Musketdawn - you've taken "reason number 64" on the list for nonexistence of Bigfoot and pretended it was pivotal to us. Reason #1 through reason #63 are not assumed away when we're adding #64 on top of the other 63.
Parn pointed out that man has been hunting much more powerful animals than bigfoot is alleged to be, and also in their own environment like the sea:
Whales - 60 tons and larger. The biggest animals on earth.
Wooly Mammoth - ten tons. Possibly hunted to extinction.
Polar Bears - One ton, twelve feet tall, apex predator of the North.
Coastal Brown Bear - up to a ton
Moose - Up to a ton.
Bison - Up to a ton.
Walrus - Up to a ton
Etc.
Bigfoot, at his most laughably powerful, is not much of a challenge to people that regularly kill animals a hundred times larger. If you step outside bigfoot's alleged terrain, you see indigenous people taking out hippos, lions and tigers, crocodiles, elephants and so on with primitive tools for thousands of years.
We have overwhelming physical evidence of this. There is no physical evidence of bigfoot at all, let alone that man hunted him, and everyone that is a regular here knows that. The strawman framing is about sufficiency. No, this is not sufficient evidence for bigfoot's nonexistence: No accidental shootings.
Nobody said that. So you opened here with a strawman.