• 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.

Vortigern99 said:
This is a discussion forum, so I'm inviting you to continue the discussion you started in citing tribal legends.

You've been trying to use Native stories of hairy or wild or half-human people as support for your belief in bigfoot. Some of us here are trying to show you there are many supernatural beings and non-existent animals in Native folklore. The "wild-man" is one of these.

It doesn't mean it's a real being. Do you see my point or don't you?
Click to expand...

This is what I'm talking about. My personal knowledge of Bigfoot has nothing to do with any such thing and I have never used Native American legend to support my position. The spin is noted.

I'm not one to argue all Native American stories are Bigfoot. Never have never will. The reason has already been covered but I'll state it again.

There is no way to know for a fact exactly what those cultures referred to. It is only a modern interpretation and opinion that is available in every case. You may "think" you know what they saw according to the specific legend, but that is an opinion.

Am I aware that many of the Native Americans may have beliefs or legends not based on real creatures? I think it's possible and a safe bet but unknowable for fact. That's why I do not wish to participate.
 
EHocking said:
And yet this doesn't stop them killing Cross River Gorillas.
http://crossrivergorilla.org/index.php/en/conservation/gorilla-killings

That said, this is a tantalising point that is repeated through the literature,
​

For example, throughout much of the Cross River gorilla range in Cameroon, there is a traditional prohibition on the sale of gorilla meat, and hence hunters have not sought out this species. Similarly, people in the Kagwene Mountains and Bechati-Fossimondi forest region of Cameroon, and some people on the Obudu Plateau in Nigeria, have a traditional ban on eating gorillas.
​
but without an explanation as to the reason behind the tradition.

Ah, here we have it.

Traditional Knowledge Systems and the Conservation of Cross River Gorillas: a Case Study of Bechati, Fossimondi, Besali, Cameroon.

As far as I can tell, this sentence, "gorillas are used by local people as totem animals", is about as close as you get to an explanation of their belief regarding gorillas. Note that this is NOT the people thinking they are "hairy men" ; "Although gorillas were the main focus of these totemic kinship beliefs, some respondents also mentioned the use of chimpanzees, monkeys, leopards, brush-tailed porcupines, and owls as animal totems."

A totem animal then. Basically a kinship is recognised, but they are never thought of as anything but animals.

Seems the line about "hairy men" and gorillas, in this case, is total invention.

ETA: This relationship is being researched because of the potential to use native tradition, belief and taboo to help with gorilla conservation.
Click to expand...


Sure, there are people that kill the Cross River Gorillas for food even though the locals considered them "Hairy people". The gorillas eating figs video describes the locals protection about 1:14 but this was reported about the Kagwene Sanctuary only.

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/news/animals-news/cross-river-gorillas-vin/


Edited to add: I forgot to mention that people when hungry enough have no problem dining on each other as well. Instead of trying to sway local cultures, they'd be better off teaching them how to raise food.
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Sure, there are people that kill the Cross River Gorillas for food even though the locals considered them "Hairy people".
Click to expand...
CIte me any reference that supports your assertion that local people consider them "hairy people".

If you had actually read the reference that I cite and quote, you will see that actual research into how the local people regard the gorillas, shows that these are totem animals.
The gorillas eating figs video describes the locals protection about 1:14 but this was reported about the Kagwene Sanctuary only.

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/news/animals-news/cross-river-gorillas-vin/
Click to expand...
Link comes up with video unavailable.

Is there an actual statement from a local declaring that they regard the gorilla as a "hairy person" or merely that local traditions, such as regarding them as totem animals, is a protection for gorillas.?
Edited to add: I forgot to mention that people when hungry enough have no problem dining on each other as well. Instead of trying to sway local cultures, they'd be better off teaching them how to raise food.
Click to expand...
It is quite obvious that you didn't read the article I cited, any of the parts of it I quoted, or indeed my actual post. But that has pretty much been your MO, so I'm not surprised.

If you had bothered to actually read anything in my post you would have understood that they are not trying to sway local culture, but to use existing local culture to persuade the local people to protect gorillas more.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
This is what I'm talking about. My personal knowledge of Bigfoot has nothing to do with any such thing and I have never used Native American legend to support my position. The spin is noted.

I'm not one to argue all Native American stories are Bigfoot. Never have never will. The reason has already been covered but I'll state it again.

There is no way to know for a fact exactly what those cultures referred to. It is only a modern interpretation and opinion that is available in every case. You may "think" you know what they saw according to the specific legend, but that is an opinion.

Am I aware that many of the Native Americans may have beliefs or legends not based on real creatures? I think it's possible and a safe bet but unknowable for fact. That's why I do not wish to participate.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Well, it's not "spin", it's my sincere reaction to your earlier posts. I follow your current point that not all tribal stories of hairy or brutish animal-men represent bigfoot, but earlier you professed to believe that at least some Native "wild-man" tales are genuine bigfoot encounters. It follows, then, that those stories -- since in your view they're true -- support belief in bigfoot.

If you now disavow this, fine. My intention here is simply to demonstrate that Native hairy-man tales are just as fantastical as Thunderbird or river panther or Coyote-as-death tales. They're mythical and not meant to be accepted as factual.
 
Vortigern99 said:
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Locals term Sasquatch, look it up, and Cross River Gorillas fig eating video from NatGeo.

Nothing at all about Native Americans. :D

sasquatch (ˈsæsˌkwætʃ)

— n
(in Canadian folklore) in British Columbia, a hairy beast or manlike monster said to leave huge footprints
[1925–30; < Mainland Halkomelem (Salishan language of SW British Columbia) sέsq̉əc]
[from Salish]


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27TuUTfp778 Cross River fig eating video from about 1:14
 
Last edited:
Vortigern99 said:
Hmmm. Well, it's not "spin", it's my sincere reaction to your earlier posts. I follow your current point that not all tribal stories of hairy or brutish animal-men represent bigfoot, but earlier you professed to believe that at least some Native "wild-man" tales are genuine bigfoot encounters. It follows, then, that those stories -- since in your view they're true -- support belief in bigfoot.

If you now disavow this, fine. My intention here is simply to demonstrate that Native hairy-man tales are just as fantastical as Thunderbird or river panther or Coyote-as-death tales. They're mythical and not meant to be accepted as factual.
Click to expand...

I render the opinion that some legends may have been associated with Bigfoot some may not. It's not a factual call either way, just a best guess based on similarities among native cultures.

Most cultures seem to have some sort of legends. Some may be based on fantasy, some may be based on fact. There's no way to prove or disprove every single one.
 
EHocking said:
CIte me any reference that supports your assertion that local people consider them "hairy people".

If you had actually read the reference that I cite and quote, you will see that actual research into how the local people regard the gorillas, shows that these are totem animals. Link comes up with video unavailable.

Is there an actual statement from a local declaring that they regard the gorilla as a "hairy person" or merely that local traditions, such as regarding them as totem animals, is a protection for gorillas.?
It is quite obvious that you didn't read the article I cited, any of the parts of it I quoted, or indeed my actual post. But that has pretty much been your MO, so I'm not surprised.

If you had bothered to actually read anything in my post you would have understood that they are not trying to sway local culture, but to use existing local culture to persuade the local people to protect gorillas more.
Click to expand...

Here's the same video on youtube. The NatGeo link seems to work for me? Anyway, the part about "The locals consider the Gorillas as hairy people" starts about 1:14 . No mention at all about Totems.

Can you explain the difference between "sway" and "persuade"? To me, even if you're nitpicking, either word is a good example of what they're trying to accomplish with the local culture. If you disagree with my use of "sway" and would rather use "persuade" that's fine. It's a difference of literary preference and nothing more. Surely you know this.

Once again, here's the NatGeo video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27TuUTfp778

This link you provided is very good. One may note that the latest citations are from 2008 though.

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss3/art22/main.html
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Here's the same video on youtube. The NatGeo link seems to work for me? Anyway, the part about "The locals consider the Gorillas as hairy people" starts about 1:14 . No mention at all about Totems.
Click to expand...
This is merely a voiceover on a TV program. This is not scientific research, but entertainment. Cite the scientific paper that the presenter gets this opinion from and I'd be happy to concede the point. I wil say that it is a popular opinion, but that clip has little scientific weight.

I provided a paper that actually discussed this with the local people and recorded their response.
Can you explain the difference between "sway" and "persuade"? To me, even if you're nitpicking, either word is a good example of what they're trying to accomplish with the local culture. If you disagree with my use of "sway" and would rather use "persuade" that's fine. It's a difference of literary preference and nothing more. Surely you know this.
Click to expand...
No.

They are not trying to sway or pursuade local beliefs.

They are trying to use existing local beliefs as a trigger to help pursuade the locals to protect gorillas. Not to change their belief in gorillas as a totem animal.
Once again, here's the NatGeo video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27TuUTfp778
Click to expand...
Even David Attenborough has been proved to be wrong in his shows. This is merely a TV show narration. Where is the scientific evidence that this belief prevails in Camaroon?
This link you provided is very good. One may note that the latest citations are from 2008 though.

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss3/art22/main.html
Click to expand...
So?
The Nat.Geo show is from 2009.
 
EHocking said:
This is merely a voiceover on a TV program. This is not scientific research, but entertainment. Cite the scientific paper that the presenter gets this opinion from and I'd be happy to concede the point. I wil say that it is a popular opinion, but that clip has little scientific weight.

I provided a paper that actually discussed this with the local people and recorded their response.No.

They are not trying to sway or pursuade local beliefs.

They are trying to use existing local beliefs as a trigger to help pursuade the locals to protect gorillas. Not to change their belief in gorillas as a totem animal.
Even David Attenborough has been proved to be wrong in his shows. This is merely a TV show narration. Where is the scientific evidence that this belief prevails in Camaroon?So?
The Nat.Geo show is from 2009.
Click to expand...

From your link:

"(CRG) habitat, with a total of 184 interviewer-administered questionnaires completed during a 4-week period. Eighty-six percent of people agreed that gorillas were totems (personal spiritual helpers or counterparts) of people living in the village. People who believed in human–gorilla totemic kinship practice did not eat or hunt gorillas, and they wanted gorillas to be protected in order to protect the practice. Most (87%), of the interviewees declared their support for gorilla conservation. The main motivation was the belief that when gorillas are killed, the human totemic counterpart will die as a result. Because of these traditions, the hunting of gorillas is taboo in all five villages surveyed."

Bolding mine. So I guess one could say an outside observer may get the impression these locals could be describing a mythical creature and not a flesh and blood animal? If that observer had never seen a Cross River Gorilla that is. To tell the difference between myth or reality, the observer relies on the knowledge that the Cross River Gorilla is real and has been discovered.

But what if it hadn't been discovered yet? One could apply the same logic as the opening post and rule out Biological being. Could you not?

Since these "totem" beliefs seem to be tied to a "personal spritual helper or counterpart". Seems magical or religious to me, kinda like the Yeti.

It's a good work. And it also looks like the surveyed areas were a fair representation. We rely on our previous knowledge of the Gorilla in this case to separate myth from reality. See how that works?
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
If you mean "we" as in you and that mouse in your pocket, I agree.
Click to expand...

"We" includes me as well, although if you have something more substantial than 'these native legends may or may not pertain to Bigfoot' I'll be happy to hear you out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom