Anyone know about the unreleased Midwest bigfoot video

[Drewbot]

No. Sasquatch would be the species, the Genus is unknown, but of course would be the same amongst all of them

 

[Vortigern99]

The genus is as unknown as the species and subspecies; all are invented and imaginary.

Why do people have such a hard time admitting when they've made a mistake? It's not a big deal.

Genus is capitalized, as you've done with "Sasquatch", followed by the species in lower-case, as you've done with what you called subspecies. No one who understands binomial nomenclature would write "Species subspecies"; it's incorrect, and it bewilders me that you wouldn't just say, "Oh, you're right. Thanks for the correction," or similar.

Drew, those aren't subspecies: they're species. Nomenclature goes:

Genus species subspecies

Homo sapiens sapiens

Gigantopithecus sasquatchicus floridiensis

etc.

 

[Drewbot]

The genus is as unknown as the species and subspecies; all are invented and imaginary.

Why do people have such a hard time admitting when they've made a mistake? It's not a big deal.

Genus is capitalized, as you've done with "Sasquatch", followed by the species in lower-case, as you've done with what you called subspecies. No one who understands binomial nomenclature would write "Species subspecies"; it's incorrect, and it bewilders me that you wouldn't just say, "Oh, you're right. Thanks for the correction," or similar.

For example: Bison bison bison is the Plains Bison, Bison bison athabascae is the Wood Bison. In a discussion about subspecies, I didn't find it necessary to inlcude the genus. Since it is a given that subspecies of the same species are of course going to be from the same genus.

 

[William Parcher]

Subspecies could mean that there are regional variations of the same creatures.

That is not the context they are using it in. They are saying their Bigfoot could be a subspecies. A subspecies of what? Of what already identified species?

I'm thinking this is stated in advance of DNA results showing that the samples are essentially human. Then they go ahead and say it must be a subspecies of humans. Something like Homo sapiens sasquatchi.

 

[Drewbot]

But Bigfoot is not an advanced tool user.

It is simply a raw meat eating, ambush predator, with no humanly definitive traits.

(except burying it's dead)

 

[William Parcher]

Then it will be a subspecies of which already known species?

 

[Drewbot]

Can't be a subspecies of Homo sapiens due to lack of advanced tool use, can't be any of the Gorillas because they are not bipedal.

 

[William Parcher]

Shocking News: DNA reveals that Bigfoot is essentially human but will probably be designated as a subspecies of human. Additionally, eyewitness observations show that Bigfoot does not used advanced tools. If this is true, then Bigfoot shows that tool use is not a common characteristic of all modern humans.

 

[GT/CS]

Might it be time to make Bigfoot Classification its own thread?

 

[LTC8K6]

Sasquatchicus flatusii

Carries a screwdriver and steals cans of pork & beans.

Believed largely responsible for the reports of strong odors associated with bigfoot.

 

[William Parcher]

John Green: "The entire problem is the strange phenomenon that scientists won't study it."

Watch the new trailer on the upcoming Erickson Project documentary here on the home page. It includes Moneymaker, Bindernagel, Green, Meldrum, etc.

The release of the documentary will coincide with the release of the DNA findings collaboratively with Dr. Melba Ketchum.

 

[Vortigern99]

For example: Bison bison bison is the Plains Bison, Bison bison athabascae is the Wood Bison. In a discussion about subspecies, I didn't find it necessary to inlcude the genus. Since it is a given that subspecies of the same species are of course going to be from the same genus.

Okay, that's a fair point. I retract my misplaced reprimand.

 

[mustbeso]

Hi all,
I'm new here and have spent probably more time than one should reading alot of bigfoot related threads. Interesting to say the least. I don't know if anyone has noticed/posted that in the contact us tab of the Erickson Project website they provide a link to Sylvanic Bigfoot. This probably gives an insite to what we can expect from the dog and pony show in Kentucky. It is certainly easy to find Todd Standing and his claims debunked with a simple Google search.

 

[GT/CS]

Is he the guy that found a magical valley that led to the land of the lost, full of bigfeet? Or something like that?

 

[mustbeso]

Yes, that's him. Must be First Nation folks who speak latin. Sasquatch Detective does a good take apart of one of his still photos.

 

[LTC8K6]

Yes, we've seen the Sylvanic photos before. Not likely to fool anyone but the most ardent believer, imo.

 

[William Parcher]

Adrian Erickson thinks that Todd Standing's evidence is genuine.

Bigfooters can now abandon all hope.

 

[WGBH]

Adrian Erickson thinks that Todd Standing's evidence is genuine.

Bigfooters can now abandon all hope.

I agree.

 

[Drewbot]

I agree.

With which part? Adrian Erickson or the Abandoning of All Hope?

 

[William Parcher]

Adrian Erickson film trailer and FAQ video.


How many Bigfoots?

Bindernagel: In the thousands.

Meldrum: 500-800 in the Western USA and Canada. If you include the rest of North America including the East and Southeast the number would be 2000-3000. Mentions Appalachia. Interestingly, this means that Meldrum thinks there are more Bigfoots living outside the PNW than within.

Erickson: Bigfoot is everywhere there are forests. Mentions Appalachia. At least 4000, maybe 8000-12000.

Erickson thinks nobody has ever found the bones of a black bear, mountain lion or wolf that has died of natural causes.