• 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.

hominids

makaya325 said:
Kita, but it doesnt mean that my tribe was mistaken either.
Click to expand...

Nor the Mormons who believe in the angel Moroni. And still you haven't pointed to one single piece of specific tale or tradition regarding Bigfoot and the Oh-Mah. There's a thread for it. Quote and respond there.

I personally think its invalid, since white man cant tell or not tell what we saw.
Click to expand...

How culturally enlightened of you. You understand that white people and native Americans aren't the only people in North America, right? You haven't shown that the Hupa saw anything.

Did the Kwakwaka'wakw really see Mr. Baxbax? You know, Baxbaxwalanuksiwe, the cannibal spirit who can transform into man-eating birds and has millions of mouths all over his body?
 
makaya325 said:
Ty, they must sleep, and since its so wild to suggest they are nocturnal, wouldnt nocturnal biologists be better for the job?
Click to expand...

You've completely missed the point. These archeologists, besides being in the areas where they might see live bigfoot (which is spotted all the time day or night, or is that another part of BF lore that you will select the specific part that suits you), are in a position to find evidence of dead bigfoot or bigfoot forerunners. Coprolite, bones, fossils, hair, nests, etc, would all be something physical. Too bad none of it has shown up.
 
makaya325 said:
MISS KITT, are you aware that it has produced genuine tracks and hair?
Click to expand...

Makaya -- would you please indicate which specific hair samples and tracks have withstood scientific scrutiny? That's not a joke question, I'm very serious.

I know people have found hair; and that people have reported finding tracks. I am not aware of any case where either finding stood up to examination by anyone who wasn't already convinced BF exists.

But, as I have said earlier, I have not been following the news that closely for the last couple of decades, so it's possible I missed the reports. I do know that there hasn't been anything that made more-mainstream media that wasn't "debunked" to my satisfaction.

Please link me to the case(s) involved! I promise I'll go read up on them.

Thank you, Miss Kitt
 
Kitakaze -- Thanks for the link to the Mid-America group, I'll be using that to get a bit more "up to speed" on current events (ie, the last decade).

Thank you for your educational posts on this thread.

yours, MK
 
I see many problems with what is written there, one being that the samples being morphologically congruent does not rule out hoaxing. I don't know why it would.

But that page also doesn't show any verifiable samples of hair or DNA from a non-human hominid.
 
Bruto, that fact that dozens of hairs collected from different regions, yet display the same features with each other. I have a pocket full of western lowland gorilla hair, (Yes, from my teacher, who has dead remains of weird animals in her freezer!) and i compared it to the alleged sasquatch hair. The result: Very similiar,
 
makaya325 said:
Bruto, that fact that dozens of hairs collected from different regions, yet display the same features with each other. I have a pocket full of western lowland gorilla hair, (Yes, from my teacher, who has dead remains of weird animals in her freezer!) and i compared it to the alleged sasquatch hair. The result: Very similiar,
Click to expand...
Have you compared the hair to that of a bison?
 
Hitch, i have compared them to many many native mammals, and i conclude the hair is similiar to a western lowland gorilla.
 
Rayg, i have never claimed to be an expert, however, i did say that i had western lowland gorilla hair, and that hair is very similiar to the alleged sasquatch hair
 
Hitch, not at all. Bison hair is totally ruled out, however, non-human primates cant be ruled out
 
They can't be ruled out because you can make them look like whatever you like. That's one of the problems with hair. Even if you find something that can't be attributed to any known animal, it doesn't mean it's from a bigfoot.

Curious if how you ruled out chemical burned human hair.
 
Ty, Not really, why do scientists use hair to identify species? I guess all those mammoth hairs were simply chemically burnt bison hair?
 
They use it when they have a known sample to compare it to. Until you have a known bigfoot to take comparative samples from, you're s.o.l.

And I said chemically burnt human hair.
 
So ty, until we have a bona fide bf hair, we cant say for sure what the hair is, only that it came from something unknown?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom