positive DNA sample of a novel primate? Would be stellar spectacular!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

 

Ask the scientists who gave us Denisovans what they needed. They didn't say novel primate, they said Human species. And I think they determined that the pinky bone came from a young female? And how long ago was that determination made? One doesn't need a body is what I got out of that discovery. The other thing I got out of it is that discovery no longer justifies slaying the creature with a bullet. DNA is the new bullet and the sooner people accept that the sooner we'll have the proof. Everyone should be pushing for that as the primary path to discovery. Especially since there's a trillion times more Sasquatch DNA out there than there are Sasquatches.

 

[norseman]

47 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Ask the scientists who gave us Denisovans what they needed. They didn't say novel primate, they said Human species. And I think they determined that the pinky bone came from a young female? And how long ago was that determination made? One doesn't need a body is what I got out of that discovery. The other thing I got out of it is that discovery no longer justifies slaying the creature with a bullet. DNA is the new bullet and the sooner people accept that the sooner we'll have the proof. Everyone should be pushing for that as the primary path to discovery. Especially since there's a trillion times more Sasquatch DNA out there than there are Sasquatches.

 

That’s an extinct species….. not extant.

[norseman]

Which as I mull this over….. as the scientific requirements to prove the existence of an extinct species is much much more lax?

 

One pinkie bone of a novel primate in the Americas? Would blow the lid off this thing. Especially if the bone was recent. Hobbits? Denisovans? Dragon man? Homo Naledi? We read about these discoveries…. Right now Homo Sapiens is the only accepted primate to have ever walked the Americas. I am convinced that some of this evidence may already be in a museum or college basement. But maybe funding a dig in some of the caves in the PAC NW might prove fruitful? I am sure permits and credentials are required.

 

But a giant hominid bone that’s 10,000 years old? 👌🏻

[hiflier]

Don't even need a bone: https://www.science.org/content/article/dna-dirt-can-offer-new-view-ancient-life  it means that the existence lid can be blown off the Bigfoot subject anytime. Science knows how to do it, and CAN do it.

[hiflier]

From SIX YEARS AGO: https://www.science.org/content/article/no-bones-no-problem-dna-left-cave-soils-can-reveal-ancient-human-occupants Think what that means today- after six years of advancements in the technology. The biggest mistake anyone can make is thinking that this technology can only be applied to ancient DNA. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's time to get mainstream science to finally step up and help us out.

 

Edited August 4, 2023 by hiflier

[Huntster]

12 hours ago, norseman said:

That’s an extinct species….. not extant.

 

What's the difference when it cones to taxonomic identification? If they can identify a human species and gender from a 50,000 year old sliver of finger bone, they should be able to do likewise with a finger chopped off of a living hand two weeks prior to submission.

 

Unless, of course, they don't want to............

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

..........It's time to get mainstream science to finally step up and help us out.

 

Good luck with that.

[NorCalWitness]

17 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

To date, as far as I can tell, all DNA studies concerning Sasquatch have pointed to genus Homo. Even studies that no one here knows about but which I do know about. And since the Sasquatch has such a physically advanced body shape, more like a Human than a Chimp, then having it's DNA align closely to Human shouldn't be a great surprise.

 

So it all comes down to brain type more than anything else.

 

which studies are you referring to? I'd love to check them out. 

[MIB]

4 hours ago, hiflier said:

it means that the existence lid can be blown off the Bigfoot subject anytime

 

I don't think so.    Science comes in compartments.   Among those there is "definitely" the ability to do the needed technical work.   Unfortunately, that's not the whole picture.   One compartment can present all it wants but until another accepts the validity of what has been presented, the lid remains firmly in place.    Science seems perfectly ok with the idea of dead-end near-us lineages in the past.   Science does not seem ok with something "us-like" still existing today.    Fair or not, proving bigfoot is a much heavier "lift" than proving yet-another long dead cousin.