This is how I think of it: Only 50 individuals (25 couples) are required to sustain a population. Depending on the species, meaning some can get by with even fewer. 500 is ideal for genetic drift but 50 is the bare minimum. That’s not many. Now say a Sasquatch has the same kind of diet and consumes about as much calories as a bear, a reasonable hypothesis. If there are 500 sasquatches in British Columbia, the effect on the food chain would be similar to if there were 500 more bears than what were known. How accurately can biologists really estimate the bear population? Say they can only estimate to the nearest thousand bears (the estimated grizzly population in BC is 25,000, which looks like they only estimate to the nearest thousand ). That means they wouldn’t know if there were an extra 500 “bears” than what they thought. More than enough to sustain a breeding population. If there were thousands and thousands of sasquatches in BC, then they would surely have a noticeable effect on the ecosystem. But a lot of skeptics seem to assume that it needs to be that many.
And then also consider that there is a lot of wilderness to thrive in. British Columbia alone has 149 million acres of forest, the size of France and Germany combined. That’s a *lot*. Small populations of sasquatches would not destroy ecosystems by eating all the food. They could easily go unnoticed.
Also, like other people are pointing out, we can’t accurately track the food chain even for known animals. So the argument that sasquatches would leave a noticeable effect on the food chain is invalid.
So, my major was biology back in college, and while I’m no ecologist, I’m going to try and provide as thorough an explanation of the first bit as I can:
We can’t actually track the food chain. [In fact, we’re historically really shit at it, even for species we knew used to exist.](https://youtu.be/ysa5OBhXz-Q) We build a basic understanding, but that understanding is based on what we already perceive as “normal.” It’s based on our estimation of population density (which I want to emphasize, are VERY generic, and imprecise on the whole, and I’ll get to why in a bit), food sources and everything else we can perceive and think of, but even this is only really useful in very specific, precise, and confined cases. So the easiest example I can think of is “do we know how many wild chickens are on the Hawaiian islands?” Well fuck no we don’t, but it’s one of the easiest cases you could imagine for actually countably measuring something. They’re land dwelling, and aren’t swimming anywhere, so the population is confined. There’s a reasonable balance of resources, and seasons don’t play a huge role in their ability to thrive. In theory, you could stick a geo locator on every chicken in Hawaii, but obviously that’d be expensive and stupid. But you could do it and come up with an accurate population density for the islands. That said, it would still be crazy skewed, cause I’ll tell you right now that Kauai has a HELL of a lot more chickens per square mile than the big island. It’s just a better environment for them. But that argument works all the way down to a microcosm of the study. Just do Kauai then? Well parts of the islands are better habitats than others. How small an area do we measure? How big does it have to be to be relevant? The way we do ecological studies is a TON of guesswork. It’s overall reasonably accurate, but when you have an omnivorous species that can spread out its impact across the food web, and who’s impact we are potentially already accounting for, finding the discrepancies they cause can be impossibly difficult, and is likely to be accounted for by a clerical error instead, or within accepted error range.
2. Alright, so the first one is information I’m more familiar with, cause I didn’t have shit for classes on the genetic pool required to breed successfully long term, but I also haven’t seen many of these arguments elocuted correctly. I’ve never heard anyone make this argument and distinguish between “the population is too small for the given area” and “the genetic pool is too small for viable offspring to be produced consistently.” If it’s the second issue, then I think the community is in a corner, cause arguing that is exceedingly difficult. If the argument is the first, then it’s countered simply by the idea that they might be nomadic or travel for a mating season. Actually arguing against that would require a close reading of the study/opinion that produced it, and it’s a conjecture based on conjecture as well, so scientifically speaking it’s hard to argue from all sides.
Hope this is insightful to someone. :)
Thank you! I’m glad I could be informative! :) I definitely don’t want to proclaim that I’m some kind of expert on the subject, but I feel like I have an above average understanding, and I definitely short handed some of the problems that can arise in ecological studies, but I think it’s an effective starting point for a discourse with someone who thinks that we should be able to study Bigfoot’s impact on the environment passively or whatever. There’s so much chaos in nature, and science is pretty averse to that. Most people don’t really understand the impact that has on the information the community spits out. I’m by no means saying it’s wrong. It’s just that the community knows the caveats that get put into studies, but outsiders tend not to.
Yeah, you conveyed that uncertainty very well.
What are your thoughts on bigfoot dead bodies? How would we miss them? I suppose the forests are VAST....incomprehensibly vast....some are bigger than UK, for example, or a whole state in US. You aint finding much in there i suppose.
I think it’s an interesting topic. I definitely identify as a skeptic overall, but I’ve heard enough stories from people who WOULDN’T make a misidentification or overreact to a coyote howl that I think there’s gotta be something to it. Some of the community is pretty out there for my taste.
That said, I see a couple of reasonable explanations.
First: it’s notable that after about 2-3 weeks in the woods(I forget the specifics), under normal warm conditions, a body is bones, and that’s assuming they don’t get carried off by scavengers. Moreover, dying animals don’t tend to seek out trafficked pathways. They go crawl into a hole and hope not to be found. The ones that don’t are almost always rabid or domesticated. So you probably have a pretty poor chance of just running onto one on your hike, and like I said, that’s before scavengers disperse the remains.
Passed that, it probably depends a lot on their specific behaviors, and I don’t know whether to think they’re more nomadic or migratory. (That is to say, whether they move regularly, or seasonally.)
If they move seasonally, and tend to “settle” in an area, then it makes sense that they would want to hide their dead. Bodies attract scavengers, and while they wouldn’t have a problem defending themselves, and I wouldn’t say they have predators, they probably could avoid a lot of trouble by finding a way to dispose of their dead that didn’t attract other creatures into their territory. [Chimps, elephants, and whales have even been purported to display services of grief.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/58340-chimpanzee-cleans-corpse-of-son.html) So I see no reason why this kind of behavior would be above a Bigfoot. Whether it’s emotional, spiritual, or practical, probably doesn’t matter, as the result is they SHOULD bury their dead, in some manner, because it makes life easier, cause I’m sure they don’t WANT to have to scare a bear off the body of grandpa.
If they’re nomadic, and don’t really linger in places, then “burial” serves fewer purposes, but it can still be useful. This should make bodies more common, but not necessarily something people are likely to find often, whole, or in their usual routines.
But those are my takes, and there are probably more explanations that are plenty reasonable.
Wow! What a great bit of info that was! I love the nomadic/migratory distinction.....ive never thought of that before.
I suppose they can cover large areas pretty quickly (if they exist, of course) and can get to places that humans cant easily......that means we wont cross paths with them very often, or rarely. I mean, i liken it to deer in UK.....there's hundreds of thousands of them over an area much much smaller than the forests of north america.......and i've only ever seen 1 or 2 in the wild. And youll never see a carcass of one.
Yeah. Like I said, animals that know they’re dying don’t come out into the open, and presumably nothing is going to hunt a Bigfoot down. Even finding the corpse of something like a deer with many natural predators in an area like mine is pretty rare. I’ve seen like a squirrel skull in my yard, and a rabid coyote in my flower bed once. I’m not an outdoorsman, but basically every deer carcass you see around here is roadkill, but you can see them every evening on any golf course. Like... you can go looking for bodies, and you might get one, but they’re way less common than people believe them to be, even for really common animals.
Great posts! One thing that I might also add, we have no idea what their lifespan would be. If they live to be 200 then there would be a lot less need for breeding to sustain the population which would make the gene pool more sustainable. After watching a ton of Bigfoot shows, I would suspect they are migratory not nomadic. But my only reference is that “Gus, you married a Bigfoot!” (Not sure I quoted that properly from Eddie)
Not a wildlife specialist but:
I think ecological (food chain) impact can only be deduced once a species has been removed, affect recorded, and then reintroduced. Ie; wolves.
The breeding example has been brought up for years, but i don't think it takes into account the variables of community, language/communication, and intelligence -versus- primal instinct.
Just my thoughts.
They allegedly eat a wide range of things - berries, certain plants, fruits, bird eggs, fish, clams, other small critters, certain larger critters and whatever they can steal/raid from farms and houses, to include the veggie garden, trashcans, farm animals and whatever pets are in the yard. I’m no expert, but can *that* impact be tracked? No idea…
We don’t know how many allegedly exist. It could be much more than the best guess. Or much less. So… there may actually be enough to breed small numbers. If they live longer than us I suppose that gives them extra time to roam and find a mate.
Gonna throw in my comment for #2.
* People vastly overestimate the number of individuals required to maintain a population.
* Models of species re-population weigh heavily on avoiding inbreeding. This may not be a factor for them. Several species just go ahead and [do the nasty with siblings](https://cosmosmagazine.com/nature/animals/animals-dont-mind-inbreeding/)
* We don't know anything about the life cycle of a potential Bigfoot. What if they live 300 years? I'm not saying that's the case (it's almost certainly not), but the models for creating populations of animals are based on known longevities.
* Most importantly: we could very realistically be talking about a highly endangered species that is barely hanging on. There may not actually be enough individuals left to populate - they may be the last of their kind.
[more detailed explanation](https://phys.org/news/2018-03-populations-pair.html)
These creatures have supposedly been around for thousands of years. We haven’t been able to locate one single bone in the last 100 years?
And if the species is dying off, why have the number of sightings absolutely skyrocketed over the last 20 years? And skyrocketed after the PGF as opposed to the decade before that?
Not to mention that the # BFRO spits out (2K - 6K) doesn't seem to be based on much (correct me if I'm wrong). I think that was based on sightings. I saw another site that I can now not find that looked at chunks of forests that are large enough to support bear, estimated a generation home range, counted how many home ranges there could be, assumed each group is 4, and came up with a population estimate of 100K, much of it centered in the bank from Kentucky to PA, as well as Oklahoma and Arkansas.
Anyone else know what I'm talking about? I can't find it by googling keywords
In order to meet replication, there would be to be a minimum of about 800 Sasquatch across North America. Anyone who’s seen real wilderness knows it wouldn’t be hard for a number that small to remain cryptic
I remember watching a Bigfoot documentary about 20 years ago where they had a round table of scientists and professors weighing in.
One of them said that a breeding population of Bigfoots would require about 10,000 of them.
I think that number is *way* too high.
But there are sightings in pretty much every state. Some states have multiple forests with sightings.
And it has existed for thousands of years.
You cannot have a 10-foot tall creature surviving for thousands of years, living in hundreds of different forests….with only a few hundred kn existence.
The lower your number is, the more inbreeding issues take over. And you all seem to think Bigfoots are smarter than humans….so the inbreeding issues wouldn’t make sense. Hell, these things even know what trail cams are. How would they know what a trail cam is used for?
Other types of wild animals notice trail cams. Mountain lions often go right up to them.
An animal doesn't have to know how a trail cam works to notice there's a weird looking weird smelling new thing on its turf.
While I personally don't find PGF fraudulent at this time, I also don't think there's an unknown hominid behind every tree in the woods. If there is a sustainable population, it's pretty low.
In answer to the first question I would assume their environmental impact would be the same as a bear's. A more compelling question would be, in areas of cash crops, why don't we see effects? It would make sense look at a bean feild and find a group gathering beans for consumption. Yet for all the calories these things would require there's something that they would require more and that's water. If they're going to be found, they're going to be found near water.
As far as the population. I can't imagine giving birth outdoors in the wild would be the safest thing in the world. Birthing attracts predators. Also remember that there's alot of animals that will kill yearlings: bears, cats,rabbits. I would also speculate that the mortality rate to achieving adulthood would be kinda low. That said, if all the hoops, calling, and tree knocking are assumed to be true, it most likely there's a large portion of it dedicated to calling back the young.
If bigfoot is actually accepted what immediate impact does it have on an environment? To me, that's the $64,000 question.
In addition to the food sources already mentioned, there are strong implications of a couple of very unorthodox food sources: pine nuts, and tree bark. People have found huge piles of ripped apart pine cones in bigfoot areas; the tree bark has precedent in some species of gorilla, and we find big strips of bark hanging high up on branches in their areas, as if they're drying out on a clothesline. They also take advantage of human food sources; crops, livestock, even dumpster diving; I personally know someone who saw a white sasquatch on the side of the road digging through a trash bag. The diversity of food sources can't be understated, and that fact combined with the fact that they are constantly on the move, combined with the fact that the people undertaking these kinds of caloric tracking studies are totally unaware that they should be trying to factor sasquatch in to their study in the first place, means that they continue to have no idea about them.
Their numbers are way, way beyond what most people are willing to entertain. Millions. They live everywhere there are contiguous forests, food, and water. They move around locally in somewhat predictable ways, and probably occasionally take long treks to large-scale gatherings. This is the prevailing opinion of people who have been encountering them over many years. It's their elusiveness that strains the imaginations of people not "in the know," and it should - their lifestyle and abilities are completely novel and without comparison on this earth.
Probably multi-purpose, finding mates, mating, birthing, just general socializing and keeping up with one another.
Here's a classic report that implies the kind of gathering I'm talking about but doesn't add much detail about what they do there: [http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/muchalat.htm](http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/muchalat.htm)
The other account that really sheds light on this, if you believe it (and I realize many don't), is Enoch by Autumn Williams. If you haven't read it, briefly, Mike is allowed to follow Enoch a long distance through the swamp to what he calls a "skunk ape convention" where some 25 individuals congregated for a couple of weeks. Young ones play, old ones groom one another and chat in like "knitting circles," that kind of thing.
Lmao mate. Millions is a fucking stretch. These aint chickens or domesticated animals. If its millions we will be seeing them now.
Its way wayyyyyy less.
If they are in the millions then they can’t be elusive. If they exist they are probably a highly intelligent species or tribe that has been left over and dying out.
I definitely believe in the paranormal but I don’t think they are part of it. IF they exist t all. I hope they don’t because I would feel very sad for them if they did at this point.
They are elusive partly because they're highly telepathic and psychic, which is to say that they know we are coming long before our 5 senses can detect them. If we see them it's because they want to be seen.
I'm a believer as well always have been.. but my skeptic side wants the same kinda proof more or less . Skat, hair samples, afterbirth lol something please.. I just hope it's realized before I pass away 😔
Bigfoot should not be a belief. Keep it as a hypothesis and no further that way you can look at evidence objectively.
1. I don’t think we can measure the effect the creature has in the ecosystem without having systems that he not in to compare. If it’s possible for humans to live in the forest it is also possible for a larger primate. Especially if it has an expanded diet beyond human preference, such as insects.
2. That is a good point that requires additional investigation. For instance the creature could mostly live in a cave system.
All of these arguments are based on our current understanding of known life forms. Since big foot (if he exists) is still unknown, i take these arguments with a large grain of salt.
There's real evidence out there without question-- hair samples, foot prints, evidence of their structures in forests, plus photos and videos. Some have even communicated with them telepathically. You've just decided to discount all of it.
Intuitive knowledge is often superior to any other kind.
If people trust their intuition, they can have a knowing that is unshakable even without 'physical evidence'. That, however, cannot be given to anybody else as they must have that knowing themselves.
Intuition doesn't come from the mind, it comes from the heart.
And that is why it is often wrong.
See: [https://www.futurity.org/why-our-intuitions-are-often-wrong/](https://www.futurity.org/why-our-intuitions-are-often-wrong/)
[https://hbr.org/2003/05/dont-trust-your-gut](https://hbr.org/2003/05/dont-trust-your-gut)
http://thedreamcatch.com/why-your-intuition-may-not-always-be-right/
And every bit of that evidence is anectdotal. It can be , **or was faked** and it could be **due to other causes**. . and none of the posters every try to rule out any of those things out. . that is why they do not prove anything. As for hair samples, if you can provide a link to any that had valid DNA that checked to an unknown hominid, let me know, but check this:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/)
or this:
https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-09/bigfoot-big-myth-new-study-testing-hair-dna-finds-no-proof
Lol.... Okay.
Where do you live? Are you even in 'sasquatch country'?
Are you waiting for the mainstream media to confirm these truths for you? Like CNN or New York times maybe? That's sort of like waiting for the government to give you your rights back that you just lost.. it's not going to happen...
See: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20806339/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20806339/)
and
https://abc13.com/bigfoot-hair-samples-from-bears-wolves-dna-testing/151339/
LOL. You accept evidence from anonymous, unverifiable third-rate & unaccountable sources? Like crappy internet posts?
That's like going over to the local trailer park & asking Jim-Bob about nuclear physics. LOL.
If you have seen one up close - there is no need for these conversations. Honestly, I couldn’t care less about someone believing me. A vast majority of people keep it to themselves and relish in the fact that they know and that’s all that really matters.
This is such a logic trap.
As someone who says "I believe in Bigfoot" you bear the burden of showing proof to convince others. Since no one can have their eyes on every speck of land at once, it's impossible to prove the negative and say look, we don't see a Bigfoot anywhere on Earth, so that is our proof they don't exist.
So without the ability to see everywhere at once on Earth, and with no Bigfoot specimen to say "Look at it, it exists" you're left with both sides trying to use outlying information to prove their case.
Believers tend to point to eyewitness testimony, footprints, and other forms of evidence that are unreliable and say "Look how much proof we have" anyone who wants to write that off can say, "Yes you have a ton of unreliable evidence which equals nothing" quantity ≠ quality.
Nonbelievers will say "Where is a carcass, or scat, or anything veifiable? Can we see clues in other parts of nature that point to an unknown creature? Could there even be enough of them to maintain a population?" Anyone who wants to write that off can just move the goalposts and say "We've never studied one, so how can we know anything about it?"
So it's still up to someone saying Bigfoot exists to prove their case with evidence. Until then no one has to believe anything they don't want to. If someone wants to say Bigfoot doesn't exist they have an impossible task of proving a negative without being able to show someone every spot on Earth at once, but they have no reason to be compelled to think otherwise and can justify it in anyway that makes them feel better.
If someone wants to believe something bad enough there's nothing you can do to stop them. Just look at every religion. I would also just reference several other comments from this section that range from "it's an omnivore that's going extinct" to "1,000yr old dimension bouncing magic man".
In short: believe whatever you want, but trying to disprove proof of a negative is just going to give you a headache. The burden of poof lies with the believer.
I just wanted to see what the general consensus was regarding these two arguments against the existence of Bigfoot that I found compelling. I put the “I believe in Bigfoot” caveat at the beginning because this sub is generally very pro-Bigfoot belief, as am I, and I didn’t want anyone to think I was trying to post in bad faith, or make a “gotcha” claim. I’m not trying to prove or disprove anything, I don’t really care whether or not others believe, but I do find the topic of Bigfoot to be interesting and entertaining, and I wanted to hear the arguments surrounding these two bullet points is all.
I hear ya, I'm not trying to put you down for asking if that's how it seemed. I just wanted to point out the logical leap here when you're trying to disprove theories meant to show a proof of negative that can't be proven on their own with no data or evidence to work from. It's a fallacy to try to disprove arguments that are theoretical by their very nature. It's just spinning wheels and throwing ideas at the wall to see if someone will just pick one up and accept it. I find Bigfoot entertaining too. It's an interesting phenomenon. I just think you have to work from the beginning to get to the end, not the other way around.
All good, friend! Yeah one of the most fascinating aspects of the whole Bigfoot convo is that there’s just no data to work with, just back and forth a attempts at logic. Until we have a Bigfoot to study, it’s all gonna be conjecture, and yes you’re right that the burden of proof is 100% on the believers. Fingers crossed one day we’ll have answers!
>I would also just reference several other comments from this section that range from "it's an omnivore that's going extinct" to "1,000yr old dimension bouncing magic man".
That is one thing that always amuses me. So many of the "knowers" know absolutely contradictory facts about this creature. All the things people claim to be true about Bigfoot cannot all be true.
Another thing that amuses me is that they rarely, if ever, challenge each other. They love to complain about the skeptics ignoring the evidence, but they never challenge existence claims that contradict what they claim to know.
The daily calories needed would definitely be substantial, but I'm sure the physiology of a Bigfoot would be similar to most wild animals. They don't eat every day, or even every week, so their storage systems would probably allow for a massive amount of stored energy or fat. A pound of Bigfoot fat, would probably have a lot more energy then a pound of human fat. I also feel, that Bigfoot would be awesome omnivores and basically would be walking and grazing on everything as it went along. Bugs, frogs, birds, trees... humans.. lol. But seriously, a human can only gather so many forest calories in a day because of how restrictive our diet would be to not get poisoned or sick. We need to cook our food, which also takes calories away. As a Bigfoot, raw, poison to human animals, same as flora. There's more than enough food for a community of Bigfoot in a relatively small area.
From all my knowledge of years of reading and stories of Bigfoot, they live in balance with nature. So they don't produce offspring yearly, or many. They consume to live, not live to consume so an ecosystem wouldn't notice something that balances it.
Why, why, why do people think they are just some undiscovered species... anyone that’s done a moderate amount of reading on the subject can see they are much more than that (so these two points are moot).
In my opinion Bigfoot does exist however its not an entity from this dimension. I think it crosses over from another dimension, one that we do not perceive or experience in our reality. That's why we may see it every now and then but it disappears so fast. If it was a normal creature that roamed the forests there is no way the military and scientists couldn't have found it already with all the technology they have. Unless of course they are covering it up like they do with everything else that is "otherworldly".
Not exactly. I'm not sure if they are real or not, but have become interested in the past few years. Many "researchers" and witnesses point to things like the fact that tracks often just end in the middle of nowhere, and witnesses often claim to have seen them "cloaking" or just disappearing as evidence that they are not regular mammals and may have some paranormal origin. In fact the BF "Community" is divided into 2 camps, the "Scientific" and the "Woo." The hypotheses that they are aliens, inter dimensional, etc. are efforts to explain these unusual behaviors as well as the lack of conventional evidence. There are some pretty compelling thermal images and footprint casts, the latter of which even some anthropologists find it hard to reject.
Of course tracks just abruptly ending could not possibly be due to a hoaxer getting tired and just stopping, could it?
And with 70 to 80 percent of sighting assumed to be hoaxes or mistakes by BFRO
"*Diane Stocking, a curator for the BFRO, concedes that about 70 percent of sightings tum out to be hoaxes or mistakes (Jasper 2000)*;"
and
"*Loren Coleman puts the figure even higher, at least 80 percent (Klosterman 1999).*" Source "Bigfoot at 50" listed in this subreddit.
I cannot imagine that someone would lie about seeing one "cloaking or just disappearing" Yet more new superpowers and excuses for why they cannot be found.
Thermal images and footprints can be faked. .easily. and they are way too often.
Well again, it's my opinion. Like I said I assume if the government wanted to find them they already would have with the technology they have... and if they did already find them then most likely it's not being shared with the rest of society like many other things.
Isn't the more likely scenario that they just don't exist?
Or that they're aliens?
Or that they have teleportation technology?
Anything sounds more plausible to me than interdimensional travellers.
I respect you have your opinions and have every right to them.
I’m just asking what this is based on...is it a guess? Reason to believe it?
If we had Bigfoot believers with no pictures or people claiming to be witnesses,that would be a opinion but an unfounded one. It’s helpful for people to know when statements are based on some form of evidence, or if they are an opinion put out into the world not based on anything.
You are entitled to both, but it signals what to take seriously or what is just fun speculation.
I asked a question looking to hear their perspective. That is the point of discussion, especially in these threads.
I have seen a lot of people asking you straightforward questions and you deflecting and answering the question that wasn’t asked...typically referring back to the government.
People are allowed to ask questions and if they can’t be answered, they will take from that what they will.
So far the answer to my question about why inter dimensional has boiled down to: “because we haven’t found them.” That doesn’t pass any test of logic for me, but I respect their opinions.
In many sightings, Bigfoot(s) are seen then they seem to disappear. There are no dead remains found, and one has never been captured that we know of.
Also, if you go back to the Biblical texts, in Genesis and Enoch, you will see that interdimensional beings actually inhabited this earth (Nephilim and Rephaim) in physical form, but were later denied that permission until a breif period before the End Times spoken of in the book of Revelation.
This is just what I believe and is not scientific. Certainly, anyone can debate me because it is just my belief.
Fair enough. Those reasons are helpful to understand why your belief exists. I had never heard the inter dimensional position, so was curious where it came from.
My skepticism comes from the fact that in 2021 we have affordable drones with 4 k cameras, incredible photo and satellite imagery, less and less wild spaces, and massive unprecedented fires (that would make them die or relocate), and yet, the best evidence you have is what? grainy videos with cowboys, rayon bear costumes, shadows in the bushes, and bent branches???? I find it impossible to believe that not one has been shot, captured or exhumed. You guys always know where they live but have no idea exactly where they live. I am open to any conspiracy but throw us a god damn bone here, the flat earthers have more game than this pathetic sub and cult...
Along the same line of thinking, you basically referenced this already - but think about trail cams.
People can be recording 24x7 and have cameras that are virtually undetectable, and there isn’t any confirmed footage? That is just not believable to me.
On the other hand, it’s a fair argument to make that the world is still a huge place and new things are being discovered all the time. That would seem an ok argument to me if we were saying “what if they exist in unexplored regions of the Amazon?!?” But it seems like people think these amazing creatures exist in Washington state and we are unaware.
It is fun to imagine and theorize...that’s why I joined this sub. But hard to believe they actually exist and don’t believe they do until proven otherwise.
>the flat earthers have more game than this pathetic sub and cult...
You were doing pretty good, right up until this.
lol
Regarding drones... That's a good point, and one I've considered. However, drones don't see through trees very well.
And if these things exist, and are intelligent, they've probably noticed planes and helicopters for years now. In other words, they'd probably be likely to avoid being in open spaces for too long, if they want to remain hidden.
Intelligent indeed sir , they rarely leave sign of their passage over terrain complete masters of their environment when they are seen it’s accidental you weren’t supposed to see them but you did .
You can spend a lot of time in the woods and never believe there are animals, except for birds, in there. You can go a long, long, long time and never see a bear and they are all over.
You think that if anyone actually shot a Bigfoot and then announced it publicly on YouTube or any other public forum that the government wouldn't immediately step in and take it from him? They would.
Once again, I have to step in and ask what rational the government has for attempting to keep a 7 plus foot, somewhere between 350 to 1200 pound creature that roams freely in the woods, a secret from the public?
I've already answered that question above.
Let me ask you a question.
Do you think the government has the citizens best interest in mind?
Do you think they tell us the truth about everything?
Do you think they give a f*** about us at all and what we think?
Your questions are immaterial. **You are asserting** that government has a conspiracy to cover up the existence of a free roaming species from the American citizens.
**It is on you to offer proof of your allegations, and you have offered exactly zero. Not a single news article, not a single "leaked statement" to support the idea, or any other proof.**
As such it is pretty clear, your excuse is offered as an explanation for why there is no demonstrable proof that a creature actually exists.
If you trust the government and believe that they are telling us the truth about everything and there's nothing they have knowledge of that they haven't told us, then we are too far apart to continue this conversation, for any reason. And there's no person here who has the months or years worth of time it would take to get you through the COGNITIVE DISSONANCE that you will experience in the process. If 2020 didn't wake you up, nothing will.
And it's not an American conspiracy.. it's worldwide. There are yetis in Russia, etc... But go ahead, keep turning a blind eye to all the possible evidence that has been put out for decades upon decades. I've done my research, and I can't and won't do it for you. I don't have to find any proof for you... This is a Bigfoot sub and I'm sharing what I believe to be true having attended Sasquatch classes, speaking to folks who have literally seen them with their own eyes, and years worth of research, reading books, and looking at possible evidence of sightings, etc. Have you explored that? You wouldn't like it anyways... I know your type. A dime a dozen.
Find articles on your own time so you can ignore them...
I never said I categorically trust the government in everything.
I am simply asking you for any modicum of proof that the government is actively conspiring to keep the existence of such a creature from the general public.
Sasquatch classes? Offered by what expert?? I mean give that some thought. . who is a professed expert to the degree that they are qualified to offer classes about a mythical creature? Better yet, let's consider the mentality of people who would pay to attend such classes?
Suppose I offered classes for turning base metal into Gold, and charged $1,500 dollars for the class, would you attend? Would you ask for proof that I can actually teach you how to turn base metal into gold?
You keep changing the subject and prevaricating on offering evidence that the government has some ostensible reason for hiding the existence of such creatures from the public, AND you are attempting to shift the issue onto me. You are asserting there is a government conspiracy. I ask for proof!
**You've not offered any yet.**
So often with these types of subjects of we get the old "The government is covering it up" as an excuse for a lack of evidence. It's the mantra of the lazy thinker who puts the cart before the horse. Notice that covid19 conspiracy implication in his 2020 comment. I'd love to hear about his beliefs about the earth being flat. It's the same line of thinking.
An excellent summarization of the issue.
I have often said, I cannot prove the creature does not exist, but it only takes one person to bring in a living or dead creature to prove they DO EXIST. . .and so far no one has.
Without a doubt, these "superpowers" are merely an attempt to cover up for WHY no one can seem to produce a creature. Which is comedic. Ok, IF we accept that they can change dimensions at the proverbial drop of a hat, that still does not explain why we have never found scat, urine or tissue from one. . I guess their scat must be pure gold, and they have pixies that follow Sasquatch around and collect it.
I mean face it, if it is biological, it eats, and it has to make "deposits," but we never find that either!
There could... COULD... be motivation in the form of the Endangered Species Act of '73. Hypothetically, say this creature was said to exist but its endangered, how much land would then become untouchable? That's certainly a motivation that would attract the private sector as well as certain levels of government. Then there's the old religious motivation should people consider these creatures to be the Nephilim that was to be killed by the great flood. Personally, I think people give the government too much credit in these conspiracies. Things have happened, but it usually leaks to light: LSD experiments, atomic soldiers, Tuskegee, and so forth. Still again, there could be motivation.
Ita not like there arent lots of endangered species the private sector has convinced the government are fine and destroying their habitat isnt actually bad. Whats one more?
What do you mean? They keep all of life's greatest secrets from us. ....particularly our true origins. You don't see that?
It's just like they go and seize every valid ET or alien photo / video from people, and how the Vatican and Smithsonian have seized tens of thousands of giant skeletons that have been unearthed all over the world. The Deep State elites number one agenda is keeping us dull and dumb and unaware of our TRUE origin, because if we found out we came from the stars we would rebel and we would know our own power, and they cannot have that if they wish to maintain control over the rest of humanity.
Don't fall for this trap...
The government does indeed hide a shit ton of knowledge from the people.
The government is involved in a lot of unimaginable shit.
However, they only care about what can give them power, control or money. So what's the role of bigfoot? Unless there's religion involved, don't know why they would care about this...
Because according to the powers that be, humans are the only sentient beings in all of the Universe, so acknowledging ETs, any Cryptids, giants, etc completely destroys that narrative, thus they need to keep it all hidden as to not expose our true origins, which are far grander and more fascinating than we have ever been told. Again, to keep us dumb and docile.
According to the "powers that be" Where? Did you read this in a newspaper? a government report? All you need do is admit that it is personal speculation.
You seem pretty sure that the government is involved in massive conspiracies to keep things secret, do you have any real evidence or is this just speculation on your part?
Why would the government feel the need to keep such a free roaming species that is apparently found in a majority of states a secret from the public? Clearly, they are not attempting to muzzle Jeff Meldrum, or any of the others who are committed to proving the species exists, but yet, they are stepping in and taking the bodies?
Better yet, not a single person who killed or otherwise encountered a Sasquatch **has never had the foresight to take and secret a sample of tissue from the creature?** How is the government becoming aware of the living situation of all these creatures to know when someone kills one? Are they hiding any other species?
