• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
RayG said:
Originally Posted by Huntster
How about contributing to a fund to hunt down a sasquatch rather than an opportunity to challenge people who are learning while they go?
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem logical. Why contribute to a fund to hunt down squatch when nobody seems able to hunt down a squatch?
Click to expand...

Because it's my position that the hunt hasn't been conducted properly, and that is partially because there isn't enough funding to do it right.
 
Huntster said:
Because it's my position that the hunt hasn't been conducted properly, and that is partially because there isn't enough funding to do it right.
Click to expand...

But how can a hunt be conducted properly unless some of the participants are experienced/trained hunters/trackers?

RayG
 
Last edited:
RayG said:
Originally Posted by Huntster
Because it's my position that the hunt hasn't been conducted properly, and that is partially because there isn't enough funding to do it right.
Click to expand...

But how can a hunt be conducted properly unless some of the participants are experienced/trained hunters/trackers?
Click to expand...

Such a hunt should be conducted with people experienced in hunting/tracking, depending on tactics.
 
So, Huntie, you found possible Squatch sign but you didn’t follow it. Afraid, you say? And yet, nobody has ever yet been attacked by a Bigfoot. What was so scary? You thought you were onto the cryptobiological find of the century, hell, the millennium, but you chickened out? A big tough guy like you, always ready to talk about his guns?

Who wounded that bear, BTW? I hope it wasn’t you, because I’m still prepared to respect you, and I don’t want to think you’re the kind of guy who’ll abandon a blood trail.

Only one percent of the Caribous are in Wyoming, but that’s a minor point.
 
I dunno huntster, I think in order to find and track a BF, one has to be able to differentiate between false and authentic tracks and sign. It's most financially reasonable to first ascertain if any of the alleged sign is actually from a huge hominid before spending more money on nabbing one. That's what went down with the Ivory-bill. The film and photos were analyzed, expreiments with pileated woodpeckers and models of Ivory-bill dummies were undertaken, and only after the photographic evidence was given a thumbs up did the actual exploration and investigation commence. The same should follow for BF...problem is, the footage, casts, and hairs are all inconclusive so far.

by the way sackett, Casper's o.k.,
but the Buckhorn Bar in Laramie...now there's where you're most likely to find a BF!!
 
I'm guessing he'd be the healthiest looking one in the crowd! You know, all his teeth, walking a little less hunched over than the rest...
 
Huntster said:
That statement illustrates your lack of understanding of the issue.

A lack of understanding? How so? What a tracker with thousands of years of training couldn't track an 8 foot tall animal - you should read the experinces of how the bushman track animals. Most of it is deductive logic. Tracking animals is more then just foot prints. Its direction of food sources, time of year, time of the day, etc, etc.


There are no sasquatches in African savannahs.
Click to expand...

So what. As I said any tracker should be any to track any animal. Again, an 8 foot animal that leaves size 18 foot prints shouldn't be that hard to find for any tracker.

Or is it your opinion that only a "special" traker can find bigfoot.
 
And to add...

I don't care how well a creature knows it's enviroment... a huge creature like bigfoot would leave tracks that anyone should be able to track.

Having spent some time living amongst the Australian aborigonies you pick up some local knowledge. For example, I now know how to see if crocidiles are about if I was to go to a creek. You can spot all the signs of 8 foot long creature that can hide 98% of it's body under water.

No animal can leave no tracks (and all that entails - broken branches, droppings, etc). Even the creatures in sea track one another by the wake that they leave in the water
 
Fact is, tracking and reading sign are just about the oldest skills on earth -- and not at all hard.

Granted that to a fresh-laid tenderfoot who's never stepped off pavement, interpreting sign can seem fanciful -- at first, until he starts using his mind, applying it to things plain to be seen by anybody. Then it quickly bcomes matter-of-fact, involuntary even, the way a literate person starts to read as soon as his eye lands on print.

So I don't think we need to mount any very specialized Squatch hunt. Just cut his trail and keep on it, fellers. Let everybody pack a pint of J. Daniels, pass 'em around often, and before long they'll see Bigfoot.
 
8 feet tall, 700 pounds, on two feet....

Can't seem to be tracked until well after the fact, though.

Whenever they get there late, footers have no trouble tracking bigfoot all over the place.

When they are near the spot and the time of the sighting, they either can't or won't track bigfoot.

When they do supposedly track bigfoot in a timely fashion, like in the PGF incident, we get conflicting stories about whether they tracked it or not, and different versions of where bigfoot went.
 
Huntster said:
There are no sasquatches in African savannahs.
Click to expand...

How do you know that? Have you combed every square inch of the savannahs to know for a fact there are no sasquatches there? I'm willing to bet my entire net worth that there are just as many sasquatches in the African Savannahs as there are in my native Pacific Northwest.

In fact, Bigfoot-like creatures known by various names, most notably Ngoloko, Kikomba, Muhalu have been reported in the central African savannah, most notably Kenya. They even exist in the Siberean tundra under the name Chuchunaa. They are prevelant in nearly every region in the world, and yet no one has ever managed to find solid evidence of one, let alone an actual body.
 
Last edited:
The reason tracking them is so difficult is because you have to deal with different sorts of tracks. When Sasquatch gets back to where he tethered his unicorn, he rides off on it. And you know those unicorns -- they're so fast that it would be pointless to try following them.
 
The reason tracking them is so difficult is because you have to deal with different sorts of tracks. When Sasquatch gets back to where he tethered his unicorn, he rides off on it. And you know those unicorns -- they're so fast that it would be pointless to try following them.
Click to expand...


Hilarious, I love posts like these.
 
luchog said:
...In fact, Bigfoot-like creatures known by various names, most notably Ngoloko, Kikomba, Muhalu have been reported in the central African savannah, most notably Kenya. They even exist in the Siberean tundra under the name Chuchunaa. They are prevelant in nearly every region in the world, and yet no one has ever managed to find solid evidence of one, let alone an actual body.
Click to expand...

You left out the Himalayas and rural Ohio (where they've learned to open cans and bottles -- a lot of bottles -- and leave them lying around their campsites).

So if they can live in all those different habitats, why not in Wyoming? Don't seem fair, goddang it!
 
It's funny how none of the footprints from anywhere match.
There's 3- 4- 5- and 6-toed tracks.
There's long toes, short toes, wide heels, narrow heels, cleft ball, single-ball. No living organism has that variety of foot morphology.
Yet somehow, all the BFers can confidently point out everything but the its favorite t.v. show based on this wide variety of alleged tracks...astounding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom