That's true: it falls under extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence. Photographs are far too easy to fake these days. Any photo would be subject to intense scrutiny, and skeptics could well end up cherry picking ordinary digital artifacts as evidence the picture wasn't real.
A body would be best, but DNA would be a close second.
I know you mean well, but you need to understand that greed drives science, which drives technology, which drives greed. Eastern Russia is the center of a black-market for harvesting mammoth tusks on an almost industrial scale:
www.rusi.org
Digital technology has its own fingerprints. If I film a ghost, or bigfoot, I can surrender my phone for digital forensic evaluation, same with my camera, and memory card, and even my laptop, and email, and online history. This is something I would be willing to do to verify my my evidence at the collection stage to confirm the footage is authentic, and unaltered. Your phone logs all of your activity. It records when you are moving, climbing in elevation, and which apps are active at any given moment. Your phone's camera will record time, and location the image is recorded. It will record any alterations made by filters, and if it was sent to someone, and who you sent it to, and how many people you contacted.
These devices were placed in some of the most remote locations in Russia, and people still got to them:
skeptoid.com
Only 14? That's a tiny fraction of the Earth's surface, which supports my argument. Furthermore, none of these 14 places are the wilderness of the Pacific Northwest. Bigfoot is not found at the top of Gangkal Pensen, or at the bottom of the Mariana Trench, or in the deep Namib. Bigfoot has only been reported where humans are, because it's humans who are reporting it.
Awaiting a prop plane flight in Yellowknife last summer, there were 5 other groups heading to outposts and rivers above the arctic circle. Rivers like the Coppermine and Tree, and outposts on Great Bear and Hottah. Whole bunches of folks spend time up there, far from any roads or settlements. Our group was there for the fishing and wildlife viewing; we stayed at an outpost near Port Radium, an abandoned uranium mine that had quite a population (relatively speaking) in the 30s and 40s. Saw some cool stuff up there: Moose and wolves and musk ox, but no footie.
These devices were placed in some of the most remote locations in Russia, and people still got to them:
Radioactive Relics: The Missing RTGs - Skeptoid
Radioactive nuclear generators sit out in the environment, posing a real hazard. They're mostly — but not all — in Russia.
Only 14? That's a tiny fraction of the Earth's surface, which supports my argument. Furthermore, none of these 14 places are the wilderness of the Pacific Northwest. Bigfoot is not found at the top of Gangkal Pensen, or at the bottom of the Mariana Trench, or in the deep Namib. Bigfoot has only been reported where humans are, because it's humans who are reporting it.
I would appreciate you not making assumptions about what I think, thanks.
I feel like going back and editing your post so it doesn't look like you said what you said is a little dishonest, actually.
You think it's funny?
Well that's because Sasquatch almost certainly doesn't exist.
Then you haven't read anything I've said on the subject. Go back and check.