Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

[Jodie]

I am not unsympathetic with how any of you view the evidence. I'm certainly not impressed with it so far. The only reason that I think they existed, and might still exist, is because I had a trusted family member that had an extended close encounter with a large primate of some kind years before the PGF, call it bigfoot, sasquatch, or whatever, it fit the typical description. If not for that, I would not waste another minute's thought on bigfoot.

Is that going to convince anyone? Well of course not, and I wouldn't expect anyone to accept it. It's the rare person's story that I accept, not that my litmus test for sincerity is any better than anyone else's.

There is one story I've never heard mentioned in regards to bigfoot in the couple of years that I've been interested in the topic.I was told by several different older folks in my area of the country of the people who went feral during the depression. There was no work, no jobs, if you lost your home you either died or reverted back to the stone age by relearning to live off the land because there was no welfare system to bail you out.

If this is true, it might be possible that some of their descendants survived, I just can't reconcile the description of a sasquatch with feral people as I don't think they would totally give up fire, the use of tools, etc... not to mention the morphological differences. Nothing about these creatures sound human to me other than they walk upright.

And bush pilot, there are many areas of the United States and Canada that are inaccessible unless you put forth great effort and expense to get there. You know full well that 97% of the population in the United States occupies just 3% of the land area. As a matter of fact, you could stand every citizen in the United States shoulder to shoulder and only cover the state of Rhode Island. So the argument that we've placed are feet on every square inch of the North American continent and have seen everything there is to see simply isn't true. That doesn't mean sasquatch is out there but your argument is equally flawed.

 

[Resume]

And bush pilot, there are many areas of the United States and Canada that are inaccessible unless you put forth great effort and expense to get there. You know full well that 97% of the population in the United States occupies just 3% of the land area. As a matter of fact, you could stand every citizen in the United States shoulder to shoulder and only cover the state of Rhode Island. So the argument that we've placed are feet on every square inch of the North American continent and have seen everything there is to see simply isn't true. That doesn't mean sasquatch is out there but your argument is equally flawed.

Oh dear.

 

[AttorneyTom]

Okay... that is something a bit new I guess ?

Hilarious !!!

 

[Jodie]

bigfooters customarily resort to scatological references and ad homs when backed into a corner. This is no different.

By the way, you don't seem to know what a cynic is.

The conference LOL. Even Ketchum is afraid of the Bleevers. If she gets death threats what do you think would happen to me surrounded by 150 of you. LOL. No, you won't catch me at one of those; that isn't just belief, that's fanaticism. Besides, who told you I was there? What's your evidence on that one?

You haven't told us what chances you assign to there being a real bigfoot. Waiting.

Do you claim to have seen one?

Is that the best you can do Parn? I believe that you are projecting your ad hom arguments onto me. I think you need to re-evaluate your definition of the word, simply disagreeing does not an ad hom make.

If you don't want to own the title of cynic I can think of some other labels to apply to you but they might not be as flattering. I'm almost positive you've been called worse.

Bigfoot World is full of unstable people, as you well know, I can't blame DMK for not going. Her biggest mistake was getting involved in the first place IMO. If "bleevers" can lie about seeing a bigfoot I suppose a you can lie about attending a conference. I can't say I blame you on that one, suggesting you attended really didn't make you look good. Are you still planning to attend Meldrum's gorilla theatre?

Parn, I think you know my story already but it should be in the above post. I have never seen one, and hope I never do unless it's dead, even if they are eventually proven to exist. At the rate we are going now, it's going to be a long wait.

 

[LTC8K6]

And there you have it, the body was there for decades before someone accidentally stumbled upon it because the murderer was limited to an area that was only accessible to humans or the person happened to have a mishap yet again in an area only accessible to humans.

Then again humans are supposedly more numerous if you are of the opinion that the sasquatch population is small. Odds are you will find human remains before you will find a sasquatch's remains.

You can't find bones that don't exist but you also can't find bones in areas that can't be reached without a lot of equipment and a desire to go to the effort and expense based on assumptions of where you think a sasquatch ought to be. It's called finding a needle in a hay stack.

In the forest they never:
trip and break a leg?
have a stroke?
get shot?
fall and fracture their skull?
climb a tree and fall out?
fight and kill one another?
become crippled for any reason and unable to escape detection?
try to cross a frozen river or lake and fall through?
get struck by lightning?
accidentally cut a major artery?
get too close to the cliff edge?
just plain drown?
get caught in a flash flood?
get trapped by a forest fire?
get taken out by a wolf pack?
don't make it to shelter before the blizzard hits?
lose a youngster to a predator?
have a heart attack?
step in a gopher hole?
eat fermented fruit and get drunk and pass out?
get old and break a hip?
build a shelter in a deadly spot and pay for it?
break an ankle on a root?

seem to do anything but walk from nowhere to nowhere.
have any fun while walking in the forest.
walk around in a circle.
race each other to the river.


etc.

 

[Jodie]

Oh dear.

I'm sorry but you and Tom feel free to laugh as you review the census data for land area usage. I was mistaken about Rhode Island. It's the world's population that can stand shoulder to shoulder in the area that Los Angeles occupies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc4HxPxNrZ0&feature=related

 

[AttorneyTom]

In the forest they never:
trip and break a leg?
have a stroke?
get shot?
fall and fracture their skull?
climb a tree and fall out?
fight and kill one another?
become crippled for any reason and unable to escape detection?
try to cross a frozen river or lake and fall through?
get struck by lightning?
accidentally cut a major artery?
get too close to the cliff edge?
just plain drown?
get caught in a flash flood?
get trapped by a forest fire?
get taken out by a wolf pack?
don't make it to shelter before the blizzard hits?
lose a youngster to a predator?
have a heart attack?
step in a gopher hole?
eat fermented fruit and get drunk and pass out?
get old and break a hip?
build a shelter in a deadly spot and pay for it?
break an ankle on a root?

seem to do anything but walk from nowhere to nowhere.
have any fun while walking in the forest.
walk around in a circle.
race each other to the river.


etc.

That pretty much covers it I would think ? Well.. except voracious Beaver attacks ??

Ma'am,

I am just trying to understand why you are on this Thread and going after a member ? If you would like to discuss BF in a friendly , fun, and intellectual manner please feel free to do so. Otherwise you arent really adding anything that we can talk about ? Not to offend.. but really "depression .. feral .. people ?"

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

I had a trusted family member that had an extended close encounter with a large primate of some kind years before the PGF, call it bigfoot, sasquatch, or whatever, it fit the typical description. If not for that, I would not waste another minute's thought on bigfoot.

By all means - humor us with this compelling account.

There is one story I've never heard mentioned in regards to bigfoot in the couple of years that I've been interested in the topic.I was told by several different older folks in my area of the country of the people who went feral during the depression. There was no work, no jobs, if you lost your home you either died or reverted back to the stone age by relearning to live off the land because there was no welfare system to bail you out.

If this is true, it might be possible that some of their descendants survived, I just can't reconcile the description of a sasquatch with feral people as I don't think they would totally give up fire, the use of tools, etc... not to mention the morphological differences. Nothing about these creatures sound human to me other than they walk upright.

This isn't bigfoot stuff.

And bush pilot, there are many areas of the United States and Canada that are inaccessible unless you put forth great effort and expense to get there.

Yeah, you'd have to own a tricked-out supercub and have a yard full of snowmachines, track rigs, four-wheelers, and boats. I don't think there's anybody like that. Not to mention you'd have to live on the edge of the wilderness to deploy any of that stuff. Even if you had a supercub, how would you land without an airport out there? You'd need 35" tires made out of kevlar or something crazy like that.

I've been thinking about getting like a mountain bike or something and taking the city bus out to the edge of town, maybe finding some dirt roads to ride around on - but I need someone to go with me. You don't want to be out there without street lights by yourself.

You know full well that 97% of the population in the United States occupies just 3% of the land area. As a matter of fact, you could stand every citizen in the United States shoulder to shoulder and only cover the state of Rhode Island. So the argument that we've placed are feet on every square inch of the North American continent and have seen everything there is to see simply isn't true. That doesn't mean sasquatch is out there but your argument is equally flawed.

I don't recall giving an argument. I asked where exactly is a place no human has ever been and can't go to. Just pick any of these places you know about. I'm not too sharp on the outdoors so I just need a map reference. We'll stick with the US since nobody lives in Canada yet. I'll just concede that one straight off.

 

[Jodie]

In the forest they never:
trip and break a leg?
have a stroke?
get shot?
fall and fracture their skull?
climb a tree and fall out?
fight and kill one another?
become crippled for any reason and unable to escape detection?
try to cross a frozen river or lake and fall through?
get struck by lightning?
accidentally cut a major artery?
get too close to the cliff edge?
just plain drown?
get caught in a flash flood?
get trapped by a forest fire?
get taken out by a wolf pack?
don't make it to shelter before the blizzard hits?
lose a youngster to a predator?
have a heart attack?
step in a gopher hole?
eat fermented fruit and get drunk and pass out?
get old and break a hip?
build a shelter in a deadly spot and pay for it?
break an ankle on a root?

seem to do anything but walk from nowhere to nowhere.
have any fun while walking in the forest.
walk around in a circle.
race each other to the river.


etc.

I have no idea, and I'm pretty sure neither do you. So which is it? There are lots of them to be found, Meldrum's estimate was accurate, or they don't exist? It depends on what perspective you choose to look at all of those scenarios from while making a lot of assumptions about what a bigfoot might or might not do.

 

[Jodie]

That pretty much covers it I would think ? Well.. except voracious Beaver attacks ??

Ma'am,

I am just trying to understand why you are on this Thread and going after a member ? If you would like to discuss BF in a friendly , fun, and intellectual manner please feel free to do so. Otherwise you arent really adding anything that we can talk about ? Not to offend.. but really "depression .. feral .. people ?"

There you have it folks, The ultimate ad hom of the evening!!!

Exactly what is intellectual about the discussion of bigfoot? Frankly I haven't seen it anywhere. And I suppose your style of posting is what is considered the fun, friendly, and intellectual approach I should take? Have you read your posts lately? I guess it's only fun and friendly if the person agrees with you but it certainly hasn't been what I would define as intellectual on any level.

 

[AttorneyTom]

Meanwhile... just updating and staying on topic.

I have not seen a BF this week, yet. Still looking... saw a woodchuck but that was it so far. No Feral Depression Era folk either..

 

[TheJackal]

So I guess I would argue the opposite. Yes, there are areas with very sparce human populations, but that doesn't necessarily mean those areas are teeming with Squatch. Again, if Bigfoot is a primate, it would share many of the same adaptations as modern human, especially if it is a very close relative. That would mean that primates would likely not occupy northern lattitudes especially given the lack of supposed evidence indicating the ability of Bigfoot to make fire or artificial heat, then the Squatch would not be adapted to survive in say the Northwest Territory of Canada. Also, they probably would find it difficult to survive in extreme heat, so you have to ask how much of that 97 percent does that eliminate? As noted previously, you need water and a food source. So, again, how much of that 97 percent does that eliminate? So, I guess my argument would be that once you eliminate areas that primates cannot survive without modern adaptations like strip malls, heat, transportation, Goretex, etc., the amount of land that could be potentially occupied shrinks considerably and the amount of human population in those areas increases proportionally. So, again, accidental contact between the species also increases, and the potential for physical evidence increases. As yet, that evidence doesn't exist. Until it does, I will still believe that Bigfoot does not exist.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

I was mistaken about Rhode Island. It's the world's population that can stand shoulder to shoulder in the area that Los Angeles occupies.

If you use a giant trash compactor they can fit into a bale about the size of the Dallas Cowboy Stadium.

 

[AttorneyTom]

It is quite interesting .

 

[Jodie]

By all means - humor us with this compelling account.







I don't recall giving an argument. I asked where exactly is a place no human has ever been and can't go to. Just pick any of these places you know about. I'm not too sharp on the outdoors so I just need a map reference. We'll stick with the US since nobody lives in Canada yet. I'll just concede that one straight off.

Perhaps argument wasn't the right word, your POV then? I'm sure surveyors have passed through some of the more remote areas, most probably got mapped via satellite. There are mountain valleys in the Appalachia that are too narrow for settlement and farming, most are off the Great Valley. But there are some that are not connected to the Great Valley, and those won't see a human being but once in a few years, if then. I'm sure when and if that person passed through he didn't grid walk after he repelled off the cliff face to get to the bottom, they can stretch for miles.

 

[DennyT]

Jodie,
I was going to count up how many dodges, ad homs, and strawmen you've thrown out there but I'd have to take off my shoes and socks. I don't know why you're here since you don't seem to have any information for us.

All the shiny objects aside, the issue was and continues to be: what chances do you give that "bigfoot' is real? Please answer at least that one question, if no others (and you can't use the "can't post URLs' excuse on that).

 

[Jodie]

So I guess I would argue the opposite. Yes, there are areas with very sparce human populations, but that doesn't necessarily mean those areas are teeming with Squatch. Again, if Bigfoot is a primate, it would share many of the same adaptations as modern human, especially if it is a very close relative. That would mean that primates would likely not occupy northern lattitudes especially given the lack of supposed evidence indicating the ability of Bigfoot to make fire or artificial heat, then the Squatch would not be adapted to survive in say the Northwest Territory of Canada. Also, they probably would find it difficult to survive in extreme heat, so you have to ask how much of that 97 percent does that eliminate? As noted previously, you need water and a food source. So, again, how much of that 97 percent does that eliminate? So, I guess my argument would be that once you eliminate areas that primates cannot survive without modern adaptations like strip malls, heat, transportation, Goretex, etc., the amount of land that could be potentially occupied shrinks considerably and the amount of human population in those areas increases proportionally. So, again, accidental contact between the species also increases, and the potential for physical evidence increases. As yet, that evidence doesn't exist. Until it does, I will still believe that Bigfoot does not exist.

Until someone drags a dead bigfoot out of the woods or hits one with a semi we really can't guess at what temp extremes they can tolerate, but everything needs water. You would have to look at the water shed in the more remote areas using topo maps to really get an exact percentage.

Just speaking from personal experience living in and around the Appalachains there are plenty of areas cut off from the regular path ways and trails that would require major effort to access that do have water sources, vegetation, and the wild life to support a primate. We also have swamps in my state that have areas that have not been disturbed for decades.

It just gets old hearing the insinuation that there is no place left untouched or undiscovered therefore there is no where for a large primate to shelter, it simply isn't true. And as I said before, the fact that we do have areas like this doesn't mean that bigfoot exists there either.

 

[DennyT]

Jodie,
apparently you don't know what an ad hom is either. obtw, if you don't like our brand of questioning, we'll just put our brains on "dumb" for as long as you like write you a pass to show to the hall monitor.

 

[LTC8K6]

I have no idea, and I'm pretty sure neither do you. So which is it? There are lots of them to be found, Meldrum's estimate was accurate, or they don't exist? It depends on what perspective you choose to look at all of those scenarios from while making a lot of assumptions about what a bigfoot might or might not do.

How come they never skip? Or hop on one foot just for fun? Or hop like a bunny rabbit? Surely they have seen rabbits?

Why don't they ever sit on a log now and then and wonder about life?

How come they never do a hand stand, or a cartwheel?

How come they never trace their hand in the dirt along the way?

Why don't they ever kick a pine cone as they walk along?

Why don't the kids goof around on the trail?

How come they never stub their toe and hop around in pain?

Why don't they ever walk around the base of a tree, looking up at something they can't get?

Why don't they ever stop and remember something and turn around and walk back the way they came?

How come they never pivot on one foot?

Why do they always walk directly from nowhere to nowhere without ever doing anything? The tracks are always boring.

Some advanced primate...

 

[DennyT]

That pretty much covers it I would think ? Well.. except voracious Beaver attacks ??
?"

ok She has no answers. lets move on to the no photographs issue. I think cameras have been in use in North America for about 150 years. I'm sure Jodie has a meaningful explanation for why we have no photographs of this purported flesh and blood animal which coincidentally we also have no fossils or bodies.