• 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.

Native American myths/traditions support Bigfoot? A critical look.

parnassus said:
Many North American tribes had little facial or body hair. Early encounters with hairy individuals or tribes, or Europeans, would have been a notable event. It is not surprising that oral traditions or pictographic records would include descriptions which would make mention of hairiness. Similarly, a 6 foot man might have been a "giant" to a tribe of 5ft 2 inchers. Lastly, the translations of these oral traditions is by no means just "word x = English word y." It is so so very difficult in terms of exact meanings.
Click to expand...

This is spot on. But I've never heard mention of little indians except in 'mythical' references. Are there indian tribes where they average 5 ft. tall?
I'm part athabascan and all of my cousins are huge, 6 ft. plus.
 
It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to support the contention that Native Americans in any century were considerably shorter in stature than any invading people from Europe.

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/tallind.htm

[In the 1800s] The average adult male Plains Indian [Cheyenne, Sioux, Blackfeet and Comanche] stood 172.6 centimeters tall -- about 5 feet 8 inches. The next tallest people in the world at that time were Australian men, who averaged 172 centimeters. European American men of the time averaged 171 centimeters tall, and men living in European countries were typically several centimeters shorter.

...

"The modern perception that Native Americans were hapless and in poor health probably comes from the era at the turn of the century when Indians were put on reservations," Steckel said. "Native Americans often did suffer high rates of tuberculosis and other manifestations of poor health on the reservations, but they weren't always that way."​

I realize this does not address the height of other, non-Plains tribes in other centuries, but that information is either unavailable generally, or only on the internet.
 
Well, I did not say that all tribes were short, nor did I say that the average European was tall, nor did I say that anyone was in poor health. If you look at the Algonkian legend of the "Yahoo" or tall hairy woman, that legend originated from interaction with a single tall hairy individual human woman. Further, if you restrict me to non-internet sources, I am screwed, because I am not privileged to have your printed sources. I respect your knowledge obviously, but the relatively tall Sioux/Lakota do not have a tradition of a living bigfoot, amirite? perhaps there is a reason there.

Now, from my internet google, the first tribe I thought of, for obvious reasons, was the Inuit; this source says they average 5-4. They have a supposed bigfoot tradition, that being the Tornit. However, if you read the translated, transcribed story about the Tornit, it turns out they are just a neighboring tribe of tall humans.

So, I will concede that my hypothetical may miss the mark of reality by 2 inches, I hope you will grant me that it IS a hypothetical, and as stated, with or without the 2 inches, it is not '"off in left field."

I do think this is an important topic and I appreciate your expertise; the more accurate the better. The other really important aspect of this is the issue of translation. The most obvious example is the fact that the type specimen, if you will, of the bigfoot phenomenon was the mis-translated "Abominable Snowman." Arguably, without that mistranslation, which captured the imagination, we wouldn't be typing away today. If you have studied tribal languages you know that their words are often not translatable one to one into English, that gesture and body language can greatly modify, and that half-baked translations were frequent, and the results sometimes comical, sometimes tragic. Attempted translations and transcriptions by unsophisticated, untrained, sometimes amateur Anglos, who may have a stake in creating a colorful story, are usually as much a source of confusion as enlightenment.
And let's face, tribal persons sometimes have a motivation to tell a colorful story.

So when I read the Anglo words, I try to think the thoughts and the linguistic barriers that created the words, not just the stuff on the page. Scientific? or Reality?
 
Last edited:
Please do not allow me to pretend to any kind of "expertise" in Native American studies. It's an area I've only recently begin to examine with any kind of earnestness. I did not mean to indicate otherwise. I only found the link I posted from a yahoo search on "Native American height".

Chiefly I was responding to your statement, "a 6 foot man might have been a 'giant' to a tribe of 5ft 2 inchers," as though it were a blanket assertion about the population of North America at the time of the Spanish invasion, rather than a hypothetical and non-specific opinion.

Apologies for any confusion. My anthropological knowledge is rather broad, not at all specialized, and tends toward the paleo- side of things. I know next to nothing about NA languages, but I like your conjecture about mistranslation being at the heart of the development of "American Snowman" beliefs.
 
in 1958, a study of Eskimo men in the Alaska national guard found they averaged 5 5 and 145 lb. PDF google An Appraisal of the Health and Nutritional Status of the Eskimo.
 
Last edited:
parnassus said:
in 1958, a study of Eskimo men in the Alaska national guard found they averaged 5 5 and 145 lb. PDF google An Appraisal of the Health and Nutritional Status of the Eskimo.
Click to expand...

