Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

[Craig4]

I agree it would seem that way, but it's not as easy as you may think. The only thing a researcher can do is to use info to try and find an area that is supposedly "hot" with sightings and activity, then trek that area routinely in hopes of crossing paths with a Bigfoot or evidence of one being there. Everyone has their own theory as to how best to go about finding them but the fact is nobody knows exactly how to find them. The best we can do is to find a likely area and hope for an encounter. Chris B.

So is holding back the release of your video and not testing your saliva sample your way of being competitive? If you were competitive, you'd have pushed out both bits of evidence to be the first for the win.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I lived in a tiny Ah Kha village just west of there in 1999. There is no history of bigfoot in Thailand - it is an emerging phenomenon right now because there is money in feeding tourists their own garbage. The hill tribes are not Buddhist, and they have their own languages. They have used slash and burn agriculture for millennia - all these preserves are recent, and it has the same parallel with logging in the USA: the pretense that the recent preserves are ancient wilderness with no previous human occupation or impact. What it has done is destroy the hill tribe migratory cultures.

Men risked their lives and indeed died climbing over a hundred feet into trees for a quart of honey. No branches up until the canopy - they were scaling the trunks of these massive trees with bare hands and feet. They would have died trying to kill bigfoot too, and are quite happy to push the tourists' own myth for easy cash.

It is interesting to see the history of Yeti begin in the Himalayas as a small hoaxing adjunct to the mountaineering industry, then explode into the North American scene, drawing the Yeti hunters like Peter Byrne to North America, and almost half a century later boomerang back all over Asia as an adjunct to the tourist trekking industry.

It began, and still is an industry serving western fantasies. The myth was nonexistent in Thailand when Roger Patterson went over there for the bar girls of Bangkok, so he could not even name the place he was supposedly looking.

Patterson himself said the story was a hoax, and it was a doozie - a live bigfoot being held captive in a Buddhist monestary. He did not name the person who supposedly sent him the letter and he did not name the monastery nor even the region. With a story that sensational, it would have been easy to fact-check had he named the alleged story-teller or the monastery.

All over the world we see the same thing emerging: bigfoot is being injected into regions with bona-fide wildlife preservation programs for real animals but the wildlife managers themselves do not recognize its existence. Native cultures which are no longer viable because they are placed on reservations without the ability to pursue their previous livelihoods service tourists with whatever sells.

It's interesting to note that the Yeti can be traced back to 326 BC and Alexander the Great. I wouldn't think there would be much of a tourist industry for climbing back then.

Perhaps you are correct and the folks in and around SE Asia are borrowing from Western Bigfoot for a tourist draw? I suppose it's possible.

From my point of view, this would be a likely area to look for one though. If we think Bigfoot may be descended from Giganto, it makes sense to look in and around areas where Giganto fossils have been found. That takes any problem with the land bridge theory completely out of the equation.

Though unlikely to find one, I still think an expedition to the area would be a worthwhile adventure and one that I will likely pursue at some point. Finding a Wild man would simply be a bonus to the other sights to be seen.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Yes, when Honest Bob donned a wig and pretended to be an Indian, that was just for snits and giggles.

RayG

Well, from what I understand Bob Gimlin is descended from the Chirokowa Apaches. I don't see any pretending or the point of your post? Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

More to the point, we were talking about "evidence" for Bigfoot, be it a film, a video, a picture, or a made-up story about migration paths and HD footage shot from 15 feet away.

No, once again you have misconceived the conversation. The conversation started with a discussion of pics as evidence, then morphed into video, and then finally included all Bigfoot evidence courtesy of dmaker. Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Does that mean that every single Bigfoot-Hunter, such as yourself, lacks the skill and knowledge required to achieve their goal?

Yep, that's exactly what it means. The first one with the correct theory on how to obtain biological evidence will win the prize and the title of "Expert" when that evidence is gathered.
Chris B.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Well, from what I understand Bob Gimlin is descended from the Chirokowa Apaches. I don't see any pretending or the point of your post? Chris B.

Yeah, that must be why he donned a wig, and a hat, and pointed off into the distance with that "native-looking glance," lol. I'm descended from the Celts and more recently from the clan Gilchrist, or clan McGilchrist, who were lords of Scotland, but I don't tend to don a ginger wig and ride a horse into a pretend battle.

You know fully-well why we mentioned Gimlin in the wig...You're fully aware that he was playing a role, which, ironically, Patterson scammed him out of eventually.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

No, once again you have misconceived the conversation. The conversation started with a discussion of pics as evidence, then morphed into video, and then finally included all Bigfoot evidence courtesy of dmaker. Chris B.

The point remains the same, though, how do you not get that? Surely if pictures are a form of evidence which you suggest cannot be supported without corroborating biological evidence, then that also applies to every other piece of Bigfoot evidence that you have... None of it can be supported with actual biological evidence. You know this. I know this. We all know this.

 

[Resume]

Well, from what I understand Bob Gimlin is descended from the Chirokowa Apaches. I don't see any pretending or the point of your post? Chris B.

Many Americans, including myself (and probably you) have Native American heritage. I stopped playing Indian and Cowboy when I was about ten.

You?

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Yep, that's exactly what it means. The first one with the correct theory on how to obtain biological evidence will win the prize and the title of "Expert" when that evidence is gathered.
Chris B.

Good, well you have dna, right? You have HD footage, right? You lived on a migration path, right? You can get close enough to study them to the point that you "know real from fake" just by using your bourbon-proof peepers, right? So, why haven't you become said "expert" of the Bigfoot World? Why are you merely just another unimportant proponent on the internet, you should be on television like that guy Bobo, now he's an expert.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Yes, when Honest Bob donned a wig and pretended to be an Indian, that was just for snits and giggles.

RayG

He was just method-acting, like De Nero. He wasn't actually playing an Indian tracker, he was just getting into the mindset of an Indian tracker who might hypothetically be out looking for a Bigfoot in a low-budget movie. This was all just the rigorous training that he had to undertake to join Roger on his really real Bigfoot hunt, not the fictional hunt that he was doing, y'know...the really real one

 

[LTC8K6]

The point remains the same, though, how do you not get that? Surely if pictures are a form of evidence which you suggest cannot be supported without corroborating biological evidence, then that also applies to every other piece of Bigfoot evidence that you have... None of it can be supported with actual biological evidence. You know this. I know this. We all know this.

Footers seem to rate the stories as the best evidence.

Tracks, hairs, saliva, pics, all seem to take a back seat to the stories of noises in the woods, or stories of sightings.

If we have a story of an encounter, looking for evidence seems to always take a back seat to the story.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Footers seem to rate the stories as the best evidence.

Tracks, hairs, saliva, pics, all seem to take a back seat to the stories of noises in the woods, or stories of sightings.

If we have a story of an encounter, looking for evidence seems to always take a back seat to the story.

Exactly, even the other day I was talking with someone on some website or other, and he literally came out with this gem: "Just wait 'til you look into the eyes of somebody who has witnessed a Bigfoot for real. When you see the fear in their eyes, you'll know you were wrong."

I mean, I have no idea what else to reply with, other than "lol." You'd think that the details would be in the photo's, the footage, the actual evidence... But no, the details are in the story, how apt.

 

[eerok]

The first one with the correct theory on how to obtain biological evidence will win the prize and the title of "Expert" when that evidence is gathered.

Gathering biological evidence wouldn't be such a big deal if the bogeyman bigfoot actually existed. The fact that bigfoot research has been a joke completely useless for decades doesn't mean that you get a free pass on special pleading.

At this point it's simply not reasonable to conclude that bigfoot could exist in North America.

 

[Giordano]

Yep, that's exactly what it means. The first one with the correct theory on how to obtain biological evidence will win the prize and the title of "Expert" when that evidence is gathered.
Chris B.

I admit that I am stumped: I have no idea how to obtain conclusive evidence that will show Bigfoot is real.

 

[Jodie]

Buy a bear rug with a bullet hole in it and post a pic of it on the internet.

 

[carlitos]

Geez. Bear rugs, bullets, pictures and the Internet actually exist. Will you still pretend not to understand the difference between these things and stories about mythical creatures?

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

It's interesting to note that the Yeti can be traced back to 326 BC and Alexander the Great. I wouldn't think there would be much of a tourist industry for climbing back then.
.

Oh really. Cite the reference to that from original Greek sources rather than unsourced bigfoot claims.

There is a translation of a real battle Alexander fought in 326 BC on his India campaign that has been dishonestly hijacked by 'footers, right now one of them being you. The report is that the humans they captured had hairy bodies.

Dr. Miland Brown:

http://www.worldhistoryblog.com/2010/02/did-alexander-great-fight-yeti.html

See how you didn't cite a source, but the skeptics have no problem sourcing?


I brought a cord of birch home from the woods today. What did you do in the woods?

 

[The Shrike]

Few things in the world are quite so lovely as catching a whiff of wintergreen while chopping fresh birch on a crisp autumn day.

Jodi, please conduct the Google image search for bear rug with a bullet hole that you're accusing ABP of doing. Let us know when you find it and from what source. If you're correct, it should be quite easy to prove that he's a big ol' fibber.

 

[Resume]

Yep, that's exactly what it means. The first one with the correct theory on how to obtain biological evidence will win the prize and the title of "Expert" when that evidence is gathered.
Chris B.

You're sort of missing the boat here. As long as no footie is found (and that's going to be a very long time) anyone can be a footie expert.

Just ask them.

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip...
From my point of view, this would be a likely area to look for one though. If we think Bigfoot may be descended from Giganto, it makes sense to look in and around areas where Giganto fossils have been found. That takes any problem with the land bridge theory completely out of the equation.

...snip...

Oh, please...
This just adds to "the equation" the need to create yet another lame excuse, one to explain why no fossils of these animals have been found between SE Asia and the bridge's starting point.

The real denialists are those who refuse to admit bigfoots are not real, regardless if they actually believe or not in them.