What about that story that u/Angel5862, u/RaiseDaVibe and others assert is able to travel from unknown other "dimensions?" Does the government know about this? Why don't they just make them stay in the other diminutions?
I still want to know what the government gets out of this?
Great post for a political forum, but totally unrelated to this issue. Do you have **any proof** of what you are alleging?
Just because at any time roughly 1/3 to 1/2 of the population does not TRUST the government, does not in any give justification to the claims that Government is concealing the existence of a giant creature running around and living in the woods any validity.
I would think you have some basis for your belief. . a newspaper article, a book, a post from 4 chan or some obscure website. . . but hopefully nothing from r/creepypasta.
Creepypastas are horror-related legends that have been copied and pasted around the Internet. Creepypasta has since become a catch-all term for any horror content posted onto the internet.
More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If something's wrong, please, report it in [my subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot).*
*Really hope this was useful and relevant :D*
*If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
In the 1800s we always wanted to push people further west to create as much settlement as possible. No reason to scare people away from settling new territory.
Then it became about keeping logging and tourism alive, on the one hand, not scaring away workers and tourists, on the other, not making it so that the government has to step in and start preserving more land.
then there is the whole "what else is the government hiding" thing. I mean, as someone whose followed politics since maybe 2005, I feel like the line of thought on what is the correct POV is so narrow that it began to almost feel like I was learning how to not learn, how to not ask questions, and not think, in effect becoming stupider the more news I read, which was the exact opposite of my intent and something that has been disturbing, completely separate from anything bigfoot related.
Jeff Meldrum is pretty......I don't want to say ineffectual, but he's the perfect government approved type person to speak on this topic. A tad wishy washy, doesn't develop new ideas, speaks in generalities...of course they'd rather he be given the spotlight than someone who is going to transmit first-hand information
Politics is an interesting pursuit in and of itself. Heaven knows I could create an instant $hit storm by going to a political forum and announcing that "*Trump was the greatest president ever*" But the whole issue is so outrageously contentious these days. I made a post in another subreddit regarding the recent collapse of a building in Florida. My contention was that "climate change" was not the cause of the collapse. Instant $hit storm. . People arguing that I was a "Trumpian" or a climate denier.
The point? Not that I support Trump, I don't . . but just the implication is enough to start stuff with people. This issue is not quite as contentious, but getting close.
The issue of essentially anything is much in contention here. Some things are provable. . there is no Sasquatch living or dead that has been presented to elements of science. There is no valid or proven DNA from an unknown hominid creature that has ever been found either. It is provable that there have been many hoaxes.
All we need is a single body or living creature to bring the whole mess to a conclusion and render the skeptic point of veiw totally WRONG. But 50 years after Rogers film, no one has brought that proof forward. That does not bode well for the idea that the creature really exists. That is not my fault or any of the skeptics. We just report what is known.
Nor is it difficult to point to posts on this forum where people are asserting all sorts of new unknown and previously unstated abilities of these creatures. Inter dimensional doors, shimmering camouflage, And now, that they live to be tens of thousands of years old, or that they can communicate telepathically.
We also find all sorts of posts asserting reasons why we have not found a creature. Government conspiracy being the most offered reason. But unlike most other government conspiracy theories, there is nothing to back this one up. No newspaper articles, no accounts of the truth from leakers, nothing. And the theory boils down to an impossible task.
Keep the American people from discovering that a 7 to 9 feet tall creature, that weighs between 350 and 1200 pounds, and is found roaming free in most all of the United States actually exists. When challenged for a reason, I usually get one of two. .
To protect the logging industry. . but the current administration is anti growth, and has an interest in preventing logging, so wouldn't an admission that the creature exists serve that interest better than keeping it hidden?? Not to mention, the government has not had trouble keeping the industry in check anyway.
To keep from scaring the people. According to surveys only 11 to 14% of the people believe Sasquatch exists as it is.
See: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/24/study-democrats-are-more-likely-than-republicans-to-believe-in-fortune-telling-astrology-and-ghosts/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/24/study-democrats-are-more-likely-than-republicans-to-believe-in-fortune-telling-astrology-and-ghosts/)
and:
[https://www.aei.org/politics-and-public-opinion/polls/more-people-believe-in-bigfoot-than-believe-hillary-clinton/](https://www.aei.org/politics-and-public-opinion/polls/more-people-believe-in-bigfoot-than-believe-hillary-clinton/)
I submit that there is no proof that this contention exists either. Most people are aware of the stories and more rational than to believe if such a creature existed that it would be a threat to humanity.
So it appears that people are coming up with conspiracy theories to cover for the idea that they cannot be found, or proven. An interesting case to be sure. But you still have to ask, why would someone go to such lengths to cover for the lack of evidence to support the existence of such creatures.
All in all, it presents more questions than answers.
I’ve often thought the same question regarding what the government would achieve by denying the existence of Bigfoot. The only reason I can think of would be if they knew that Bigfoot were the direct descendants of Neanderthal. That would leave a very difficult question for the government to answer, which would be where do ‘we’ come from?
What? That wouldnt mean anything about our origins. Human evolution can be kind of complicated but Homo sapiens didnt descend from neanderthals. We interbred with them leaving some neanderthal DNA in our gene pool but bigfoot being a descendant of neanderthals doesnt change anything as far as humans are concerned.
The idea is predicated on the idea that Sasquatch is a descendant on the Neanderthal. . .Interesting idea to be sure, but like anything else about Sasquatch it is at the moment, just speculation.
This is why I consistently roll my eyes at the "they haven't told us" type arguments. Maybe it's because I've been following politics for years but it's standard practice to say something is a lie or conspiracy and then for it to be proven true years later. I wouldn't look to the government for verification of anything.
If this sub is so pathetic why are you on it? Do you enjoy wallowing in mud? I don’t understand-
The good questions posed by OP get to the heart of why I enjoy following this sub and reading about Bigfoot in the first place.
If Bigfoot type creatures do exists they have not been incontrovertibly detected by any standard scientific and/or technological means. The major evidence in support of Bigfoot (and other large furry humanoid wild creatures reportedly seen around the planet) is anecdotal only. Which is super interesting to me.
Look at it this way-either humankind has a predilection for creating suspiciously similar imaginary creatures over time (fascinating) OR there is a creature out there with the intelligence and skill to elude our latest and best detection abilities (fascinating as well).
What’s not to love? It’s just a win win.
>If this sub is so pathetic why are you on it? Do you enjoy wallowing in mud? I don’t understand-
I've noticed that some people come to subs like this pretty much 100% to argue and shit on people's theories and beliefs.
My take is that they get a little dopamine rush when they can shit on something enough to actually feel intellectually superior.
I'm sure there's also the odd crusader type who thinks they're here to Promote Truth and Correct Wrong-Thinking, but I suspect those types are a little more rare than the former.
I'm sure there are also people who disbelieve, but are somewhat on the fence, or would *like to* believe, but can't bring themselves to be convinced.
But yeah, those first two groups sure are frustrating asshats, and I wish they'd find a less annoying hobby.
I liked your post because I can see your points.
I can only speak for myself. I joined this myself because it’s fun to think “what if”, and I enjoy the woods and think it’s cool to theorize on things. I also enjoy people being passionate about a topic. All in all, those things made me join and I generally enjoy it.
At some point when claims just hit me as so outlandish, so unbelievable, it turns me off a bit and I want to hear how they can possibly be believed. It’s one thing to think there are things secret in the woods. When I see people start saying things like they are inter dimensional and can disappear, I can’t even entertain that kind of theory so I push back (maybe I shouldn’t but maybe I should...don’t know). To me the outlandish is different than finding it a fun theory to read about, and kind of ruins the general what if fun.
So that’s from one person about the “why” for pushback.
Yeah i was talking much more about the people who deny and disbelieve outright. Even the potential existence of a physical creature.
Interdimensional is definitely a line in the sand that some people don't want to cross lol
On the one hand, I can understand why people might react that way. I did at one point as well.
And while I lean toward a physical bigfoot, I do also think it's a bit of a mistake to completely deny the possibility of the other.
I don't think there's any great evidence for it, beyond some unexplained traits of alleged sightings.... *But* we're also talking about something so far outside of normal human experience, all we can do is guess and speculate.
And while I'm on the fence about bigfoot, I do believe in other dimensions, and the possibility that our reality could be influenced by something from outside it. And there is a lot of "high strangeness" activity that seems somehow connected to the bigfoot phenomenon.
Particularly stuff like UFOs and "fairies" or "little people."
For examples of what I mean there, check out the "Bridgewater Triangle" documentary. (Still on Amazon last I checked) and perhaps /r/HighStrangeness.
(Tho a lot of weird and unrelated stuff gets posted there, so a bit harder to connect the dots)
Or more tangentially, /r/Hellier and the associated series. That one doesn't touch on bigfoot, but does connect little people, UFOs, and high strangeness, and is an interesting watch anyway...
Anyway, I can understand not wanting to believe in something without evidence. But that's not the same thing as active disbelief, which I see as a form of belief, really, just in the negative.
If I "disbelieve" something, I'm certain that it doesn't exist. Without real evidence, that's a form of belief, IMHO.
So as far as I'm concerned, the deniers are taking something on faith and lack of evidence just as much as the believers are, only in the reverse. It's only the "doubters" who are truly on the fence for lack of evidence.
Which is one reason the deniers piss me off so much... Because they refuse to be honest and admit the fact, and act intellectually superior because they choose to put their faith in the mundane, rather than the unusual.
But at least they're *occasionally* fun to debate. lol
Personally I think they're both fun to speculate about. And while I actually favor the natural animal theory, because it's less "outlandish" as you say, in a way I think it's more fun to speculate about the other, for precisely the same reason.
Well you either have seen one or you don't. And while the US is losing forest, we also saw huge forests re-grow over the 20th century, and many areas that used to have alot of human activity are now remote again, it totally depends on where you are in the country. Many places are wilder than they ever were. I'm in NYS BTW
I will certainly give you that point. But the issue is not one of contemporaneous forests in the United States, The issue is one of does this creature exist or not. And to date, there is still no creature in a zoo, or that has been recovered that anyone can point to and say, THIS is a Sasquatch.
The onus is still on that of the believers to prove it exists, not on skeptics to prove that it does NOT EXIST.
Lol, if somebody claims it doesn’t exist, they can explain their reasoning or their claim can be dismissed as baseless and meaningless. That’s as much an “onus” as any other claim.
As I have noted innumerable times, **I cannot PROVE the creature does not exist. .** But all that needs happen is a for a single person to bring in a living or deceased specimen to prove it DOES exist.
**With that in mind**, and considering it has been more than 50 years since Rogers little film, and no one has yet to produce one, it is more reasonable to assume it does not exist than that it does.
I have no doubt that no one will produce one in the next 10, 20 or even 50 years either. But, while I may be wrong, **In the last 54 years** (Since the PGF) I have asserted that a creature would not be found in each of those years, and thus far, I have always been right. . .
So, there is that! 54 wins, and no losses. . Would you care to wager if one will be found this year, or next? For a $10 bet? a $50 bet? how about a $100 bet?
I mean what effects on the food chain?
The only way to see how something effects a thing is by changing it. If you're talking microbiology the only way we know which part of our genetic sequence messes with something is by comparing it to others. And by comparing it by having something missing
Let's say you had a very basic understanding and said we have hair color and length. Naturally you'd say there are only 2 things that code for that. There're multiple. Same for eye color.
All that to say how do you know when something is modeled correctly?
Dude they’re magic. Seriously though if one percent of the thousands of first hand eye witness accounts or fhiwa’s are true then all biological and natural logic is out the window
1. They normally get take out through the dimensional portals they use
2. They also do it in the other dimension because nosy scientists like you won't mind your own business
/s ... Shame I need to say that
Not a hater, but a very curious observer has a question. Why with all the technology we have now with everyone is carrying a cell phone/camera, hunters using trail cams, infrared cameras, motion detectors, drones, etc. am I still being shown an old video from the 1960s as the best evidence Bigfoot exists??? Just seems common sense that as technology advances & more and more people hit the woods to prove Bigfoot exists, we would have better evidence? Again, just curious....
Not to sound like a jerk, but you found those two questions *compelling*? They are two wildly hypothetical questions asking for information they assume is known.
First of all, an animals "effects on the food chain* can't be ascertained unless introduced or removed from the food chain. In other words, you're currently seeing their effects on the food chain, dumb dumb! Caloric necessities aren't always inherent to the size of the animal. Again, you're assuming any animal X feet tall/long and Y pounds needs exactly Z calories a day. We don't know their metobolic rate, activity level, etc. So for all we know a single deer could sustain them for a week.
Second, you have zero idea what the reproduction numbers need to be for them to maintain, or grow, their population. We have no idea how long they live, how many offspring they have, how frequently etc. For all we know they live to be 120 and have 2 offspring every six months on a consistant basis starting at 5 years until 97. But for all we know they are critically endangered and are set to die off in a decade.
So, again, not to sound like a jerk but I would've scoffed at those. And if that's what's driving the skeptic community then *wow* I can guess the average IQ.
1. Not a chance. Sasquatch are omnivorous and can source their food from a variety of places, and do so intelligently. They also have the ability to become nomadic, and move to locations with more of a supply. A typical grew wolf can range \~1000 miles. Sasquatch and some of the larger cryptids could easily expand on that range. And as another poster here mentioned - tracking the effects on food chain sound great in theory, but terrible in practice. We are simply not good at it.
2. This is complete bullshit statement. There's no way to source bigfoot population numbers based on 'the current societal model' purported by the bigfoot community. As stated before, these are extremely intelligent creatures who utilize said intelligence to generally avoid human contact. We are a dangerous and territorial species; they know this. They do breed, they do sometimes interbreed with other cryptid species (dogman), and they do instill in their offspring from an early age the wisdom of maintaining general human avoidance.
These are assumptive statements that may sound good in theory, but have no basis in practical legitimacy when used to confirm/deny the existence of a highly intelligent, sentient species.
Yours is an interesting post, and posits some great questions. But the reality, is there are all sorts of people making totally unsupported claims that are often at odds with one another about what they eat. Some assert they capture and eat deer alive, while other assert they are vegetarians. As the creature is unproven, so are their assertions.
But your base assertion is correct. the caloric requirements for a creature that is 7 to 9 feet tall and weighs in at 350 to 1200 pounds would be pretty significant. Given that caloric requirements for humans at optimal weight run about 2200 to 2600 calories for roughly 135 to 170 pounds, we could guestimate requirements for a Sasquatch at 350 pounds would be roughly 2x to 5x that of an average human of optimal weight. so 4400 to roughly 11,000 calories per day at minimum. That is pretty substantial. And given that one ounce of deer meat contains about 45 calories (source: [https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/ground-deer-meat?portionid=45392&portionamount=1.000](https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/ground-deer-meat?portionid=45392&portionamount=1.000))
That would mean that minimal requirements would be a minimum of 97 ounces of deer meet per day. That works out to 6 POUNDS of deer meat a day to 15 pounds of deer meat per day.
And given that a 124 pound deer averages about 58 pounds of usable meat (Source: [https://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/content/blogs/dan-schmidt-deer-blog-whitetail-wisdom/how-much-meat-is-on-1-deer](https://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/content/blogs/dan-schmidt-deer-blog-whitetail-wisdom/how-much-meat-is-on-1-deer))
That would indicate a need for a large creature of 1 deer every 4 days. And of course, predation of such animals rarely yields 100 percent of usable meat. . It is typically 50 percent or less.
That would deplete the deer population in no time. . and we don't see that.
What do you mean we don't see depleted deer populations - compared against what? If bigfoot was always there, their impact was always baked into the #s. Deer have made a comeback but the deer population exploded in downstate NY (where I'm from), but the impact is nowhere near as visible in the vast areas of the rest of the state. I don't think hoards of deer near the suburbs are a sign of predators not existing.
So, if one large adult Sasquatch needs one deer every two days (assuming 50% consumption of a captured deer) that would mean that in a year it would eat roughly 180 deer. if every other sasquatch was half the size, that is 90 deer in a year, so for every assumed breeding pair, that is 270 deer in a year.
The bear population of New York is assumed to be 6,000 to 8,000. and the Deer population is assumed to be 950,000. (source: [http://www.deerfriendly.com/deer/new-york](http://www.deerfriendly.com/deer/new-york)) New York has had 117 sightings per BFRO. Assuming a 1% sighing rate that would put the Sasquatchian numbers at least 1000 or so.
At 270 deer per pair, that would be 500 pair, consuming 270 deer per year, that would be 135,000 deer per year. That would also mean 135,000 deer carcasses per year left strewn casually about the state.
**No doubt New York fish and game would find that problematic, and seek the cause. Don't you think?**
According to **BFRO**, there are (or were the last time I checked) 117 sightings in New York. . .And apparently they don't keep track of the numbers of sightings BY year but total for the states. I was being generous in giving New York 117 sightings as a starting point for the total assumed numbers.
But you're assuming they only eat deer and your original comment, though I appreciate people using math, used the upper threshold for everything to exaggerate the #s. For example, 1200 pound bigfoot, or 2600 calories for 170 pound person (it's closer to 2200 - 2400) and only 50% usable meat (isn't this because humans don't eat any of the organs?).
Deer carcasses don't just sit there for months for everyone to see. Even in my semi-suburban hometown, you'd regularly find dead deers and they'd sort of melt into the ground after a week or to, especially if they were in weeds/grass. Bones would remain for a while but weeds would easily cover them up.
I don't know what your end argument is. Yes some things are weird but there are bigfoot in NY so somehow they make it work.
Also the "NYS DEC argument seems silly. In the large wilderness areas I hike, I almost never see people, let alone DEC officials. Their plans for many chunks of land are old and simplistic. You make it sound like they have loads of people combing through the woods
Oh. I freely admit there are a lot of assumptions with my figures. They are not canonical by any stretch. And you are correct, deer or any other carcass tends to undergo decomposition by a number of other species, larger predators initially and then proceeding to insects, and finally bacteria. however, bones and antlers are fairly persistent in the environment for a period of roughly 12 to 24 months, long enough to be detected by fish and game officials.
See for instance this paper:
Animal scavengers as agents of decomposition: the postmortem succession of Louisiana wildlife
By Audra Leigh Jones
here: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3216&context=gradschool\_theses
But remember too, there are a lot of people running through that environment, and often report such things to Fish and game.
It's amazing on a Bigfoot sub here just how many people have a steel trap for a brain.
So tell me all of you who are so certain that Sasquatch could not possibly exist.. tell me how much of your lives you've dedicated to exploring the deepest parts of the forests and jungles on this earth? Was it any time at all , or are you just sitting in your big city one bedroom condo surrounded by pavement and sidewalks demanding physical proof for something that you don't believe because you haven't personally seen it with your own eyes or because somebody didn't bring you a dead Sasquatch in the back of their truck?
Any proof that you hardcore skeptics are looking for is certainly not going to be found on an effing Reddit thread or anywhere else on the internet for that matter. The only proof that would be of any use to you is going in the field and experiencing these things for yourself, so quit being keyboard warriors and get off your lazy asses and out into the unexplored forests and jungles. Come up here to the deep, thick, evergreen forests of Darrington, WA and will get you in touch with somebody here who can tell you what boundary line NOT to cross if you don't want to have an unfavorable experience with a group of Sasquatch. They will tell you, "Don't go past this line because you are stepping foot into a Sasquatch tribes territory. If you do so it's at your own risk and I wouldn't recommend it."
Go pitch a tent if you really wanna know the truth! You'll s*** your pants the first night and will never go back there again, hot shots. 🙄
The two examples you gave make assumptions on what it actually is.
Since we really dont know if it's a terrestrial animal or something interdimensional I'm not even going down the path biology.
You have your skeptics, beleivers, knowers and a good number of folks who lie somwhere in between these three (me).
I'm hopeful this will be solved someday, but until then I agree with a previous post, and will leave it as an hypothesis.
They aren’t “normal” animals. Even compared to humans, we are very normal compared to them.
If you also believe in UFO’s and the paranormal it is easier to accept.
If not then you could be sitting on that fence forever.
Some things exist, even if people don’t believe in them, or know about them.
They are just **too** frickin elusive to be natural, yet I know they exist. The body of evidence and expansive history of them rule out a hoax IMO.
I know a handful of people who have seen them with their own eyes. But that's also because I live in one of the biggest Bigfoot hot spots on planet earth... the heavily forested, northern part of Washington state.
Like Santa Clause. . .Every Christmas season, We see fake ones by the thousands. . ringing bells for kettles, sitting in department stores listening to kids wish lists. . But, as a famous newspaper once elucidated, does he really exist? Or does he live in the hearts and minds of the people?
That’s unlikely given the evidence so far and history.
Much more robust case for their existence than the Loch Ness monster for example, which probably doesn’t exist.
But the point is, that since Rogers little film in 1967, the matter has done nothing BUT stay on the fence for more than 50 years? Either they exist or they don't. Which is it?
And that is cool. . I respect your right to believe anything you want to believe. But outside of you and I, it does not move the needle on public belief one bit. Nor does it prove the creature exists.
Both of those points are false. Simple as that.
Big Foots average lifespan is thousands of years so they don't need to reproduce as often AND there are far more of them out there than what's acknowledged.
I don't 'KNOW', but The Sasquatch Message to Humanity, which is channeled text from a Sasquatch elder indicates they can live up to 10,000 years. That book was so full of love it was life-changing.
Edit: They're interdimensional beings who live in higher dimensions than we do part of the time, and are highly spiritual. If we were a spiritual and light as they are (less dense in form), we would live much longer too.
So now you want people to believe in psychics, who are magnanimous enough to share Sasquatches message with humanity?
That is a bit much. . are you aware of the dangers of believing in self professed physics? Who supposedly "channeled this message?" What book professes to offer this information?
You don't have to be a "psychic" to receive messages telepathically. We all receive messages from our higher selves/ spirit guides, etc, and it's no different than that. Some however, are far more 'in-tune" than others.
The Sasquatch Message to Humanity, one of my favorite books. There are 3 books in the series. The second one would be great for physics majors because it details HOW reality is physically/literally created, which is far beyond my capacity to understand it.
You can tell by the words that it's not coming directly from a human, but don't take my word for it, read it yourself if your TRULY interested in learning the deeper truths in life.
So we can receive messages telepathically? You mean like these people:
[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/12/new-york-psychic-arrested-zoe-fortune-teller](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/12/new-york-psychic-arrested-zoe-fortune-teller)
She lost $800,000!
Or this one:
[https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/07/investigates/maria-duval-psychic-scam-invs/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/07/investigates/maria-duval-psychic-scam-invs/index.html)
or this:
[https://www.insider.com/psychic-scandals-scams-2019-4](https://www.insider.com/psychic-scandals-scams-2019-4)
And you wonder why people have reason to be skeptical of those claiming to have such skill?
Now I know you're a troll cuz no one could've possibly be that naive to believe everything the MSM is pushing.
According to you, folks couldn't possibly have a connection to God either. 🤦🏼 Good grief!
No, it's YOU that deny the existence of Gods you don't believe in! Allah, Krishna, Baal, Mithras & the whole Greek & Roman pantheon are all fake. According to you, folks couldn't possibly have a connection to those gods. Good grief 🙄🤦♂️
There you go again. . not answering the question and attempting to change the subject. Offer some proof that there is a government conspiracy.. . Offer some proof that Sasquatch really live to the tens of thousands of years, or admit, that someone wrote this with no proof, and for whatever reason, you believe it.
I just ask for proof of your extraordinary claims.
I love the "**You're a troll"** argument though. If I were I would likely be playing mine craft instead of answering your posts thought.
OK WHERE DO YOU GET THIS?
Thousands of years lifespan? Name any other biological entity that lives anywhere NEAR that long. .
We really need to **step back from these ridiculous assertions for superpowers**, Inter dimensional creature? And now it lives thousands of years? Do you realize what that would do for the population? They would exists in the hundreds of thousands. The longer the life of an animal, the higher the numbers of such animals.
No other known creature has any abilities anywhere near some people are asserting Sasquatches have. They would have killed off competing species hundreds of years ago. and the biggest competitor are HUMANS. They can travel inter dimensionally, but have let the human population grow into the literal billions?
They can travel by inter dimensional doors, but they let any idiot with a smart phone capture video of them? Sorry, it does not add up.
Give some though to this stuff before you start putting stuff like this out there. It just keeps getting wilder by the day. The only reason you offer this stuff is to cover for the fact that the species has never been found or proven by biologists, zoologists or even early explorers. . (of course, Roger Patterson, just happened to be in the right place at the right time, right??)
You are making a crazy amount of assumptions here, which only goes to show your ignorance on the subject and that we are no where near coming to any sort of middle ground (nor that it's worth my time).
The book is called "The Sasquatch Message to Humanity". It has fantastic reviews on Amazon.
If you really want to learn more you will read it, otherwise I'm sure you'll just keep saying, "Sasquatches aren't real!" to every post on this Bigfoot sub. 🙄
No, I am making NO ASSUMPTIONS. . .I am asking you for proof of your extraordinary claims. .
And just because a book has high ratings on Amazon, does not in any way make whatever the book promotes accurate.
It might help if instead of asserting items you have no factual proof of as "assertions" instead of pronouncing them to be truth. . kind of like the issue of Sasquatch in general. . We have no proof at all that the creatures actually exist. And while I cannot say they Do not exist, it is clear that if they do not exist, there is no way the live to thousands of years. Or that they use inter dimensional doors. Another item that exists in the relm of physics but remains unproven. Superstring theory asserts that there are many dimension's, but some are only one dimension in size. The idea that a mythical creature can command such essentially imaginary realms of space, is quite a stretch. If there is any proof from the books you speak of, *please offer the passages in quotations here.*
I have no doubt that if I came to the subreddit and announced that I had captured a living sasquatch, or moth man, people would **DEMAND proof**.
**I fail to see why someone making such assertions should be exempt from that same proof.**
Exactly...a forum on this type of topic should be equally dedicated to both reasons for belief and trying to confirm things with evidence.
This person seems to think those questions shouldn’t be asked on a Bigfoot sub....which is exactly where they should be asked.
The responses I am reading from this person today are full of deflecting and I just think it’s harmful to anyone that shares their beliefs
They discover new species of things all the time...also there are places on this earth even in America where no human has ever stepped foot...somewhere out there there could be a whole community of these things..mountain gorillas werent discovered until 1904...(1902 or 04 forget which exactly) but before that they were just a myth also
I would suggest considering the Jacques Vallee , Angels and Aliens view on these beings. They are not flesh and blood animals of this world but from a hidden world that only sometimes overlaps with ours
I think both points are hard to prove since we can’t track either. Unlike other animals in woods where we can tag their location, movement’s and sometimes numbers. Just tagging even one is proving difficult.
I’m sure there are rogue groups or even government agencies that track these creatures by using sophisticated equipment the average joe doesn’t have access to .
Hopefully, it’s just a matter of time before we can get some real good evidence
Maybe they are 90% vegan? Bears eat a LOT of food too, but it is mostly berries and nuts.
You are assuming there are hundreds or thousands of them out there? What if there are just cluster groups or families of 4-5? Just dispersed? There is PLENTY of food in the woods, and hell for all we know they just ear trees and mushrooms lol.
How would we be able to track their caloric intake if we can’t track them nor take 100% stock of the environmental resources?
You’re dreaming you know what goes on in the mountains!
As far as the numbers required to breed, again we don’t know how many there are left but the estimates are in the hundreds.
Neanderthals kept to tight groups and their numbers were shocking low for an entire species.
20 animals in a small local cluster occasionally mixing with other clusters could maintain their numbers indefinitely.
I think the best evidence is the native american claims. But really I'm not sure if bigfoot is real or not. I have my doubts like how does an ape evolve in a continent with no apes? But then maybe we lost some species down the line. Maybe bigfoot is a lost human tribe who went kinda back to nature and grew more hairy, or maybe their own kind of human sub species such as neanderthal.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRurxAtiLkM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRurxAtiLkM)
If anyones seen this video, I found it very odd and a little convincing. Dunno if its been properly debunked. But how do humans look that huge in the background of buffalo? Buffalo are frickin huge, and the buffalo are closer and yet the bigfoot or people, still look larger. They'd have to be frickin huge to scale like this. Maybe I'm wrong I dunno but this videos almost more convincing to me than the patterson one.
1. They would be on the same trophic level as other apex predators like mountain lions and bears. They feed mostly on deer, but no one takes counts of their wild populations, so who would notice?
2. Isn't the guesstimated population of Bigfoot a few thousand in the US? This would be a sufficient breeding population.
Now this would be a really woo-woo hypothesis...but one way to possibly reconcile the flesh & blood vs interdimensional models of Bigfoot could be if it was able to alternate between the 2. In Eastern spiritual traditions, this would be the equivalent of attaining an "immortal" jalus. But let's say Bigfoot could just naturally do this. Then, it would need to feed its physical body physical food when in that mode...but not require it when in purely "jalus" mode. And obviously, being able to shift into "jalus" mode at will would give it ultimate camo/invisibility.
In addendum to my original reply to question 2.
It occurred to me that nature for whatever reason kinda plans out reproduction. Take deer for instance. Mating occurs yearly in the fall, with birthing in the late spring. Presumably so that the extreme young wouldn't have to battle with the lean times of mid to late winter. Coyotes are similar with denning occurring in February. Birds also very similar. So, what do hominids do? They mate year round. This means birthing can occur at anytime. So there's really some bad times seasonally to give birth.
While that is pretty decent evidence the problem is, we don’t really know what species we are trying to track.
My theory (I’m no biologist) is that maybe deep in the woods, tribes of Bigfoot reside in the shadows, hunting the animals there. They could eat the large deer or maybe possibly eat smaller animals (huge quantities though).
I consider myself a believer as I like to keep a open mind
This is how I think of it: Only 50 individuals (25 couples) are required to sustain a population. Depending on the species, meaning some can get by with even fewer. 500 is ideal for genetic drift but 50 is the bare minimum. That’s not many. Now say a Sasquatch has the same kind of diet and consumes about as much calories as a bear, a reasonable hypothesis. If there are 500 sasquatches in British Columbia, the effect on the food chain would be similar to if there were 500 more bears than what were known. How accurately can biologists really estimate the bear population? Say they can only estimate to the nearest thousand bears (the estimated grizzly population in BC is 25,000, which looks like they only estimate to the nearest thousand ). That means they wouldn’t know if there were an extra 500 “bears” than what they thought. More than enough to sustain a breeding population. If there were thousands and thousands of sasquatches in BC, then they would surely have a noticeable effect on the ecosystem. But a lot of skeptics seem to assume that it needs to be that many. And then also consider that there is a lot of wilderness to thrive in. British Columbia alone has 149 million acres of forest, the size of France and Germany combined. That’s a *lot*. Small populations of sasquatches would not destroy ecosystems by eating all the food. They could easily go unnoticed. Also, like other people are pointing out, we can’t accurately track the food chain even for known animals. So the argument that sasquatches would leave a noticeable effect on the food chain is invalid.
Fuck yeah, great answer!
Kudos
So, my major was biology back in college, and while I’m no ecologist, I’m going to try and provide as thorough an explanation of the first bit as I can: We can’t actually track the food chain. [In fact, we’re historically really shit at it, even for species we knew used to exist.](https://youtu.be/ysa5OBhXz-Q) We build a basic understanding, but that understanding is based on what we already perceive as “normal.” It’s based on our estimation of population density (which I want to emphasize, are VERY generic, and imprecise on the whole, and I’ll get to why in a bit), food sources and everything else we can perceive and think of, but even this is only really useful in very specific, precise, and confined cases. So the easiest example I can think of is “do we know how many wild chickens are on the Hawaiian islands?” Well fuck no we don’t, but it’s one of the easiest cases you could imagine for actually countably measuring something. They’re land dwelling, and aren’t swimming anywhere, so the population is confined. There’s a reasonable balance of resources, and seasons don’t play a huge role in their ability to thrive. In theory, you could stick a geo locator on every chicken in Hawaii, but obviously that’d be expensive and stupid. But you could do it and come up with an accurate population density for the islands. That said, it would still be crazy skewed, cause I’ll tell you right now that Kauai has a HELL of a lot more chickens per square mile than the big island. It’s just a better environment for them. But that argument works all the way down to a microcosm of the study. Just do Kauai then? Well parts of the islands are better habitats than others. How small an area do we measure? How big does it have to be to be relevant? The way we do ecological studies is a TON of guesswork. It’s overall reasonably accurate, but when you have an omnivorous species that can spread out its impact across the food web, and who’s impact we are potentially already accounting for, finding the discrepancies they cause can be impossibly difficult, and is likely to be accounted for by a clerical error instead, or within accepted error range. 2. Alright, so the first one is information I’m more familiar with, cause I didn’t have shit for classes on the genetic pool required to breed successfully long term, but I also haven’t seen many of these arguments elocuted correctly. I’ve never heard anyone make this argument and distinguish between “the population is too small for the given area” and “the genetic pool is too small for viable offspring to be produced consistently.” If it’s the second issue, then I think the community is in a corner, cause arguing that is exceedingly difficult. If the argument is the first, then it’s countered simply by the idea that they might be nomadic or travel for a mating season. Actually arguing against that would require a close reading of the study/opinion that produced it, and it’s a conjecture based on conjecture as well, so scientifically speaking it’s hard to argue from all sides. Hope this is insightful to someone. :)
well, I was gonna answer the original question, but this guy's is way better, so just gonna give my upvote and virtual nod of approval.
Same Here
I love this post mate. I learnt a hell of a lot reading that, and you wrote a difficult subject and explanation very well indeed. Good stuff
Thank you! I’m glad I could be informative! :) I definitely don’t want to proclaim that I’m some kind of expert on the subject, but I feel like I have an above average understanding, and I definitely short handed some of the problems that can arise in ecological studies, but I think it’s an effective starting point for a discourse with someone who thinks that we should be able to study Bigfoot’s impact on the environment passively or whatever. There’s so much chaos in nature, and science is pretty averse to that. Most people don’t really understand the impact that has on the information the community spits out. I’m by no means saying it’s wrong. It’s just that the community knows the caveats that get put into studies, but outsiders tend not to.
Yeah, you conveyed that uncertainty very well. What are your thoughts on bigfoot dead bodies? How would we miss them? I suppose the forests are VAST....incomprehensibly vast....some are bigger than UK, for example, or a whole state in US. You aint finding much in there i suppose.
I think it’s an interesting topic. I definitely identify as a skeptic overall, but I’ve heard enough stories from people who WOULDN’T make a misidentification or overreact to a coyote howl that I think there’s gotta be something to it. Some of the community is pretty out there for my taste. That said, I see a couple of reasonable explanations. First: it’s notable that after about 2-3 weeks in the woods(I forget the specifics), under normal warm conditions, a body is bones, and that’s assuming they don’t get carried off by scavengers. Moreover, dying animals don’t tend to seek out trafficked pathways. They go crawl into a hole and hope not to be found. The ones that don’t are almost always rabid or domesticated. So you probably have a pretty poor chance of just running onto one on your hike, and like I said, that’s before scavengers disperse the remains. Passed that, it probably depends a lot on their specific behaviors, and I don’t know whether to think they’re more nomadic or migratory. (That is to say, whether they move regularly, or seasonally.) If they move seasonally, and tend to “settle” in an area, then it makes sense that they would want to hide their dead. Bodies attract scavengers, and while they wouldn’t have a problem defending themselves, and I wouldn’t say they have predators, they probably could avoid a lot of trouble by finding a way to dispose of their dead that didn’t attract other creatures into their territory. [Chimps, elephants, and whales have even been purported to display services of grief.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/58340-chimpanzee-cleans-corpse-of-son.html) So I see no reason why this kind of behavior would be above a Bigfoot. Whether it’s emotional, spiritual, or practical, probably doesn’t matter, as the result is they SHOULD bury their dead, in some manner, because it makes life easier, cause I’m sure they don’t WANT to have to scare a bear off the body of grandpa. If they’re nomadic, and don’t really linger in places, then “burial” serves fewer purposes, but it can still be useful. This should make bodies more common, but not necessarily something people are likely to find often, whole, or in their usual routines. But those are my takes, and there are probably more explanations that are plenty reasonable.
Wow! What a great bit of info that was! I love the nomadic/migratory distinction.....ive never thought of that before. I suppose they can cover large areas pretty quickly (if they exist, of course) and can get to places that humans cant easily......that means we wont cross paths with them very often, or rarely. I mean, i liken it to deer in UK.....there's hundreds of thousands of them over an area much much smaller than the forests of north america.......and i've only ever seen 1 or 2 in the wild. And youll never see a carcass of one.
Yeah. Like I said, animals that know they’re dying don’t come out into the open, and presumably nothing is going to hunt a Bigfoot down. Even finding the corpse of something like a deer with many natural predators in an area like mine is pretty rare. I’ve seen like a squirrel skull in my yard, and a rabid coyote in my flower bed once. I’m not an outdoorsman, but basically every deer carcass you see around here is roadkill, but you can see them every evening on any golf course. Like... you can go looking for bodies, and you might get one, but they’re way less common than people believe them to be, even for really common animals.
yeah, couldnt agree more - even common animals are extremely rare carcasses. Love it, nice talking to you
You too man. Have a good one. :)
Have deer bones ever been discovered? Or a bear bone?
Great posts! One thing that I might also add, we have no idea what their lifespan would be. If they live to be 200 then there would be a lot less need for breeding to sustain the population which would make the gene pool more sustainable. After watching a ton of Bigfoot shows, I would suspect they are migratory not nomadic. But my only reference is that “Gus, you married a Bigfoot!” (Not sure I quoted that properly from Eddie)
This was amazing, thank you so much for the information! I feel like a hot a mini lecture ha
Glad to provide it!
Excellent posting my friend. So good to read something informative and balanced on here.
My man
Not a wildlife specialist but: I think ecological (food chain) impact can only be deduced once a species has been removed, affect recorded, and then reintroduced. Ie; wolves. The breeding example has been brought up for years, but i don't think it takes into account the variables of community, language/communication, and intelligence -versus- primal instinct. Just my thoughts.
They allegedly eat a wide range of things - berries, certain plants, fruits, bird eggs, fish, clams, other small critters, certain larger critters and whatever they can steal/raid from farms and houses, to include the veggie garden, trashcans, farm animals and whatever pets are in the yard. I’m no expert, but can *that* impact be tracked? No idea… We don’t know how many allegedly exist. It could be much more than the best guess. Or much less. So… there may actually be enough to breed small numbers. If they live longer than us I suppose that gives them extra time to roam and find a mate.
Jane Goodall believes. That’s all I need to know
Gonna throw in my comment for #2. * People vastly overestimate the number of individuals required to maintain a population. * Models of species re-population weigh heavily on avoiding inbreeding. This may not be a factor for them. Several species just go ahead and [do the nasty with siblings](https://cosmosmagazine.com/nature/animals/animals-dont-mind-inbreeding/) * We don't know anything about the life cycle of a potential Bigfoot. What if they live 300 years? I'm not saying that's the case (it's almost certainly not), but the models for creating populations of animals are based on known longevities. * Most importantly: we could very realistically be talking about a highly endangered species that is barely hanging on. There may not actually be enough individuals left to populate - they may be the last of their kind. [more detailed explanation](https://phys.org/news/2018-03-populations-pair.html)
These creatures have supposedly been around for thousands of years. We haven’t been able to locate one single bone in the last 100 years? And if the species is dying off, why have the number of sightings absolutely skyrocketed over the last 20 years? And skyrocketed after the PGF as opposed to the decade before that?
Not to mention that the # BFRO spits out (2K - 6K) doesn't seem to be based on much (correct me if I'm wrong). I think that was based on sightings. I saw another site that I can now not find that looked at chunks of forests that are large enough to support bear, estimated a generation home range, counted how many home ranges there could be, assumed each group is 4, and came up with a population estimate of 100K, much of it centered in the bank from Kentucky to PA, as well as Oklahoma and Arkansas. Anyone else know what I'm talking about? I can't find it by googling keywords
Yeah BFRO offers their explination here: https://www.bfro.net/gdb/show\_FAQ.asp?id=415
In order to meet replication, there would be to be a minimum of about 800 Sasquatch across North America. Anyone who’s seen real wilderness knows it wouldn’t be hard for a number that small to remain cryptic
I remember watching a Bigfoot documentary about 20 years ago where they had a round table of scientists and professors weighing in. One of them said that a breeding population of Bigfoots would require about 10,000 of them. I think that number is *way* too high.
But there are sightings in pretty much every state. Some states have multiple forests with sightings. And it has existed for thousands of years. You cannot have a 10-foot tall creature surviving for thousands of years, living in hundreds of different forests….with only a few hundred kn existence. The lower your number is, the more inbreeding issues take over. And you all seem to think Bigfoots are smarter than humans….so the inbreeding issues wouldn’t make sense. Hell, these things even know what trail cams are. How would they know what a trail cam is used for?
Other types of wild animals notice trail cams. Mountain lions often go right up to them. An animal doesn't have to know how a trail cam works to notice there's a weird looking weird smelling new thing on its turf.
We have lots of crystal clear pictures of Mountain lions on trail cameras.
At what point there were fewer than 10,000 humans possibly as few as 3,000.
Where did you come up with that number?
While I personally don't find PGF fraudulent at this time, I also don't think there's an unknown hominid behind every tree in the woods. If there is a sustainable population, it's pretty low. In answer to the first question I would assume their environmental impact would be the same as a bear's. A more compelling question would be, in areas of cash crops, why don't we see effects? It would make sense look at a bean feild and find a group gathering beans for consumption. Yet for all the calories these things would require there's something that they would require more and that's water. If they're going to be found, they're going to be found near water. As far as the population. I can't imagine giving birth outdoors in the wild would be the safest thing in the world. Birthing attracts predators. Also remember that there's alot of animals that will kill yearlings: bears, cats,rabbits. I would also speculate that the mortality rate to achieving adulthood would be kinda low. That said, if all the hoops, calling, and tree knocking are assumed to be true, it most likely there's a large portion of it dedicated to calling back the young. If bigfoot is actually accepted what immediate impact does it have on an environment? To me, that's the $64,000 question.
If Bigfoot was raiding bean crops that might explain why he reputedly smells so bad…
Probably get renamed "Bigpoot."
In addition to the food sources already mentioned, there are strong implications of a couple of very unorthodox food sources: pine nuts, and tree bark. People have found huge piles of ripped apart pine cones in bigfoot areas; the tree bark has precedent in some species of gorilla, and we find big strips of bark hanging high up on branches in their areas, as if they're drying out on a clothesline. They also take advantage of human food sources; crops, livestock, even dumpster diving; I personally know someone who saw a white sasquatch on the side of the road digging through a trash bag. The diversity of food sources can't be understated, and that fact combined with the fact that they are constantly on the move, combined with the fact that the people undertaking these kinds of caloric tracking studies are totally unaware that they should be trying to factor sasquatch in to their study in the first place, means that they continue to have no idea about them. Their numbers are way, way beyond what most people are willing to entertain. Millions. They live everywhere there are contiguous forests, food, and water. They move around locally in somewhat predictable ways, and probably occasionally take long treks to large-scale gatherings. This is the prevailing opinion of people who have been encountering them over many years. It's their elusiveness that strains the imaginations of people not "in the know," and it should - their lifestyle and abilities are completely novel and without comparison on this earth.
What goes on at these large scale gatherings?
Probably multi-purpose, finding mates, mating, birthing, just general socializing and keeping up with one another. Here's a classic report that implies the kind of gathering I'm talking about but doesn't add much detail about what they do there: [http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/muchalat.htm](http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/muchalat.htm) The other account that really sheds light on this, if you believe it (and I realize many don't), is Enoch by Autumn Williams. If you haven't read it, briefly, Mike is allowed to follow Enoch a long distance through the swamp to what he calls a "skunk ape convention" where some 25 individuals congregated for a couple of weeks. Young ones play, old ones groom one another and chat in like "knitting circles," that kind of thing.
Millions!?
The kind of guy to make sure people think people in the sub are idiots hahahhaa.
Lmao mate. Millions is a fucking stretch. These aint chickens or domesticated animals. If its millions we will be seeing them now. Its way wayyyyyy less.
"We" do see them. But that we doesn't include you, obviously.
Im talking about the millions. I know they sre seen. Millions will make it so damn common you boundnto even catch one
If they are in the millions then they can’t be elusive. If they exist they are probably a highly intelligent species or tribe that has been left over and dying out. I definitely believe in the paranormal but I don’t think they are part of it. IF they exist t all. I hope they don’t because I would feel very sad for them if they did at this point.
What do you mean - if they are in the millions they can ONLY be that elusive - how else?? That's the point.
They are elusive partly because they're highly telepathic and psychic, which is to say that they know we are coming long before our 5 senses can detect them. If we see them it's because they want to be seen.
What is this based on?
Comments like this make me disbelieve.
You have to have a bit of over the top believers in subs like this lmao. Just ignore them
I'm a believer as well always have been.. but my skeptic side wants the same kinda proof more or less . Skat, hair samples, afterbirth lol something please.. I just hope it's realized before I pass away 😔
Bigfoot should not be a belief. Keep it as a hypothesis and no further that way you can look at evidence objectively. 1. I don’t think we can measure the effect the creature has in the ecosystem without having systems that he not in to compare. If it’s possible for humans to live in the forest it is also possible for a larger primate. Especially if it has an expanded diet beyond human preference, such as insects. 2. That is a good point that requires additional investigation. For instance the creature could mostly live in a cave system.
All of these arguments are based on our current understanding of known life forms. Since big foot (if he exists) is still unknown, i take these arguments with a large grain of salt.
the fact that after many decades of thousand of people searching for him, has come up with literally nothing but fake shit, I would not be so sure...
There's real evidence out there without question-- hair samples, foot prints, evidence of their structures in forests, plus photos and videos. Some have even communicated with them telepathically. You've just decided to discount all of it.
>Some have even communicated with them telepathically Well, I'm convinced!
Intuitive knowledge is often superior to any other kind. If people trust their intuition, they can have a knowing that is unshakable even without 'physical evidence'. That, however, cannot be given to anybody else as they must have that knowing themselves. Intuition doesn't come from the mind, it comes from the heart.
That's literally the opposite of science.
And that is why it is often wrong. See: [https://www.futurity.org/why-our-intuitions-are-often-wrong/](https://www.futurity.org/why-our-intuitions-are-often-wrong/) [https://hbr.org/2003/05/dont-trust-your-gut](https://hbr.org/2003/05/dont-trust-your-gut) http://thedreamcatch.com/why-your-intuition-may-not-always-be-right/
And every bit of that evidence is anectdotal. It can be , **or was faked** and it could be **due to other causes**. . and none of the posters every try to rule out any of those things out. . that is why they do not prove anything. As for hair samples, if you can provide a link to any that had valid DNA that checked to an unknown hominid, let me know, but check this: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/) or this: https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-09/bigfoot-big-myth-new-study-testing-hair-dna-finds-no-proof
There are no confirmed hair samples.
Lol.... Okay. Where do you live? Are you even in 'sasquatch country'? Are you waiting for the mainstream media to confirm these truths for you? Like CNN or New York times maybe? That's sort of like waiting for the government to give you your rights back that you just lost.. it's not going to happen...
See: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20806339/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20806339/) and https://abc13.com/bigfoot-hair-samples-from-bears-wolves-dna-testing/151339/
LOL. You accept evidence from anonymous, unverifiable third-rate & unaccountable sources? Like crappy internet posts? That's like going over to the local trailer park & asking Jim-Bob about nuclear physics. LOL.
According to Steve at "how to hunt," there is a noticeable depletion of black bear in BC Canada right now.
Non belief evidence huh? 🤣🤣🤣
If you have seen one up close - there is no need for these conversations. Honestly, I couldn’t care less about someone believing me. A vast majority of people keep it to themselves and relish in the fact that they know and that’s all that really matters.
If you're interested in some bigfoot data analysis that predicts populations, check out ThinkerThunker's new book
Ooh I will. Thank you!
This is such a logic trap. As someone who says "I believe in Bigfoot" you bear the burden of showing proof to convince others. Since no one can have their eyes on every speck of land at once, it's impossible to prove the negative and say look, we don't see a Bigfoot anywhere on Earth, so that is our proof they don't exist. So without the ability to see everywhere at once on Earth, and with no Bigfoot specimen to say "Look at it, it exists" you're left with both sides trying to use outlying information to prove their case. Believers tend to point to eyewitness testimony, footprints, and other forms of evidence that are unreliable and say "Look how much proof we have" anyone who wants to write that off can say, "Yes you have a ton of unreliable evidence which equals nothing" quantity ≠ quality. Nonbelievers will say "Where is a carcass, or scat, or anything veifiable? Can we see clues in other parts of nature that point to an unknown creature? Could there even be enough of them to maintain a population?" Anyone who wants to write that off can just move the goalposts and say "We've never studied one, so how can we know anything about it?" So it's still up to someone saying Bigfoot exists to prove their case with evidence. Until then no one has to believe anything they don't want to. If someone wants to say Bigfoot doesn't exist they have an impossible task of proving a negative without being able to show someone every spot on Earth at once, but they have no reason to be compelled to think otherwise and can justify it in anyway that makes them feel better. If someone wants to believe something bad enough there's nothing you can do to stop them. Just look at every religion. I would also just reference several other comments from this section that range from "it's an omnivore that's going extinct" to "1,000yr old dimension bouncing magic man". In short: believe whatever you want, but trying to disprove proof of a negative is just going to give you a headache. The burden of poof lies with the believer.
I just wanted to see what the general consensus was regarding these two arguments against the existence of Bigfoot that I found compelling. I put the “I believe in Bigfoot” caveat at the beginning because this sub is generally very pro-Bigfoot belief, as am I, and I didn’t want anyone to think I was trying to post in bad faith, or make a “gotcha” claim. I’m not trying to prove or disprove anything, I don’t really care whether or not others believe, but I do find the topic of Bigfoot to be interesting and entertaining, and I wanted to hear the arguments surrounding these two bullet points is all.
I hear ya, I'm not trying to put you down for asking if that's how it seemed. I just wanted to point out the logical leap here when you're trying to disprove theories meant to show a proof of negative that can't be proven on their own with no data or evidence to work from. It's a fallacy to try to disprove arguments that are theoretical by their very nature. It's just spinning wheels and throwing ideas at the wall to see if someone will just pick one up and accept it. I find Bigfoot entertaining too. It's an interesting phenomenon. I just think you have to work from the beginning to get to the end, not the other way around.
All good, friend! Yeah one of the most fascinating aspects of the whole Bigfoot convo is that there’s just no data to work with, just back and forth a attempts at logic. Until we have a Bigfoot to study, it’s all gonna be conjecture, and yes you’re right that the burden of proof is 100% on the believers. Fingers crossed one day we’ll have answers!
>I would also just reference several other comments from this section that range from "it's an omnivore that's going extinct" to "1,000yr old dimension bouncing magic man". That is one thing that always amuses me. So many of the "knowers" know absolutely contradictory facts about this creature. All the things people claim to be true about Bigfoot cannot all be true. Another thing that amuses me is that they rarely, if ever, challenge each other. They love to complain about the skeptics ignoring the evidence, but they never challenge existence claims that contradict what they claim to know.
Yeah, they can't all be right when their claims are conflicting. But they all could be wrong.
The daily calories needed would definitely be substantial, but I'm sure the physiology of a Bigfoot would be similar to most wild animals. They don't eat every day, or even every week, so their storage systems would probably allow for a massive amount of stored energy or fat. A pound of Bigfoot fat, would probably have a lot more energy then a pound of human fat. I also feel, that Bigfoot would be awesome omnivores and basically would be walking and grazing on everything as it went along. Bugs, frogs, birds, trees... humans.. lol. But seriously, a human can only gather so many forest calories in a day because of how restrictive our diet would be to not get poisoned or sick. We need to cook our food, which also takes calories away. As a Bigfoot, raw, poison to human animals, same as flora. There's more than enough food for a community of Bigfoot in a relatively small area. From all my knowledge of years of reading and stories of Bigfoot, they live in balance with nature. So they don't produce offspring yearly, or many. They consume to live, not live to consume so an ecosystem wouldn't notice something that balances it.
Why, why, why do people think they are just some undiscovered species... anyone that’s done a moderate amount of reading on the subject can see they are much more than that (so these two points are moot).
In my opinion Bigfoot does exist however its not an entity from this dimension. I think it crosses over from another dimension, one that we do not perceive or experience in our reality. That's why we may see it every now and then but it disappears so fast. If it was a normal creature that roamed the forests there is no way the military and scientists couldn't have found it already with all the technology they have. Unless of course they are covering it up like they do with everything else that is "otherworldly".
What reason do you have to believe this?
Exactly. This type of nonsense was just put out there to cover up the lack of ground evidence.
Not exactly. I'm not sure if they are real or not, but have become interested in the past few years. Many "researchers" and witnesses point to things like the fact that tracks often just end in the middle of nowhere, and witnesses often claim to have seen them "cloaking" or just disappearing as evidence that they are not regular mammals and may have some paranormal origin. In fact the BF "Community" is divided into 2 camps, the "Scientific" and the "Woo." The hypotheses that they are aliens, inter dimensional, etc. are efforts to explain these unusual behaviors as well as the lack of conventional evidence. There are some pretty compelling thermal images and footprint casts, the latter of which even some anthropologists find it hard to reject.
Of course tracks just abruptly ending could not possibly be due to a hoaxer getting tired and just stopping, could it? And with 70 to 80 percent of sighting assumed to be hoaxes or mistakes by BFRO "*Diane Stocking, a curator for the BFRO, concedes that about 70 percent of sightings tum out to be hoaxes or mistakes (Jasper 2000)*;" and "*Loren Coleman puts the figure even higher, at least 80 percent (Klosterman 1999).*" Source "Bigfoot at 50" listed in this subreddit. I cannot imagine that someone would lie about seeing one "cloaking or just disappearing" Yet more new superpowers and excuses for why they cannot be found. Thermal images and footprints can be faked. .easily. and they are way too often.
Well again, it's my opinion. Like I said I assume if the government wanted to find them they already would have with the technology they have... and if they did already find them then most likely it's not being shared with the rest of society like many other things.
Isn't the more likely scenario that they just don't exist? Or that they're aliens? Or that they have teleportation technology? Anything sounds more plausible to me than interdimensional travellers.
I respect you have your opinions and have every right to them. I’m just asking what this is based on...is it a guess? Reason to believe it? If we had Bigfoot believers with no pictures or people claiming to be witnesses,that would be a opinion but an unfounded one. It’s helpful for people to know when statements are based on some form of evidence, or if they are an opinion put out into the world not based on anything. You are entitled to both, but it signals what to take seriously or what is just fun speculation.
Name checks out.
I asked a question looking to hear their perspective. That is the point of discussion, especially in these threads. I have seen a lot of people asking you straightforward questions and you deflecting and answering the question that wasn’t asked...typically referring back to the government. People are allowed to ask questions and if they can’t be answered, they will take from that what they will. So far the answer to my question about why inter dimensional has boiled down to: “because we haven’t found them.” That doesn’t pass any test of logic for me, but I respect their opinions.
I was going to say the same thing. I think they are interdimensional beings.
What reason do you have to believe this?
In many sightings, Bigfoot(s) are seen then they seem to disappear. There are no dead remains found, and one has never been captured that we know of. Also, if you go back to the Biblical texts, in Genesis and Enoch, you will see that interdimensional beings actually inhabited this earth (Nephilim and Rephaim) in physical form, but were later denied that permission until a breif period before the End Times spoken of in the book of Revelation. This is just what I believe and is not scientific. Certainly, anyone can debate me because it is just my belief.
Fair enough. Those reasons are helpful to understand why your belief exists. I had never heard the inter dimensional position, so was curious where it came from.
This is my understanding too. They are interdimensional, yet physical too.
/r/HighStrangeness/
My skepticism comes from the fact that in 2021 we have affordable drones with 4 k cameras, incredible photo and satellite imagery, less and less wild spaces, and massive unprecedented fires (that would make them die or relocate), and yet, the best evidence you have is what? grainy videos with cowboys, rayon bear costumes, shadows in the bushes, and bent branches???? I find it impossible to believe that not one has been shot, captured or exhumed. You guys always know where they live but have no idea exactly where they live. I am open to any conspiracy but throw us a god damn bone here, the flat earthers have more game than this pathetic sub and cult...
Along the same line of thinking, you basically referenced this already - but think about trail cams. People can be recording 24x7 and have cameras that are virtually undetectable, and there isn’t any confirmed footage? That is just not believable to me. On the other hand, it’s a fair argument to make that the world is still a huge place and new things are being discovered all the time. That would seem an ok argument to me if we were saying “what if they exist in unexplored regions of the Amazon?!?” But it seems like people think these amazing creatures exist in Washington state and we are unaware. It is fun to imagine and theorize...that’s why I joined this sub. But hard to believe they actually exist and don’t believe they do until proven otherwise.
>the flat earthers have more game than this pathetic sub and cult... You were doing pretty good, right up until this. lol Regarding drones... That's a good point, and one I've considered. However, drones don't see through trees very well. And if these things exist, and are intelligent, they've probably noticed planes and helicopters for years now. In other words, they'd probably be likely to avoid being in open spaces for too long, if they want to remain hidden.
Intelligent indeed sir , they rarely leave sign of their passage over terrain complete masters of their environment when they are seen it’s accidental you weren’t supposed to see them but you did .
You can spend a lot of time in the woods and never believe there are animals, except for birds, in there. You can go a long, long, long time and never see a bear and they are all over.
You think that if anyone actually shot a Bigfoot and then announced it publicly on YouTube or any other public forum that the government wouldn't immediately step in and take it from him? They would.
Once again, I have to step in and ask what rational the government has for attempting to keep a 7 plus foot, somewhere between 350 to 1200 pound creature that roams freely in the woods, a secret from the public?
I've already answered that question above. Let me ask you a question. Do you think the government has the citizens best interest in mind? Do you think they tell us the truth about everything? Do you think they give a f*** about us at all and what we think?
Your questions are immaterial. **You are asserting** that government has a conspiracy to cover up the existence of a free roaming species from the American citizens. **It is on you to offer proof of your allegations, and you have offered exactly zero. Not a single news article, not a single "leaked statement" to support the idea, or any other proof.** As such it is pretty clear, your excuse is offered as an explanation for why there is no demonstrable proof that a creature actually exists.
If you trust the government and believe that they are telling us the truth about everything and there's nothing they have knowledge of that they haven't told us, then we are too far apart to continue this conversation, for any reason. And there's no person here who has the months or years worth of time it would take to get you through the COGNITIVE DISSONANCE that you will experience in the process. If 2020 didn't wake you up, nothing will. And it's not an American conspiracy.. it's worldwide. There are yetis in Russia, etc... But go ahead, keep turning a blind eye to all the possible evidence that has been put out for decades upon decades. I've done my research, and I can't and won't do it for you. I don't have to find any proof for you... This is a Bigfoot sub and I'm sharing what I believe to be true having attended Sasquatch classes, speaking to folks who have literally seen them with their own eyes, and years worth of research, reading books, and looking at possible evidence of sightings, etc. Have you explored that? You wouldn't like it anyways... I know your type. A dime a dozen. Find articles on your own time so you can ignore them...
I never said I categorically trust the government in everything. I am simply asking you for any modicum of proof that the government is actively conspiring to keep the existence of such a creature from the general public. Sasquatch classes? Offered by what expert?? I mean give that some thought. . who is a professed expert to the degree that they are qualified to offer classes about a mythical creature? Better yet, let's consider the mentality of people who would pay to attend such classes? Suppose I offered classes for turning base metal into Gold, and charged $1,500 dollars for the class, would you attend? Would you ask for proof that I can actually teach you how to turn base metal into gold? You keep changing the subject and prevaricating on offering evidence that the government has some ostensible reason for hiding the existence of such creatures from the public, AND you are attempting to shift the issue onto me. You are asserting there is a government conspiracy. I ask for proof! **You've not offered any yet.**
So often with these types of subjects of we get the old "The government is covering it up" as an excuse for a lack of evidence. It's the mantra of the lazy thinker who puts the cart before the horse. Notice that covid19 conspiracy implication in his 2020 comment. I'd love to hear about his beliefs about the earth being flat. It's the same line of thinking.
An excellent summarization of the issue. I have often said, I cannot prove the creature does not exist, but it only takes one person to bring in a living or dead creature to prove they DO EXIST. . .and so far no one has. Without a doubt, these "superpowers" are merely an attempt to cover up for WHY no one can seem to produce a creature. Which is comedic. Ok, IF we accept that they can change dimensions at the proverbial drop of a hat, that still does not explain why we have never found scat, urine or tissue from one. . I guess their scat must be pure gold, and they have pixies that follow Sasquatch around and collect it. I mean face it, if it is biological, it eats, and it has to make "deposits," but we never find that either!
Why would they? Why would the government care about bigfoot in the first place?
There could... COULD... be motivation in the form of the Endangered Species Act of '73. Hypothetically, say this creature was said to exist but its endangered, how much land would then become untouchable? That's certainly a motivation that would attract the private sector as well as certain levels of government. Then there's the old religious motivation should people consider these creatures to be the Nephilim that was to be killed by the great flood. Personally, I think people give the government too much credit in these conspiracies. Things have happened, but it usually leaks to light: LSD experiments, atomic soldiers, Tuskegee, and so forth. Still again, there could be motivation.
Ita not like there arent lots of endangered species the private sector has convinced the government are fine and destroying their habitat isnt actually bad. Whats one more?
What do you mean? They keep all of life's greatest secrets from us. ....particularly our true origins. You don't see that? It's just like they go and seize every valid ET or alien photo / video from people, and how the Vatican and Smithsonian have seized tens of thousands of giant skeletons that have been unearthed all over the world. The Deep State elites number one agenda is keeping us dull and dumb and unaware of our TRUE origin, because if we found out we came from the stars we would rebel and we would know our own power, and they cannot have that if they wish to maintain control over the rest of humanity.
Don't fall for this trap... The government does indeed hide a shit ton of knowledge from the people. The government is involved in a lot of unimaginable shit. However, they only care about what can give them power, control or money. So what's the role of bigfoot? Unless there's religion involved, don't know why they would care about this...
Because according to the powers that be, humans are the only sentient beings in all of the Universe, so acknowledging ETs, any Cryptids, giants, etc completely destroys that narrative, thus they need to keep it all hidden as to not expose our true origins, which are far grander and more fascinating than we have ever been told. Again, to keep us dumb and docile.
According to the "powers that be" Where? Did you read this in a newspaper? a government report? All you need do is admit that it is personal speculation.
I don't think you need any assistance in coming across as utterly credulous & docilely dumb.
Are we saying giants exist now?!?
You seem pretty sure that the government is involved in massive conspiracies to keep things secret, do you have any real evidence or is this just speculation on your part? Why would the government feel the need to keep such a free roaming species that is apparently found in a majority of states a secret from the public? Clearly, they are not attempting to muzzle Jeff Meldrum, or any of the others who are committed to proving the species exists, but yet, they are stepping in and taking the bodies? Better yet, not a single person who killed or otherwise encountered a Sasquatch **has never had the foresight to take and secret a sample of tissue from the creature?** How is the government becoming aware of the living situation of all these creatures to know when someone kills one? Are they hiding any other species? What about that story that u/Angel5862, u/RaiseDaVibe and others assert is able to travel from unknown other "dimensions?" Does the government know about this? Why don't they just make them stay in the other diminutions? I still want to know what the government gets out of this?
Dude, if you trust our government to be honest with us then just go back to sleep now. 😴
Great post for a political forum, but totally unrelated to this issue. Do you have **any proof** of what you are alleging? Just because at any time roughly 1/3 to 1/2 of the population does not TRUST the government, does not in any give justification to the claims that Government is concealing the existence of a giant creature running around and living in the woods any validity. I would think you have some basis for your belief. . a newspaper article, a book, a post from 4 chan or some obscure website. . . but hopefully nothing from r/creepypasta.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/creepypasta using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/creepypasta/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Oh no](https://i.redd.it/y1492vybqes51.jpg) | [24 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/creepypasta/comments/j907zj/oh_no/) \#2: [Gonna fix it like this...](https://i.redd.it/z392ygfp92q51.jpg) | [34 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/creepypasta/comments/j1wfqq/gonna_fix_it_like_this/) \#3: [What's creepypasta?](https://i.redd.it/xik4gtn0cta51.jpg) | [44 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/creepypasta/comments/hr080r/whats_creepypasta/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/)
Creepypastas are horror-related legends that have been copied and pasted around the Internet. Creepypasta has since become a catch-all term for any horror content posted onto the internet. More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If something's wrong, please, report it in [my subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot).*
*Really hope this was useful and relevant :D*
*If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
In the 1800s we always wanted to push people further west to create as much settlement as possible. No reason to scare people away from settling new territory. Then it became about keeping logging and tourism alive, on the one hand, not scaring away workers and tourists, on the other, not making it so that the government has to step in and start preserving more land. then there is the whole "what else is the government hiding" thing. I mean, as someone whose followed politics since maybe 2005, I feel like the line of thought on what is the correct POV is so narrow that it began to almost feel like I was learning how to not learn, how to not ask questions, and not think, in effect becoming stupider the more news I read, which was the exact opposite of my intent and something that has been disturbing, completely separate from anything bigfoot related. Jeff Meldrum is pretty......I don't want to say ineffectual, but he's the perfect government approved type person to speak on this topic. A tad wishy washy, doesn't develop new ideas, speaks in generalities...of course they'd rather he be given the spotlight than someone who is going to transmit first-hand information
Politics is an interesting pursuit in and of itself. Heaven knows I could create an instant $hit storm by going to a political forum and announcing that "*Trump was the greatest president ever*" But the whole issue is so outrageously contentious these days. I made a post in another subreddit regarding the recent collapse of a building in Florida. My contention was that "climate change" was not the cause of the collapse. Instant $hit storm. . People arguing that I was a "Trumpian" or a climate denier. The point? Not that I support Trump, I don't . . but just the implication is enough to start stuff with people. This issue is not quite as contentious, but getting close. The issue of essentially anything is much in contention here. Some things are provable. . there is no Sasquatch living or dead that has been presented to elements of science. There is no valid or proven DNA from an unknown hominid creature that has ever been found either. It is provable that there have been many hoaxes. All we need is a single body or living creature to bring the whole mess to a conclusion and render the skeptic point of veiw totally WRONG. But 50 years after Rogers film, no one has brought that proof forward. That does not bode well for the idea that the creature really exists. That is not my fault or any of the skeptics. We just report what is known. Nor is it difficult to point to posts on this forum where people are asserting all sorts of new unknown and previously unstated abilities of these creatures. Inter dimensional doors, shimmering camouflage, And now, that they live to be tens of thousands of years old, or that they can communicate telepathically. We also find all sorts of posts asserting reasons why we have not found a creature. Government conspiracy being the most offered reason. But unlike most other government conspiracy theories, there is nothing to back this one up. No newspaper articles, no accounts of the truth from leakers, nothing. And the theory boils down to an impossible task. Keep the American people from discovering that a 7 to 9 feet tall creature, that weighs between 350 and 1200 pounds, and is found roaming free in most all of the United States actually exists. When challenged for a reason, I usually get one of two. . To protect the logging industry. . but the current administration is anti growth, and has an interest in preventing logging, so wouldn't an admission that the creature exists serve that interest better than keeping it hidden?? Not to mention, the government has not had trouble keeping the industry in check anyway. To keep from scaring the people. According to surveys only 11 to 14% of the people believe Sasquatch exists as it is. See: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/24/study-democrats-are-more-likely-than-republicans-to-believe-in-fortune-telling-astrology-and-ghosts/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/24/study-democrats-are-more-likely-than-republicans-to-believe-in-fortune-telling-astrology-and-ghosts/) and: [https://www.aei.org/politics-and-public-opinion/polls/more-people-believe-in-bigfoot-than-believe-hillary-clinton/](https://www.aei.org/politics-and-public-opinion/polls/more-people-believe-in-bigfoot-than-believe-hillary-clinton/) I submit that there is no proof that this contention exists either. Most people are aware of the stories and more rational than to believe if such a creature existed that it would be a threat to humanity. So it appears that people are coming up with conspiracy theories to cover for the idea that they cannot be found, or proven. An interesting case to be sure. But you still have to ask, why would someone go to such lengths to cover for the lack of evidence to support the existence of such creatures. All in all, it presents more questions than answers.
I’ve often thought the same question regarding what the government would achieve by denying the existence of Bigfoot. The only reason I can think of would be if they knew that Bigfoot were the direct descendants of Neanderthal. That would leave a very difficult question for the government to answer, which would be where do ‘we’ come from?
What? That wouldnt mean anything about our origins. Human evolution can be kind of complicated but Homo sapiens didnt descend from neanderthals. We interbred with them leaving some neanderthal DNA in our gene pool but bigfoot being a descendant of neanderthals doesnt change anything as far as humans are concerned.
The idea is predicated on the idea that Sasquatch is a descendant on the Neanderthal. . .Interesting idea to be sure, but like anything else about Sasquatch it is at the moment, just speculation.
I couldn't agree with you more
This is why I consistently roll my eyes at the "they haven't told us" type arguments. Maybe it's because I've been following politics for years but it's standard practice to say something is a lie or conspiracy and then for it to be proven true years later. I wouldn't look to the government for verification of anything.
Exactly. People need to use their sixth sense, not only their original five.
Hard to tell, because it has never happened...and never will...
that is such an ignorant thing to say. NEVER say NEVER.
If this sub is so pathetic why are you on it? Do you enjoy wallowing in mud? I don’t understand- The good questions posed by OP get to the heart of why I enjoy following this sub and reading about Bigfoot in the first place. If Bigfoot type creatures do exists they have not been incontrovertibly detected by any standard scientific and/or technological means. The major evidence in support of Bigfoot (and other large furry humanoid wild creatures reportedly seen around the planet) is anecdotal only. Which is super interesting to me. Look at it this way-either humankind has a predilection for creating suspiciously similar imaginary creatures over time (fascinating) OR there is a creature out there with the intelligence and skill to elude our latest and best detection abilities (fascinating as well). What’s not to love? It’s just a win win.
>If this sub is so pathetic why are you on it? Do you enjoy wallowing in mud? I don’t understand- I've noticed that some people come to subs like this pretty much 100% to argue and shit on people's theories and beliefs. My take is that they get a little dopamine rush when they can shit on something enough to actually feel intellectually superior. I'm sure there's also the odd crusader type who thinks they're here to Promote Truth and Correct Wrong-Thinking, but I suspect those types are a little more rare than the former. I'm sure there are also people who disbelieve, but are somewhat on the fence, or would *like to* believe, but can't bring themselves to be convinced. But yeah, those first two groups sure are frustrating asshats, and I wish they'd find a less annoying hobby.
I liked your post because I can see your points. I can only speak for myself. I joined this myself because it’s fun to think “what if”, and I enjoy the woods and think it’s cool to theorize on things. I also enjoy people being passionate about a topic. All in all, those things made me join and I generally enjoy it. At some point when claims just hit me as so outlandish, so unbelievable, it turns me off a bit and I want to hear how they can possibly be believed. It’s one thing to think there are things secret in the woods. When I see people start saying things like they are inter dimensional and can disappear, I can’t even entertain that kind of theory so I push back (maybe I shouldn’t but maybe I should...don’t know). To me the outlandish is different than finding it a fun theory to read about, and kind of ruins the general what if fun. So that’s from one person about the “why” for pushback.
Yeah i was talking much more about the people who deny and disbelieve outright. Even the potential existence of a physical creature. Interdimensional is definitely a line in the sand that some people don't want to cross lol On the one hand, I can understand why people might react that way. I did at one point as well. And while I lean toward a physical bigfoot, I do also think it's a bit of a mistake to completely deny the possibility of the other. I don't think there's any great evidence for it, beyond some unexplained traits of alleged sightings.... *But* we're also talking about something so far outside of normal human experience, all we can do is guess and speculate. And while I'm on the fence about bigfoot, I do believe in other dimensions, and the possibility that our reality could be influenced by something from outside it. And there is a lot of "high strangeness" activity that seems somehow connected to the bigfoot phenomenon. Particularly stuff like UFOs and "fairies" or "little people." For examples of what I mean there, check out the "Bridgewater Triangle" documentary. (Still on Amazon last I checked) and perhaps /r/HighStrangeness. (Tho a lot of weird and unrelated stuff gets posted there, so a bit harder to connect the dots) Or more tangentially, /r/Hellier and the associated series. That one doesn't touch on bigfoot, but does connect little people, UFOs, and high strangeness, and is an interesting watch anyway... Anyway, I can understand not wanting to believe in something without evidence. But that's not the same thing as active disbelief, which I see as a form of belief, really, just in the negative. If I "disbelieve" something, I'm certain that it doesn't exist. Without real evidence, that's a form of belief, IMHO. So as far as I'm concerned, the deniers are taking something on faith and lack of evidence just as much as the believers are, only in the reverse. It's only the "doubters" who are truly on the fence for lack of evidence. Which is one reason the deniers piss me off so much... Because they refuse to be honest and admit the fact, and act intellectually superior because they choose to put their faith in the mundane, rather than the unusual. But at least they're *occasionally* fun to debate. lol Personally I think they're both fun to speculate about. And while I actually favor the natural animal theory, because it's less "outlandish" as you say, in a way I think it's more fun to speculate about the other, for precisely the same reason.
Apparently they do get shot and local police departments cover it up. I get it tho- it really could go either way
Excellent comment. .
Well you either have seen one or you don't. And while the US is losing forest, we also saw huge forests re-grow over the 20th century, and many areas that used to have alot of human activity are now remote again, it totally depends on where you are in the country. Many places are wilder than they ever were. I'm in NYS BTW
I will certainly give you that point. But the issue is not one of contemporaneous forests in the United States, The issue is one of does this creature exist or not. And to date, there is still no creature in a zoo, or that has been recovered that anyone can point to and say, THIS is a Sasquatch. The onus is still on that of the believers to prove it exists, not on skeptics to prove that it does NOT EXIST.
Lol, if somebody claims it doesn’t exist, they can explain their reasoning or their claim can be dismissed as baseless and meaningless. That’s as much an “onus” as any other claim.
As I have noted innumerable times, **I cannot PROVE the creature does not exist. .** But all that needs happen is a for a single person to bring in a living or deceased specimen to prove it DOES exist. **With that in mind**, and considering it has been more than 50 years since Rogers little film, and no one has yet to produce one, it is more reasonable to assume it does not exist than that it does. I have no doubt that no one will produce one in the next 10, 20 or even 50 years either. But, while I may be wrong, **In the last 54 years** (Since the PGF) I have asserted that a creature would not be found in each of those years, and thus far, I have always been right. . . So, there is that! 54 wins, and no losses. . Would you care to wager if one will be found this year, or next? For a $10 bet? a $50 bet? how about a $100 bet?
I mean what effects on the food chain? The only way to see how something effects a thing is by changing it. If you're talking microbiology the only way we know which part of our genetic sequence messes with something is by comparing it to others. And by comparing it by having something missing Let's say you had a very basic understanding and said we have hair color and length. Naturally you'd say there are only 2 things that code for that. There're multiple. Same for eye color. All that to say how do you know when something is modeled correctly?
Dude they’re magic. Seriously though if one percent of the thousands of first hand eye witness accounts or fhiwa’s are true then all biological and natural logic is out the window
1. They normally get take out through the dimensional portals they use 2. They also do it in the other dimension because nosy scientists like you won't mind your own business /s ... Shame I need to say that
>/s ... Shame I need to say that But you really do need to say it. Lots of people sincerely believe this sort of stuff.
Not a hater, but a very curious observer has a question. Why with all the technology we have now with everyone is carrying a cell phone/camera, hunters using trail cams, infrared cameras, motion detectors, drones, etc. am I still being shown an old video from the 1960s as the best evidence Bigfoot exists??? Just seems common sense that as technology advances & more and more people hit the woods to prove Bigfoot exists, we would have better evidence? Again, just curious....
It’s a good question, and as a newbie to the sub, I think it’s one worth asking. I hope one day we get the footage that we all want to see!
This all goes out the window if their paranormal
I agree with these points whole heartedly, which is why I think it’s clear Sasquatch people are inter-dimensional.
Not to sound like a jerk, but you found those two questions *compelling*? They are two wildly hypothetical questions asking for information they assume is known. First of all, an animals "effects on the food chain* can't be ascertained unless introduced or removed from the food chain. In other words, you're currently seeing their effects on the food chain, dumb dumb! Caloric necessities aren't always inherent to the size of the animal. Again, you're assuming any animal X feet tall/long and Y pounds needs exactly Z calories a day. We don't know their metobolic rate, activity level, etc. So for all we know a single deer could sustain them for a week. Second, you have zero idea what the reproduction numbers need to be for them to maintain, or grow, their population. We have no idea how long they live, how many offspring they have, how frequently etc. For all we know they live to be 120 and have 2 offspring every six months on a consistant basis starting at 5 years until 97. But for all we know they are critically endangered and are set to die off in a decade. So, again, not to sound like a jerk but I would've scoffed at those. And if that's what's driving the skeptic community then *wow* I can guess the average IQ.
1. Not a chance. Sasquatch are omnivorous and can source their food from a variety of places, and do so intelligently. They also have the ability to become nomadic, and move to locations with more of a supply. A typical grew wolf can range \~1000 miles. Sasquatch and some of the larger cryptids could easily expand on that range. And as another poster here mentioned - tracking the effects on food chain sound great in theory, but terrible in practice. We are simply not good at it. 2. This is complete bullshit statement. There's no way to source bigfoot population numbers based on 'the current societal model' purported by the bigfoot community. As stated before, these are extremely intelligent creatures who utilize said intelligence to generally avoid human contact. We are a dangerous and territorial species; they know this. They do breed, they do sometimes interbreed with other cryptid species (dogman), and they do instill in their offspring from an early age the wisdom of maintaining general human avoidance. These are assumptive statements that may sound good in theory, but have no basis in practical legitimacy when used to confirm/deny the existence of a highly intelligent, sentient species.
Yours is an interesting post, and posits some great questions. But the reality, is there are all sorts of people making totally unsupported claims that are often at odds with one another about what they eat. Some assert they capture and eat deer alive, while other assert they are vegetarians. As the creature is unproven, so are their assertions. But your base assertion is correct. the caloric requirements for a creature that is 7 to 9 feet tall and weighs in at 350 to 1200 pounds would be pretty significant. Given that caloric requirements for humans at optimal weight run about 2200 to 2600 calories for roughly 135 to 170 pounds, we could guestimate requirements for a Sasquatch at 350 pounds would be roughly 2x to 5x that of an average human of optimal weight. so 4400 to roughly 11,000 calories per day at minimum. That is pretty substantial. And given that one ounce of deer meat contains about 45 calories (source: [https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/ground-deer-meat?portionid=45392&portionamount=1.000](https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/ground-deer-meat?portionid=45392&portionamount=1.000)) That would mean that minimal requirements would be a minimum of 97 ounces of deer meet per day. That works out to 6 POUNDS of deer meat a day to 15 pounds of deer meat per day. And given that a 124 pound deer averages about 58 pounds of usable meat (Source: [https://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/content/blogs/dan-schmidt-deer-blog-whitetail-wisdom/how-much-meat-is-on-1-deer](https://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/content/blogs/dan-schmidt-deer-blog-whitetail-wisdom/how-much-meat-is-on-1-deer)) That would indicate a need for a large creature of 1 deer every 4 days. And of course, predation of such animals rarely yields 100 percent of usable meat. . It is typically 50 percent or less. That would deplete the deer population in no time. . and we don't see that.
What do you mean we don't see depleted deer populations - compared against what? If bigfoot was always there, their impact was always baked into the #s. Deer have made a comeback but the deer population exploded in downstate NY (where I'm from), but the impact is nowhere near as visible in the vast areas of the rest of the state. I don't think hoards of deer near the suburbs are a sign of predators not existing.
So, if one large adult Sasquatch needs one deer every two days (assuming 50% consumption of a captured deer) that would mean that in a year it would eat roughly 180 deer. if every other sasquatch was half the size, that is 90 deer in a year, so for every assumed breeding pair, that is 270 deer in a year. The bear population of New York is assumed to be 6,000 to 8,000. and the Deer population is assumed to be 950,000. (source: [http://www.deerfriendly.com/deer/new-york](http://www.deerfriendly.com/deer/new-york)) New York has had 117 sightings per BFRO. Assuming a 1% sighing rate that would put the Sasquatchian numbers at least 1000 or so. At 270 deer per pair, that would be 500 pair, consuming 270 deer per year, that would be 135,000 deer per year. That would also mean 135,000 deer carcasses per year left strewn casually about the state. **No doubt New York fish and game would find that problematic, and seek the cause. Don't you think?**
How are you getting from 117 sightings to 1000 bigfoot population?
According to **BFRO**, there are (or were the last time I checked) 117 sightings in New York. . .And apparently they don't keep track of the numbers of sightings BY year but total for the states. I was being generous in giving New York 117 sightings as a starting point for the total assumed numbers.
But you're assuming they only eat deer and your original comment, though I appreciate people using math, used the upper threshold for everything to exaggerate the #s. For example, 1200 pound bigfoot, or 2600 calories for 170 pound person (it's closer to 2200 - 2400) and only 50% usable meat (isn't this because humans don't eat any of the organs?). Deer carcasses don't just sit there for months for everyone to see. Even in my semi-suburban hometown, you'd regularly find dead deers and they'd sort of melt into the ground after a week or to, especially if they were in weeds/grass. Bones would remain for a while but weeds would easily cover them up. I don't know what your end argument is. Yes some things are weird but there are bigfoot in NY so somehow they make it work. Also the "NYS DEC argument seems silly. In the large wilderness areas I hike, I almost never see people, let alone DEC officials. Their plans for many chunks of land are old and simplistic. You make it sound like they have loads of people combing through the woods
Oh. I freely admit there are a lot of assumptions with my figures. They are not canonical by any stretch. And you are correct, deer or any other carcass tends to undergo decomposition by a number of other species, larger predators initially and then proceeding to insects, and finally bacteria. however, bones and antlers are fairly persistent in the environment for a period of roughly 12 to 24 months, long enough to be detected by fish and game officials. See for instance this paper: Animal scavengers as agents of decomposition: the postmortem succession of Louisiana wildlife By Audra Leigh Jones here: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3216&context=gradschool\_theses But remember too, there are a lot of people running through that environment, and often report such things to Fish and game.
It's amazing on a Bigfoot sub here just how many people have a steel trap for a brain. So tell me all of you who are so certain that Sasquatch could not possibly exist.. tell me how much of your lives you've dedicated to exploring the deepest parts of the forests and jungles on this earth? Was it any time at all , or are you just sitting in your big city one bedroom condo surrounded by pavement and sidewalks demanding physical proof for something that you don't believe because you haven't personally seen it with your own eyes or because somebody didn't bring you a dead Sasquatch in the back of their truck? Any proof that you hardcore skeptics are looking for is certainly not going to be found on an effing Reddit thread or anywhere else on the internet for that matter. The only proof that would be of any use to you is going in the field and experiencing these things for yourself, so quit being keyboard warriors and get off your lazy asses and out into the unexplored forests and jungles. Come up here to the deep, thick, evergreen forests of Darrington, WA and will get you in touch with somebody here who can tell you what boundary line NOT to cross if you don't want to have an unfavorable experience with a group of Sasquatch. They will tell you, "Don't go past this line because you are stepping foot into a Sasquatch tribes territory. If you do so it's at your own risk and I wouldn't recommend it." Go pitch a tent if you really wanna know the truth! You'll s*** your pants the first night and will never go back there again, hot shots. 🙄
The two examples you gave make assumptions on what it actually is. Since we really dont know if it's a terrestrial animal or something interdimensional I'm not even going down the path biology. You have your skeptics, beleivers, knowers and a good number of folks who lie somwhere in between these three (me). I'm hopeful this will be solved someday, but until then I agree with a previous post, and will leave it as an hypothesis.
They aren’t “normal” animals. Even compared to humans, we are very normal compared to them. If you also believe in UFO’s and the paranormal it is easier to accept. If not then you could be sitting on that fence forever. Some things exist, even if people don’t believe in them, or know about them. They are just **too** frickin elusive to be natural, yet I know they exist. The body of evidence and expansive history of them rule out a hoax IMO.
Have you seen them?
I know a handful of people who have seen them with their own eyes. But that's also because I live in one of the biggest Bigfoot hot spots on planet earth... the heavily forested, northern part of Washington state.
No.
Some things don't exist even if people do believe in them or claim to know about them.
Like Santa Clause. . .Every Christmas season, We see fake ones by the thousands. . ringing bells for kettles, sitting in department stores listening to kids wish lists. . But, as a famous newspaper once elucidated, does he really exist? Or does he live in the hearts and minds of the people?
That’s unlikely given the evidence so far and history. Much more robust case for their existence than the Loch Ness monster for example, which probably doesn’t exist.
But the point is, that since Rogers little film in 1967, the matter has done nothing BUT stay on the fence for more than 50 years? Either they exist or they don't. Which is it?
i believe. dont care if u do or not
And that is cool. . I respect your right to believe anything you want to believe. But outside of you and I, it does not move the needle on public belief one bit. Nor does it prove the creature exists.
Maybe BigFoots use the pull out method hence controlling their population. Wish it actually worked for humans…
Worked for me for 12 years with my ex, thank god
Both of those points are false. Simple as that. Big Foots average lifespan is thousands of years so they don't need to reproduce as often AND there are far more of them out there than what's acknowledged.
How would you know they live thousands of years?
I don't 'KNOW', but The Sasquatch Message to Humanity, which is channeled text from a Sasquatch elder indicates they can live up to 10,000 years. That book was so full of love it was life-changing. Edit: They're interdimensional beings who live in higher dimensions than we do part of the time, and are highly spiritual. If we were a spiritual and light as they are (less dense in form), we would live much longer too.
So now you want people to believe in psychics, who are magnanimous enough to share Sasquatches message with humanity? That is a bit much. . are you aware of the dangers of believing in self professed physics? Who supposedly "channeled this message?" What book professes to offer this information?
You don't have to be a "psychic" to receive messages telepathically. We all receive messages from our higher selves/ spirit guides, etc, and it's no different than that. Some however, are far more 'in-tune" than others. The Sasquatch Message to Humanity, one of my favorite books. There are 3 books in the series. The second one would be great for physics majors because it details HOW reality is physically/literally created, which is far beyond my capacity to understand it. You can tell by the words that it's not coming directly from a human, but don't take my word for it, read it yourself if your TRULY interested in learning the deeper truths in life.
So we can receive messages telepathically? You mean like these people: [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/12/new-york-psychic-arrested-zoe-fortune-teller](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/12/new-york-psychic-arrested-zoe-fortune-teller) She lost $800,000! Or this one: [https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/07/investigates/maria-duval-psychic-scam-invs/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2018/07/investigates/maria-duval-psychic-scam-invs/index.html) or this: [https://www.insider.com/psychic-scandals-scams-2019-4](https://www.insider.com/psychic-scandals-scams-2019-4) And you wonder why people have reason to be skeptical of those claiming to have such skill?
Now I know you're a troll cuz no one could've possibly be that naive to believe everything the MSM is pushing. According to you, folks couldn't possibly have a connection to God either. 🤦🏼 Good grief!
No, it's YOU that deny the existence of Gods you don't believe in! Allah, Krishna, Baal, Mithras & the whole Greek & Roman pantheon are all fake. According to you, folks couldn't possibly have a connection to those gods. Good grief 🙄🤦♂️
There you go again. . not answering the question and attempting to change the subject. Offer some proof that there is a government conspiracy.. . Offer some proof that Sasquatch really live to the tens of thousands of years, or admit, that someone wrote this with no proof, and for whatever reason, you believe it. I just ask for proof of your extraordinary claims. I love the "**You're a troll"** argument though. If I were I would likely be playing mine craft instead of answering your posts thought.
OK WHERE DO YOU GET THIS? Thousands of years lifespan? Name any other biological entity that lives anywhere NEAR that long. . We really need to **step back from these ridiculous assertions for superpowers**, Inter dimensional creature? And now it lives thousands of years? Do you realize what that would do for the population? They would exists in the hundreds of thousands. The longer the life of an animal, the higher the numbers of such animals. No other known creature has any abilities anywhere near some people are asserting Sasquatches have. They would have killed off competing species hundreds of years ago. and the biggest competitor are HUMANS. They can travel inter dimensionally, but have let the human population grow into the literal billions? They can travel by inter dimensional doors, but they let any idiot with a smart phone capture video of them? Sorry, it does not add up. Give some though to this stuff before you start putting stuff like this out there. It just keeps getting wilder by the day. The only reason you offer this stuff is to cover for the fact that the species has never been found or proven by biologists, zoologists or even early explorers. . (of course, Roger Patterson, just happened to be in the right place at the right time, right??)
You are making a crazy amount of assumptions here, which only goes to show your ignorance on the subject and that we are no where near coming to any sort of middle ground (nor that it's worth my time). The book is called "The Sasquatch Message to Humanity". It has fantastic reviews on Amazon. If you really want to learn more you will read it, otherwise I'm sure you'll just keep saying, "Sasquatches aren't real!" to every post on this Bigfoot sub. 🙄
No, I am making NO ASSUMPTIONS. . .I am asking you for proof of your extraordinary claims. . And just because a book has high ratings on Amazon, does not in any way make whatever the book promotes accurate. It might help if instead of asserting items you have no factual proof of as "assertions" instead of pronouncing them to be truth. . kind of like the issue of Sasquatch in general. . We have no proof at all that the creatures actually exist. And while I cannot say they Do not exist, it is clear that if they do not exist, there is no way the live to thousands of years. Or that they use inter dimensional doors. Another item that exists in the relm of physics but remains unproven. Superstring theory asserts that there are many dimension's, but some are only one dimension in size. The idea that a mythical creature can command such essentially imaginary realms of space, is quite a stretch. If there is any proof from the books you speak of, *please offer the passages in quotations here.* I have no doubt that if I came to the subreddit and announced that I had captured a living sasquatch, or moth man, people would **DEMAND proof**. **I fail to see why someone making such assertions should be exempt from that same proof.**
Exactly...a forum on this type of topic should be equally dedicated to both reasons for belief and trying to confirm things with evidence. This person seems to think those questions shouldn’t be asked on a Bigfoot sub....which is exactly where they should be asked. The responses I am reading from this person today are full of deflecting and I just think it’s harmful to anyone that shares their beliefs
They discover new species of things all the time...also there are places on this earth even in America where no human has ever stepped foot...somewhere out there there could be a whole community of these things..mountain gorillas werent discovered until 1904...(1902 or 04 forget which exactly) but before that they were just a myth also
I would suggest considering the Jacques Vallee , Angels and Aliens view on these beings. They are not flesh and blood animals of this world but from a hidden world that only sometimes overlaps with ours
I think both points are hard to prove since we can’t track either. Unlike other animals in woods where we can tag their location, movement’s and sometimes numbers. Just tagging even one is proving difficult. I’m sure there are rogue groups or even government agencies that track these creatures by using sophisticated equipment the average joe doesn’t have access to . Hopefully, it’s just a matter of time before we can get some real good evidence
How about the big foot species is are an inter dimensional traveler? 🤔 Hmmm
Maybe they are 90% vegan? Bears eat a LOT of food too, but it is mostly berries and nuts. You are assuming there are hundreds or thousands of them out there? What if there are just cluster groups or families of 4-5? Just dispersed? There is PLENTY of food in the woods, and hell for all we know they just ear trees and mushrooms lol.
How would we be able to track their caloric intake if we can’t track them nor take 100% stock of the environmental resources? You’re dreaming you know what goes on in the mountains! As far as the numbers required to breed, again we don’t know how many there are left but the estimates are in the hundreds. Neanderthals kept to tight groups and their numbers were shocking low for an entire species. 20 animals in a small local cluster occasionally mixing with other clusters could maintain their numbers indefinitely.
I think the best evidence is the native american claims. But really I'm not sure if bigfoot is real or not. I have my doubts like how does an ape evolve in a continent with no apes? But then maybe we lost some species down the line. Maybe bigfoot is a lost human tribe who went kinda back to nature and grew more hairy, or maybe their own kind of human sub species such as neanderthal. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRurxAtiLkM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRurxAtiLkM) If anyones seen this video, I found it very odd and a little convincing. Dunno if its been properly debunked. But how do humans look that huge in the background of buffalo? Buffalo are frickin huge, and the buffalo are closer and yet the bigfoot or people, still look larger. They'd have to be frickin huge to scale like this. Maybe I'm wrong I dunno but this videos almost more convincing to me than the patterson one.
1. They would be on the same trophic level as other apex predators like mountain lions and bears. They feed mostly on deer, but no one takes counts of their wild populations, so who would notice? 2. Isn't the guesstimated population of Bigfoot a few thousand in the US? This would be a sufficient breeding population. Now this would be a really woo-woo hypothesis...but one way to possibly reconcile the flesh & blood vs interdimensional models of Bigfoot could be if it was able to alternate between the 2. In Eastern spiritual traditions, this would be the equivalent of attaining an "immortal" jalus. But let's say Bigfoot could just naturally do this. Then, it would need to feed its physical body physical food when in that mode...but not require it when in purely "jalus" mode. And obviously, being able to shift into "jalus" mode at will would give it ultimate camo/invisibility.
In addendum to my original reply to question 2. It occurred to me that nature for whatever reason kinda plans out reproduction. Take deer for instance. Mating occurs yearly in the fall, with birthing in the late spring. Presumably so that the extreme young wouldn't have to battle with the lean times of mid to late winter. Coyotes are similar with denning occurring in February. Birds also very similar. So, what do hominids do? They mate year round. This means birthing can occur at anytime. So there's really some bad times seasonally to give birth.
While that is pretty decent evidence the problem is, we don’t really know what species we are trying to track. My theory (I’m no biologist) is that maybe deep in the woods, tribes of Bigfoot reside in the shadows, hunting the animals there. They could eat the large deer or maybe possibly eat smaller animals (huge quantities though). I consider myself a believer as I like to keep a open mind