I was really hoping you were above this. Alas. How many sasquatch reports originate in the Arctic Circle?

Stop before it's too late. It's a deep, dark hole you're sliding down. Pseudoskepticism doesn't fit you.

Beatinadeadhorse.gif
 
manofthesea said:
I was really hoping you were above this. Alas. How many sasquatch reports originate in the Arctic Circle?

Stop before it's too late. It's a deep, dark hole you're sliding down. Pseudoskepticism doesn't fit you.

[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v421/Keithhs/Misc%20Pics/Beatinadeadhorse.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Thanks for your concern!!:)
The issue wasn't how many sasquatch reports originate in the Arctic Circle. The issue was about tribal people who are alleged to have bigfoot legends, and how these legends might have arisen. The Inuit are one of those tribes. The terminology "Eskimo" is sometimes used as a catchall for Inuits and related tribes. Further, they live in many parts of Alaska, not just that part of the state which is above the Arctic Circle.

I am skeptical about tribal legends being used to support the idea of a bigfoot as some sort of non-human primate.
 
Reposting from the BFF...

My goal as a skeptic and writer on the subject of Bigfoot is to deal with specific claims. Two of the specific claims I have written about over the years are concerning the PGF showing a real Bigfoot, and native myths and traditions featuring Bigfoot. I love the Bigfoot myth. I love it as a myth, not as a biological species. I would be ecstatic for that to be the case, but I see the evidence of a social construct no different than Reptoids, alien abduction, Dogman, etc. I think it is pseudoscience to teach people these things are real without proof. For Reptoids, Dogman, Bigfoot or any other fortean zooform that means type specimen. That's the way we've done it since Linnaeus, and anyone who wants us to lower the standards of science and imperical knowledge now so that we can accommodate belief in Bigfoot, I think are misinformed. When my son goes to biology class when he is older, until Bigfoot is on a slab somewhere, I do not want any teacher telling him about Bigfoot in our woods, other than in the context of discussing real science and pseudoscience.

There is a thread here that discusses people who can no longer enter the woods for fear of Bigfoot. To their credit, there are a number who claim to have witnessed or interacted with Bigfoot that have no such fear. For others, Bigfoot is this awesome demongodlike thing that will go berserk and tear you up and squish the leftovers under massive foot. This is tragic to me that anyone should feel fear for their lives when entering nature. I can't speak to the specifics of every person that feels that way, but I can say that people do experience very scary things that scares the crap out of them, but they did not actually occur, or they did occur, but not as the person thought.

The idea that Bigfoot lives now and has lived across North America for thousands of years, yet we do not have a type specimen, and indeed be a well studied species now as gorillas, chimps, and orangutans are is absurd to me. That is not to say that people who do believe such a thing are stupid. I once strongly believed in Bigfoot and I wasn't stupid then. I simply did not have enough information in hand to discern what is the full situation in hand. The way for me to do that was simple: I examine specific claims to see if they have any merit, and I continue spending lots of time in the habitat where Bigfoot is said to live.

My contention here is this: If Bigfoot lived across North America and did such things as take food from native tribes and even occasionally abduct children, I don't care how nasty some people think Bigfoot is, that monkey is going to die. That monkey os going to wind up somebody's rug, or cloak, or necklace, etc. I just wrote the following in my PGF thread...

If Bigfoot is out there across North America and being in our places of recreation and living and working, it is going to wind up dead after coming into contact with us. The people who I think have gone to far with fortean ideas and see Bigfoot as some near godlike thing in the forest that would shake off bullet wounds and any attack a human could make are just not thinking rationally to me. We are humans and we are badass. We're not always badass, but whether it's here and now with the Western domination of North America, or before that with the countless native cultures, we have always had groups of badass humans. They could bring down mammoths, polar bears, brown bears, etc with little more than brains and spears and lances. Want to take down a mammoth? Use fear, a cliff, and some spears. Want a whale? Get some boats and some harpoons. Want a polar bear? Spears and team work. We are badass. We are phyically weak, but with our massive brains we make up for it and we go out across the globe and annihilate whatever messes with us. Bigfoot could not contend with our badass ways, nor could it remain safe from our badassness across North America for hundreds of years.

Bigfoot would show up, try to take our food or yoink one of our kids, and wham, Bigfoot is a rug.

I want to talk about badass natives. Tribes of humans in North America that would take a big monkey down to Chinatown if they messed with them at all. First let's look at some specific badasses...

Badass #1 - Iroquois warrior:

http://warandgame.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/iroquois_warrior_sm.jpg

That guy and his homies live smack in the middle of alleged Bigfoot territory. Northeastern United States and Eastern Canada was their turf. Any giant monkey that messes with those badasses will wind up a decorative showpiece.

Let's see what they have in the arsenal to make some monkey salad with...

http://www.catesdesigngroup.com/images/weapons_01.jpg

Ouch. Those look sharp. If I were a hungry monkey with a hankering for human kid legs, I would think twice before trying to yoink one and mess with those badasses. And more...

http://webprojects.prm.ox.ac.uk/arms-and-armour/600/1884.12.34.jpg

Yep. I don't care how big your sagittal crest is, mess with the Iroquois or the Huron and you're asking for your head to be made a pastey soup.

Badass #2 - Blackfoot warrior:

http://www.blackfootcrossing.ca/images/na-790-1bearshield.jpg

He doesn't look like one to mess with. The Blackfeet or Blackfoot roamed the plains and woodlands of Montana and Alberta. They were badass and the mighty buffalo was one of their main quarry. I would say him and ten of his brothers could make some mean monkey salad. Let's see some of their tongs with which to toss that mean monkey salad...

http://ushistoryimages.com/images/indian-weapons/fullsize/indian-weapons-4.jpg

Those are just an example of some of the things the Blackfeet might use. If I was a 7 ft monkey, and I wanted to keep my funky hide in one piece, I would not ever mess with the Blackfeet. If you think Bigfoot and the Blackfoot would never meet, think again. They did not live only on the plains. The lived in places such as this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/Blackfoot_teepees.jpg

And this....

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/3061671964_9b97bc9096_z.jpg

Badass #3 - Chiricahua Apache Warrior:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...jpg/220px-Chiricahua_Apache_Ba-keitz-ogie.jpg

Bob Gimlin is 1/4 Chiricahua Apache. Let's see something they might use to take out a Bigfoot with...

http://i.ehow.com/images/a04/ba/g8/apache-indian-symbols-200X200.jpg

These people have traditionally lived in New Mexico, Arizona, and in norther Sonora in Mexico. This is there turf...

http://www.soenyun.com/Blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/chiricahua-cochise-head.jpg

Badass #4 - Shawnee warrior:

http://michaeljtaylor.com/images/OIL PAINTINGS - Counting.jpg

Historical painting description...

Artist self portrait from a living history event at Old Mans Cave in Hocking Hills Ohio. Portrayal of an eighteenth century Shawnee warrior counting the number of warriors that participated in a raid on Frontier people that were rendering salt from a salt spring. Michael acted the scene annually and wanted to capture the feeling of standing on the cliff at Old Mans Cave.
Click to expand...

http://michaeljtaylor.com/historical_paintings2.htm

That painting is of a dude from a tribe that historically have inhabited Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Western Maryland, Kentucky, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. I think i covered about six major Bigfoot research organizations there. Let's see how the Shawnee would toss their mean monkey salad...

http://www.nativeworkshop.com/images/tradepointballclub.jpg

And this...

http://www.hbforge.com/images/shawneehawk_260x110.jpg

And this...

http://www.furtrade.org/3collct/picscolct/guns/JB 67 NW TECUMSEH.jpg

Hello, Boss of the Woods. How are you today? Put down the child and back away slowly or me and 12 of my Shawnee brothers here are going to hack your feet of, strap you to a pole, disembowel you, and cut of your eyelids while you die in slow agaony.

I understand that some people will say that the badasses I am showing are in places that is not prime tradition Bigfoot habitat re: PNW. To that I would say I hope you don't throw your New York State, Ohio, Arizona counterparts under the bus, so to speak, but let's get really on target...

Badass #5: Tlingit warrior:

http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/exhibitions/aborig/nwca/images/nwcah17b.jpg

Now, that is a painting of a Tlingit warrior in a war canoe with rifle, dagger, helmet, and armour going to raid another village. The Tlingit lived in the PNW here...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Tlingit-map.png

That painting "Raven Warrior" is from 1991 by Bill Holm. Here is the description...

Screened by the fog, a Tlingit war party in the early nineteenth century approaches an enemy village. The warriors paddle silently, steering their great war canoes close to the steep shore. The canoes are the ancient battle craft, with upright, broad and flaring bows, apparently designed as a shield against arrows. These high bows were said to be removeable for ease in travelling. Their details seem to be exaggerations of classic Nootkan canoe design, but these war canoes were used in the early historic period all along the coast, from Vancouver Island to Alaska. They are known today only from a few drawings and paintings and a handful of Native models. The Tlingit name of this canoe type was kookh-da-gi-gin-yakw. The Kwakwaka'wakw term was muhnka, and it is by this name that the archaic war canoe is best known today.

Standing in the bow of the lead canoe is a warrior armed with a flintlock trade musket and steel dagger, the pommel of which is in the form of a raven's head. Raven's image, a crest derived from lineage myths, appears on his canoe and paddles, his heavy hide armour and his carved helmet with its trailing plume of human hair. All the warriors are armed with daggers or spears and wear armour, some of it reinforced with rows of Chinese coins.

A pair of ravens wheel and call in the fog above the canoes. They are the counterparts in nature of the mythical culture hero Raven, the source of the images below. All along the Northwest Coast there was the belief that ravens spoke a language that could be understood by those given that power, and could foretell victory or danger. Perhaps these are off to tell the unsuspecting village of the warriors' approach.
Click to expand...

http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/exhibitions/aborig/nwca/nwcah17e.shtml

These people we have been told by Hairy Man and other had Bigfoot in their culture. Here are some of their arsenal with which to make mean monkey salad...

http://webprojects.prm.ox.ac.uk/arms-and-armour/600/1921.53.3.jpg

http://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/Sothebys/N08554-77-lr-1?$lot_main$

http://forensicfashion.com/files/1802TlingitWarriorDaggerAMNH01.JPG

Those people were badass and had no problem slaughtering other humans. One Bigfoot comes and tries to yoink one of their kids, and that Bigfoot is going to end up dead. That's because people in the PNW had things like this...

http://www.alaskanartifacts.com/Typology/LargeHaftedLance_1.jpg

And gear like this...

http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/exhibitions/aborig/haida/images/havwa02b.jpg

And most important of all, this...

http://www.thelatestnews.in/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/human-brain.jpg

With these things natives killed everything over the ages from other people, to polar bears, to whales, to brown bears, to mammoths. They made artifcats from them that are here today and in collections around the world. Not one of these artifacts is a Bigfoot pelt, bone, or tooth. What I am arguing is that if Bigfoot did in fact live from Alaska to Ohio to New York to Arizona, etc, and it did do the things that people are saying they do, like stealing food and yoinking kids, we would have physical evidence of Bigfoot in the form of artifacts actually coming from Bigfoot physically. If Bigfoot is a social construct, something like a combination of the woodwoses and troll Western Civilization brought, and the human/animal hybrid boogeymen that natives had which feature animalistic qualities, which humans around the world do, we would never have anything physical. All we would have a myriad of tales that you need to cherry pick to get something like our current conception of Bigfoot from. The problem there is that there is not even consensus now on what exactly Bigfoot is and how it looks.
 
Bigfoot has Indian sense. He can tell when Indians are coming that want to hurt him.
 
Page 187 of Steward's Fork: a sustainable future for the Klamath Mountains by James K. Agee offers some great notes on why certain Native American myths that don't equal Bigfoot.
 
One of the most frequent problems in understanding tribal legends is translation, and even the words require interpretation. The Arikara had animal entities in their medicine ceremony, and one of the animals was hwat kusu, literally "foot big" or "big foot."

However, the meaning of hwat kusu is "duck." I've always chuckled at that.
 
Last edited:
kitakaze said:
Reposting from the BFF...

My goal as a skeptic and writer on the subject of Bigfoot is to deal with specific claims. Two of the specific claims I have written about over the years are concerning the PGF showing a real Bigfoot, and native myths and traditions featuring Bigfoot. I love the Bigfoot myth. I love it as a myth, not as a biological species. I would be ecstatic for that to be the case, but I see the evidence of a social construct no different than Reptoids, alien abduction, Dogman, etc. I think it is pseudoscience to teach people these things are real without proof. For Reptoids, Dogman, Bigfoot or any other fortean zooform that means type specimen. That's the way we've done it since Linnaeus, and anyone who wants us to lower the standards of science and imperical knowledge now so that we can accommodate belief in Bigfoot, I think are misinformed. When my son goes to biology class when he is older, until Bigfoot is on a slab somewhere, I do not want any teacher telling him about Bigfoot in our woods, other than in the context of discussing real science and pseudoscience.

There is a thread here that discusses people who can no longer enter the woods for fear of Bigfoot. To their credit, there are a number who claim to have witnessed or interacted with Bigfoot that have no such fear. For others, Bigfoot is this awesome demongodlike thing that will go berserk and tear you up and squish the leftovers under massive foot. This is tragic to me that anyone should feel fear for their lives when entering nature. I can't speak to the specifics of every person that feels that way, but I can say that people do experience very scary things that scares the crap out of them, but they did not actually occur, or they did occur, but not as the person thought.

The idea that Bigfoot lives now and has lived across North America for thousands of years, yet we do not have a type specimen, and indeed be a well studied species now as gorillas, chimps, and orangutans are is absurd to me. That is not to say that people who do believe such a thing are stupid. I once strongly believed in Bigfoot and I wasn't stupid then. I simply did not have enough information in hand to discern what is the full situation in hand. The way for me to do that was simple: I examine specific claims to see if they have any merit, and I continue spending lots of time in the habitat where Bigfoot is said to live.

My contention here is this: If Bigfoot lived across North America and did such things as take food from native tribes and even occasionally abduct children, I don't care how nasty some people think Bigfoot is, that monkey is going to die. That monkey os going to wind up somebody's rug, or cloak, or necklace, etc. I just wrote the following in my PGF thread...

If Bigfoot is out there across North America and being in our places of recreation and living and working, it is going to wind up dead after coming into contact with us. The people who I think have gone to far with fortean ideas and see Bigfoot as some near godlike thing in the forest that would shake off bullet wounds and any attack a human could make are just not thinking rationally to me. We are humans and we are badass. We're not always badass, but whether it's here and now with the Western domination of North America, or before that with the countless native cultures, we have always had groups of badass humans. They could bring down mammoths, polar bears, brown bears, etc with little more than brains and spears and lances. Want to take down a mammoth? Use fear, a cliff, and some spears. Want a whale? Get some boats and some harpoons. Want a polar bear? Spears and team work. We are badass. We are phyically weak, but with our massive brains we make up for it and we go out across the globe and annihilate whatever messes with us. Bigfoot could not contend with our badass ways, nor could it remain safe from our badassness across North America for hundreds of years.

Bigfoot would show up, try to take our food or yoink one of our kids, and wham, Bigfoot is a rug.

I want to talk about badass natives. Tribes of humans in North America that would take a big monkey down to Chinatown if they messed with them at all. First let's look at some specific badasses...

Badass #1 - Iroquois warrior:

http://warandgame.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/iroquois_warrior_sm.jpg

That guy and his homies live smack in the middle of alleged Bigfoot territory. Northeastern United States and Eastern Canada was their turf. Any giant monkey that messes with those badasses will wind up a decorative showpiece.

Let's see what they have in the arsenal to make some monkey salad with...

http://www.catesdesigngroup.com/images/weapons_01.jpg

Ouch. Those look sharp. If I were a hungry monkey with a hankering for human kid legs, I would think twice before trying to yoink one and mess with those badasses. And more...

http://webprojects.prm.ox.ac.uk/arms-and-armour/600/1884.12.34.jpg

Yep. I don't care how big your sagittal crest is, mess with the Iroquois or the Huron and you're asking for your head to be made a pastey soup.

Badass #2 - Blackfoot warrior:

http://www.blackfootcrossing.ca/images/na-790-1bearshield.jpg

He doesn't look like one to mess with. The Blackfeet or Blackfoot roamed the plains and woodlands of Montana and Alberta. They were badass and the mighty buffalo was one of their main quarry. I would say him and ten of his brothers could make some mean monkey salad. Let's see some of their tongs with which to toss that mean monkey salad...

http://ushistoryimages.com/images/indian-weapons/fullsize/indian-weapons-4.jpg

Those are just an example of some of the things the Blackfeet might use. If I was a 7 ft monkey, and I wanted to keep my funky hide in one piece, I would not ever mess with the Blackfeet. If you think Bigfoot and the Blackfoot would never meet, think again. They did not live only on the plains. The lived in places such as this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/Blackfoot_teepees.jpg

And this....

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/3061671964_9b97bc9096_z.jpg

Badass #3 - Chiricahua Apache Warrior:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...jpg/220px-Chiricahua_Apache_Ba-keitz-ogie.jpg

Bob Gimlin is 1/4 Chiricahua Apache. Let's see something they might use to take out a Bigfoot with...

http://i.ehow.com/images/a04/ba/g8/apache-indian-symbols-200X200.jpg

These people have traditionally lived in New Mexico, Arizona, and in norther Sonora in Mexico. This is there turf...

http://www.soenyun.com/Blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/chiricahua-cochise-head.jpg

Badass #4 - Shawnee warrior:

http://michaeljtaylor.com/images/OIL PAINTINGS - Counting.jpg

Historical painting description...



http://michaeljtaylor.com/historical_paintings2.htm

That painting is of a dude from a tribe that historically have inhabited Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Western Maryland, Kentucky, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. I think i covered about six major Bigfoot research organizations there. Let's see how the Shawnee would toss their mean monkey salad...

http://www.nativeworkshop.com/images/tradepointballclub.jpg

And this...

http://www.hbforge.com/images/shawneehawk_260x110.jpg

And this...

http://www.furtrade.org/3collct/picscolct/guns/JB 67 NW TECUMSEH.jpg

Hello, Boss of the Woods. How are you today? Put down the child and back away slowly or me and 12 of my Shawnee brothers here are going to hack your feet of, strap you to a pole, disembowel you, and cut of your eyelids while you die in slow agaony.

I understand that some people will say that the badasses I am showing are in places that is not prime tradition Bigfoot habitat re: PNW. To that I would say I hope you don't throw your New York State, Ohio, Arizona counterparts under the bus, so to speak, but let's get really on target...

Badass #5: Tlingit warrior:

http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/exhibitions/aborig/nwca/images/nwcah17b.jpg

Now, that is a painting of a Tlingit warrior in a war canoe with rifle, dagger, helmet, and armour going to raid another village. The Tlingit lived in the PNW here...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Tlingit-map.png

That painting "Raven Warrior" is from 1991 by Bill Holm. Here is the description...



http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/exhibitions/aborig/nwca/nwcah17e.shtml

These people we have been told by Hairy Man and other had Bigfoot in their culture. Here are some of their arsenal with which to make mean monkey salad...

http://webprojects.prm.ox.ac.uk/arms-and-armour/600/1921.53.3.jpg

http://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/Sothebys/N08554-77-lr-1?$lot_main$

http://forensicfashion.com/files/1802TlingitWarriorDaggerAMNH01.JPG

Those people were badass and had no problem slaughtering other humans. One Bigfoot comes and tries to yoink one of their kids, and that Bigfoot is going to end up dead. That's because people in the PNW had things like this...

http://www.alaskanartifacts.com/Typology/LargeHaftedLance_1.jpg

And gear like this...

http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/exhibitions/aborig/haida/images/havwa02b.jpg

And most important of all, this...

http://www.thelatestnews.in/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/human-brain.jpg

With these things natives killed everything over the ages from other people, to polar bears, to whales, to brown bears, to mammoths. They made artifcats from them that are here today and in collections around the world. Not one of these artifacts is a Bigfoot pelt, bone, or tooth. What I am arguing is that if Bigfoot did in fact live from Alaska to Ohio to New York to Arizona, etc, and it did do the things that people are saying they do, like stealing food and yoinking kids, we would have physical evidence of Bigfoot in the form of artifacts actually coming from Bigfoot physically. If Bigfoot is a social construct, something like a combination of the woodwoses and troll Western Civilization brought, and the human/animal hybrid boogeymen that natives had which feature animalistic qualities, which humans around the world do, we would never have anything physical. All we would have a myriad of tales that you need to cherry pick to get something like our current conception of Bigfoot from. The problem there is that there is not even consensus now on what exactly Bigfoot is and how it looks.
Click to expand...

You seem to be overlooking the fact that more than a few tribes had hang ups about even hunting bear because they were too close to human in their belief system, squatchy seems to often fall into a similar context. Your suggestions above are a wee bit of an oversimplication.
 
Mikey, for the sake of my iPhone and my thumbs could you please not quote kitakaze's posts in their entirety. Thanks. :)
 
mikeyx said:
You seem to be overlooking the fact that more than a few tribes had hang ups about even hunting bear because they were too close to human in their belief system, squatchy seems to often fall into a similar context. Your suggestions above are a wee bit of an oversimplication.
Click to expand...

This does not explain the lack of dead Bigfoot items made by tribes with no such qualms.
 
If a young Indian found a huge Bigfoot skull and brought it into the village would the elders just get rid of it? Does that explain the lack of such found objects?
 
" Taboo", "looks too human" and blah.

"Taboo". .. Seems they were made to be broken.
"Looks too human"... What a lame excuse. Humans have been killing other humans since the dawn of times.
So, why wouldn't they (we) kill something that just looks a bit like a human?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom