Does Sasquatch really exist?

[Gigantor]

I saw a documentary on the discovery channel about sasquatch. I always thought it was b.s., but apparently there are a bunch of anthropologists conviced it really exists.

They analyzed the Patterson film and said there's no way anybody could make a monkey suit that good, with swinging breasts and everything.

http://www.bfro.net/AVEVID/PHOTOS/FOOTAGE_STILLS/f352.jpg

There is a group called the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (http://www.bfro.net) which has a huge database of reported sightings, pictures, sound recording, etc. and conducts regular "expeditions" to try to find a sasquatch.

Frankly, I was really surprised at the amount of info available. I'm still not convinced, what do you guys think?

[Coach Williams]

I've seen Majors mom twice today....what a useless thread;)

[PleaseBlitz]

:munchout:

Bring on the fun!

[Major Harris]

I've seen Majors mom twice today....what a useless thread;)
take it to the cage. chump, you're not even a member. :laugh:

[MissU28]

ahhh the study of cryptozoology.... love it!

[Coach Williams]

take it to the cage. chump, you're not even a member. :laugh:

SOB , I'm a member ****it :silly:

he just won't edit that title!!!!!!!!!

[PleaseBlitz]

:munchout:

hahahaha, I knew this thread wouldnt disappoint.



Dont take that :pooh: KB!

[spjunkies]

I'd BBQ that thing if I found it.

[Gigantor]

I'd BBQ that thing if I found it.

hehehe... my thoughts exactly. I thought somebody would've put a couple of 30.06 rounds in it if it existed, but they claim a male grows to 7ft and weighs 800 pounds! and that many a hunter has pissed himself and didn't shoot, afraid he might miss and just get the thing mad at him...

[skinfan13]

too bad the guy admited it was a hoax. just like that black and white picture of nessie; guy admited that he and a friend photographed a toy dinosaur straped o a toy boat:)

[Major Harris]

SOB , I'm a member ****it :silly:

he just won't edit that title!!!!!!!!!
some hints aren't strong enough. ;)

[Gigantor]

too bad the guy admited it was a hoax. just like that black and white picture of nessie; guy admited that he and a friend photographed a toy dinosaur straped o a toy boat:)


That's what I thought, but it's not the guy who filmed it. A bunch of people have claimed to be "the man in the suit", but can't produce the suit...

from that website:

The Patterson footage has never been debunked as a hoax. No one has ever demonstrated how it was done. Neither the original "costume," nor a matching costume, has ever been presented by honest skeptics, nor by various imposters who claim to have worn the costume.

Large amounts of money have been spent trying to make a matching costume. The best Hollywood costume design talents have been brought to the task, but have never succeeded. The British Broadcasting Corporation spent the most money so far. They failed miserably. The side-by-side results are shown below.

Every attempt and failure to make a similar costume strengthens the case for authenticity of the Patterson footage. Comparing a man in a costume side by side with the Patterson creature in motion helps highlight the striking anatomical peculiarities.

http://www.bfro.net/REF/THEORIES/images/f352.jpghttp://www.bfro.net/REF/THEORIES/images/packham1.jpg

[MisterPinstripe]

I've seen Majors mom twice today....what a useless thread;)

:laugh::laugh: :notworthy

[Coach Williams]

some hints aren't strong enough. ;)

[chomerics]

Yes. . .sasquach does exist.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040510/040510_damon_vmed_5p.widec.jpg

Come on now, a sasquach thread without a picture of Johnny Damon in an hour??? Man, you guys are slipping :laugh:

[skinfan13]

the thing you have to remember about these type of documentaries is that they are geared more toward entertainment than information. i remeber on seperate occasions seeing two documentaries on discovery arguing convncingly oposite sides of the same issue; purely entertainment. also these types of documentaries are genrally entaerainingly biased, meanign they'll omit certaint facts to keep the entertainment value up. dont be so quick to believe everything on discovery for face value.


for intance discoveries show about paranormal huantings titles, "a huanting" is all made up, check online, its on discoveries website.

[Johnny Punani2]

I majored in anthropology and I'm pretty thoroughly convinced. Besides the fact we discover a new species some like twice day.

Do you work in a job related to your degree in any way? I knew a guy about 10 years ago who dropped over $100,000 on a Doctorate in Anthropology degree and was busing tables.

[Johnny Punani2]

I know Sasquatch exists. It's name is Arthur Mills...

[Gigantor]

I majored in anthropology and I'm pretty thoroughly convinced. Besides the fact we discover a new species something like twice day.

Apparently even Jane Goodall is a believer...

[skinfan13]

Apparently even Jane Goodall is a believer... then again i cant take someone who hangs out with apes 24/7 for fun seriously :silly: :laugh:

[dreamingwolf]

anyone who doesnt call it big foot needs a swift kick in the balls

[Om]

Assuming we can actually keep one thread on topic ... some ES background reading:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125998&highlight=bigfoot

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49675&highlight=bigfoot

[Gigantor]

the thing you have to remember about these type of documentaries is that they are geared more toward entertainment than information... dont be so quick to believe everything on discovery for face value.



oh, I agree and I'm not convinced. But I did look into it with other sources of information and found this BFRO (http://www.bfro.net) site which is pretty thorough, IMHO.

One thing that is very interesting to me is the old newspaper accounts from the late 1800s and early 1900s, before the movie was taken...

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/ReportImages/article_bc_1934_part1.gif

[dreamingwolf]

"he came face to face with a hairy giant, tall, muscular and nude."

they have clips like that on COPS in trailer parks all the time, whats the big deal.

[Gigantor]

Here is another from 1870!

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/ReportImages/newspaper_article_1800s_orestimba_ca.gif

[Johnny Punani2]

Thanks for the links Om.

Back to the topic...

I think the chances of bigfoot really existing are slim to none. The famous film clip showing bigfoot walking in a forest turned out to be a fake. We can deduct from the descriptions that Bigfoot (if real) is prob further back on the evolutionary scale in terms of human evolution. With that, his intelligence should be significantly less then a humans and shouldn't be that hard to find considering it's size.

Given the area where Bigfoot lives is frequented by thousands of people every year there should be a lot more sightings then reported.

[Gigantor]

I think the chances of bigfoot really existing are slim to none. The famous film clip showing bigfoot walking in a forest turned out to be a fake.

I respectfully disagree, but even if the film was faked, what do you make of the old newspaper stories?


We can deduct from the descriptions that Bigfoot (if real) is prob further back on the evolutionary scale in terms of human evolution. With that, his intelligence should be significantly less then a humans and shouldn't be that hard to find considering it's size.

Given the area where Bigfoot lives is frequented by thousands of people every year there should be a lot more sightings then reported.


The pacific northwest, british columbia and most of canada are huge expanses of undeveloped land. There are places there nobody visits, that's a fact. The argument that "it's too big to hide" is not a sound one IMO.

here (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=walla+walla,+washington&ll=49.59647,-118.322754&spn=6.837663,22.148438&t=k&om=1) is a link to google satellite picture of the pacific northwest, you'll see that there are millions of acres of uninhabited pristine land.

[Johnny Punani2]

Not really, there are thousands of miles of unexplored wilderness further up north. Not only that but they do have remains of the species gigantopithecus-- Which is eerily similar to big foot.

Moreover, the level of primate anatomy a person would have to know to even conceive of how it would walk in that video is rediculous.

I don't get whats so unbelievable-- The ceolocanth was thought to have been extinct and turned up on the shores of madagascar.

As for me using anthropology-- I don't really use it for anything. It does teach you a really interesting way to look at human behavior. I'm back in school working on my masters in architecture.

http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,1959,00.html

[Gigantor]

http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,1959,00.html

yeah, that article is from 1997 and has been debunked since. Chambers denied he made the suit, here (http://www.bigfootencounters.com/hoaxes/loren.htm) is his interview denying it.

[Barney B]

Not really, there are thousands of miles of unexplored wilderness further up north. Not only that but they do have remains of the species gigantopithecus-- Which is eerily similar to big foot.


True dat.

As far as the unexplored wilderness issue, it's possible for a large animal to hide within close proximity to humans:

Onza (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onza)


"The onza is a species of wild cat reputed to exist in Mesoamerica at the time of the Spanish conquistadors. The Aztecs named this animal cuitlamiztli in Nahuatl."

"Missionaries there described the onza as much more fierce than a mountain lion, and reported the animal attacked people more frequently. The last well-known records of the animal occur in 1757."


"The onza is a fairly large cat the size of a small mountain lion living in the northwestern corner of Mexico, in the states of Sinaloa and Sonora. The Onza isn't really a cryptid any longer, since one was shot and examined by scientists in 1986. But it's still an animal that remains of interest to cryptozoologists, because if the Onza remained hidden in a place that close to human eyes but was never found until this recently, what other creatures might there be, awaiting discovery?"

[Bonez3]

Yes, I know him and he does.

[Fergasun]

Are there any Indian paintings of Bigfoot?

I'm inclined to think Bigfoot is real... but I also believe there are dinosaurs (not big ones) that still exist.

[Fergasun]

Well... eventually Bigfoot is going to die and people 100 years from now won't believe he exists.

[dreamingwolf]

Well... eventually Bigfoot is going to die and people 100 years from now won't believe he exists.

The best thing about bigfoot is that if you dont have cash on you, he doesnt ever [female dog] about picking up the tab

[Johnny Punani2]

case closed eonline solved the mystery of bigfoot!

you betcha! :D

[LD0506]

I recommend some of y'all try and catch Penn and Teller's show "Bulls**t" on Showtime, they have one coming up on "cryptozoology". They do a fine job not so much with the myth debunking but pointing out just how gullible people are and how many perpetuate these things to make a buck (the essential element behind virtually all of them).

[codeorama]

Good one Chomerics...LOL../

The most compelling evidence IMO, for the existance of Bigfoot comes from Jimmy Chilcutt, a fingerprint expert. He started analizing the footprints to disprove them and found that some were actually proof that a different species exists. Some of the prints had dermal ridges that were different than human or ape dermal ridges.
I've seen a guy on the discovery channel say how easy it was to duplicate the dermal ridges and it was ridiculous. No one could go through all the trouble he went through to create many fake prints with dermal ridges, it took him like 30 plus minutes just to create one.
Also, many anthropologists have analyzed prints that showed injuries or bone abnormalities that were too detailed for hoaxers.

Obviously, many of the prints and pictures are hoaxes, but I think there is enough circumstantial scientific evidence that "something" is out there, what exactly it is, no one knows yet.

[Bang]

The thing about these mystery creatures, like Bigfoot or Nessie.. there have been a LOT of people who have seen things.. too many for it to be dismissed casually.
My question is for ChocolateCity

As an anthropologist, I'd like to hear your opinion on this.
As it is, the Pacific Northwest is a huge untracked wilderness, and I suppose it is possible for a creature, (or creatures, as it would have to be unless it was somehow un-natural and didn't have to reproduce, and could live as long as it has been around) to exist undiscovered.
But after so many years of sightings, and after so many people hunting for it, why have no remains ever been found?
It seems to me that we'd find something by now, a bone at least, even evidence of a live creature, droppings, feeding sites, etc.

I'd like to hear your take on that end of it.

~Bang

[Shallow1]

Ok, just because I used to love watchin "In Search Of" and "Aurthur C.CLarks Mysterious World" I will chime in on this thread.

Ive always thought it would be possible for unknow species to exist on this planet even with the population we have now, and the possibility of "Bigfoot" existing is intresting especially because its so widely reported and not US exclusive.

I don't know if Bigfoot exists, but I did find this account on a bigfoot research site eluded to in this thread, although I cannot verify the siting was real I can verify the location and all the other data in the account because its about 5 miles from my house and it happend on the 2/24/05 witch was my moms 65th birthday and I remeber the conditions of the night very well.

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=10766

So,.....if I can personally remember and verify the location discribed ( I know exactly where this was ) and all the conditions of this night (because it was an important day for my mom). I remeber the moonlight that night because it was very bright and this road would have been lit up very easily. That would incline me to believe "something" was witnessed...

[codeorama]

Good post Bang, I'd like to hear Chocolate City's opinion as well.

BTW, the famous Loch Ness picture has been proven to be a hoax, but no credible source has disproven the patterson/gimlin film.
Another point of interest in that film is that there is a buldging muscle in the right leg of the "creature" that many experts say looks like a hernia.

[Gigantor]

But after so many years of sightings, and after so many people hunting for it, why have no remains ever been found?
It seems to me that we'd find something by now, a bone at least, even evidence of a live creature, droppings, feeding sites, etc.

~Bang

I'm not chocolatecity and I'm sure he'll answer you also...

We don't find remains of bears either and that's because as soon as the animal dies, all the forest critters eat the carcass and disperse it about. Even bone is broken apart for the marrow, the rest won't last long in the acidic soil.

There is hair and droppings which has been collected and analyzed via DNA. The results didn't match any known animal.

[PleaseBlitz]

He did exist and he lived with my family for a few years back in the mid-80's. With hilarious results!

PleaseBlitz family photo archive:
http://www.classictvhits.com/shows/294.jpg

He doesnt exist anymore. He attacked the neighbors cat and we had to put him down. :(

[codeorama]

I'm not chocolatecity and I'm sure he'll answer you also...

We don't find remains of bears either and that's because as soon as the animal dies, all the forest critters eat the carcass and disperse it about. Even bone is broken apart for the marrow, the rest won't last long in the acidic soil.

There is hair and droppings which has been collected and analyzed via DNA. The results didn't match any known animal.

Beat me to it... Good post. :applause:

[Bang]

I'm not chocolatecity and I'm sure he'll answer you also...

We don't find remains of bears either and that's because as soon as the animal dies, all the forest critters eat the carcass and disperse it about. Even bone is broken apart for the marrow, the rest won't last long in the acidic soil.

There is hair and droppings which has been collected and analyzed via DNA. The results didn't match any known animal.


Makes plenty of sense to me, thanks!

~Bang

[Kilmer17]

Of course they exist.

We feed them spotted owl and monk seal when we visit them.

Remlik and the Illuminati.

[Barney B]

Of course they exist.

We feed them spotted owl and monk seal when we visit them.

Remlik and the Illuminati.

If only you would use a smilie, I could tell if you're kidding or not. :)

[Kilmer17]

we get shot if we smile.

[Predicto]

No. Sorry, but it's a lovely myth but it is false.

There are no unexplored wilds of North America anymore. We have explored everything, satellite photos, etc. For this species to exist with sufficient genetic diversity, there would have to be a lot of them. They could not possibly have hidden this long, with no evidence of dwellings, bodies, bones, tools, anything.

It is romantic to think that there always is unexplored wilderness and new mysteries to uncover, but in this case, it is false hope. This is not like discovering a new species of fish or frog or insect - like it or not, humanoids make a huge impact on their surroundings and we would know.

[codeorama]

No. Sorry, but it's a lovely myth but it is false.

There are no unexplored wilds of North America anymore. We have explored everything, satellite photos, etc. For this species to exist with sufficient genetic diversity, there would have to be a lot of them. They could not possibly have hidden this long, with no evidence of dwellings, bodies, bones, tools, anything.

It is romantic to think that there always is unexplored wilderness and new mysteries to uncover, but in this case, it is false hope. This is not like discovering a new species of fish or frog or insect - like it or not, humanoids make a huge impact on their surroundings and we would know.

You realize that planes have crashed in the pacific northwest that haven't been found, right?

I guess not.... :doh:

[Stophovr6]

No. Sorry, but it's a lovely myth but it is false.

There are no unexplored wilds of North America anymore. We have explored everything, satellite photos, etc. For this species to exist with sufficient genetic diversity, there would have to be a lot of them. They could not possibly have hidden this long, with no evidence of dwellings, bodies, bones, tools, anything.

It is romantic to think that there always is unexplored wilderness and new mysteries to uncover, but in this case, it is false hope. This is not like discovering a new species of fish or frog or insect - like it or not, humanoids make a huge impact on their surroundings and we would know.

I have to agree with Pedicto here and point out something that I think is important.

Tools.

Bigfoot would be an excellent candidate for an animal that uses tools. So remains left by one of these creatures should include these tools.

As much as you guys would like to believe the Upper Northwest is completely unexplored, it is widely explored. Throughout Canada and Alaska pond skippers are constantly flying around. There are hunter, trackers, hikers and general explorers are on the ground as well. How is it possible these low flying planes, which constantly spot bears, elk, etc. never see one of these creatures.

Getting back to remains, someone said something about a bear dying and then it's body completely disapeering. This makes sense, but there are still clues to point towards a bears existence in a certain area. Bears poo too you know? Do big foots have outhouses? There must be other clues left behind, like territorial markings etc.

Getting back to the famous film footage, people keep bringing up the fact that the breasts sway too much to be fake.... Well then maybe thats a woman in that costume. Either way, I don't think it would be too hard to fake. That one picture of the british attempt to recreate the costume looked like a half-assed effort to me.


As to the point about the coelacanth, that fish was rediscovered in 1938. Lets think about underwater exploration and documentation up until 1938, and the exploration and documentation of land in the upper northwest until this very day. The comparison is weak.


I'm a sceptic until I see one in a zoo.

[Predicto]

You realize that planes have crashed in the pacific northwest that haven't been found, right?

I guess not.... :doh:


Of course I realize this. I'm sure there are lots of individual ravines scattered about where people have not been. Sorry, but that is not enough space to sustain an ENTIRE RACE of sentient humanoids. Unless they hide in those individual scattered ravines, and are sure not to eat, travel to each other, make shelters or tools, or die. They must be magic!

[Stophovr6]

You realize that planes have crashed in the pacific northwest that haven't been found, right?

I guess not.... :doh:

Looking for one plane in a vast area and calling off the search after 2 weeks because you can't find it is one thing.

But not having any evidence of a species that, like he said would have an impact, are two different things.

I don't think anyone can argue that the Northwest isn't a huge expanse of land, but these comparisons still don't explain how a species such as a giant ape, could go on undocumented.

[codeorama]

Of course I realize this. I'm sure there are lots of individual ravines scattered about where people have not been. Sorry, but that is not enough space to sustain an ENTIRE RACE of sentient humanoids. Unless they hide in those individual scattered ravines, and are sure not to eat, travel to each other, make shelters or tools, or die. They must be magic!

People don't find dead bears. I would assume that a creature as intelligent as a bigfoot is supposed to be would be smart enought to stay hidden in a vast wilderness like the PNW. Lots of stuff to eat.

Again, there is evidence, hairs are found all the time that don't match any animal known, footprints with dermal ridges that don't match man or ape, droppings, etc...
My point in quoting you was to point out that there is LOTS of unexplored terrain, dense forests etc...

[Lloyds' Mongolian Beef]

People don't find dead bears. I would assume that a creature as intelligent as a bigfoot is supposed to be would be smart enought to stay hidden in a vast wilderness like the PNW. Lots of stuff to eat.

Again, there is evidence, hairs are found all the time that don't match any animal known, footprints with dermal ridges that don't match man or ape, droppings, etc...
My point in quoting you was to point out that there is LOTS of unexplored terrain, dense forests etc...
Let me guess...you believe in crop circles and the Loch Ness monster (Nessie) too :doh: The people who made the obviously fake video that has become so popular have admitted it was fake. Still, people use it as evidence. Every plaster cast of "footprints" have been concluded to be those of animals or fake. Hair samples unknown. NO! They sent the most credible "yetti" scalp to a lab where it was discovered to be that of a yak. I don't want to ruin your world, but Santa Claus is fake too.

[codeorama]

Let me guess...you believe in crop circles and the Loch Ness monster (Nessie) too :doh: The people who made the obviously fake video that has become so popular have admitted it was fake. Still, people use it as evidence. Every plaster cast of "footprints" have been concluded to be those of animals or fake. Hair samples unknown. NO! They sent the most credible "yetti" scalp to a lab where it was discovered to be that of a yak. I don't want to ruin your world, but Santa Claus is fake too.

Read the entire thread doofus...

[Lloyds' Mongolian Beef]

Read the entire thread doofus...
I've read your posts, and my reaction stands... :doh:

[Barney B]

For this species to exist with sufficient genetic diversity, there would have to be a lot of them.

This statement is true, but the belief that genetic diversity is always essential to survival is a false assumption. Cheetahs have survived for thousands of years with virtually no genetic diversity:

Cheetah Conservation Fund (http://www.cheetah.org/?html=aboutcheetah-03)


"Evolution eliminates traits in organisms that are least suited for survival. Some of the decline in the cheetah's genetic diversity is accounted for by its specialization through natural selection. The decrease in genetic diversity resulting from natural selection has benefited the species' survival as it has made the cheetah better adapted to its environment. However, the effects of this occurrence are small when compared to the effects of the inbreeding that occurred 10,000 years ago from a population bottleneck."

Note that if the environment changes, the cheetahs are probably doomed, but that's beside the point, since the environment in the Pacific Northwest, for instance, hasn't changed so much in the mountainous, wooded areas.

Having said all this, and having pointed out the example of the onza, my point is that it's not inconceivable that these Bigfoot things are out there, waiting to scoop up your children for a nice, crunchy snack. :)

[codeorama]

I've read your posts, and my reaction stands... :doh:

Ok then...
It's been pointed out that the Patterson/Gimlin film has NOT be refuted. Sure a few people have claimed they were in the suit etc..., but they have no proof, no suit, no witnesses. Gimlin and Patterson never hesitated from their story.

I pointed out that the Loch Ness photo HAS proven to be a fake and for the record, I don't think it was ever true.

Chocolate City is an anthropologist and he pointed out new species are found every day.

Contribute to the thread, point out why the hairs can't be identified, point out why the dermal ridges can't be identified rather than just posting stereotypical BS.

[Stophovr6]

Ok then...
It's been pointed out that the Patterson/Gimlin film has NOT be refuted. Sure a few people have claimed they were in the suit etc..., but they have no proof, no suit, no witnesses. Gimlin and Patterson never hesitated from their story.

I pointed out that the Loch Ness photo HAS proven to be a fake and for the record, I don't think it was ever true.

Chocolate City is an anthropologist and he pointed out new species are found every day.

Contribute to the thread, point out why the hairs can't be identified, point out why the dermal ridges can't be identified rather than just posting stereotypical BS.

About the new species everyday thing. I think those are usually smaller animals such as insects etc. You rarely hear of a new species of large mammal being found although I will concede that it happens. My point about this is that people have searched extensively for this animal and it's existense is far from being proven.

[codeorama]

About the new species everyday thing. I think those are usually smaller animals such as insects etc. You rarely hear of a new species of large mammal being found although I will concede that it happens. My point about this is that people have searched extensively for this animal and it's existense is far from being proven.

You haven't seen me post that it is proven. I'm only saying that IMO, it's possible. I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to look for it. That's all.

[Predicto]

People don't find dead bears. I would assume that a creature as intelligent as a bigfoot is supposed to be would be smart enought to stay hidden in a vast wilderness like the PNW. Lots of stuff to eat.

Again, there is evidence, hairs are found all the time that don't match any animal known, footprints with dermal ridges that don't match man or ape, droppings, etc...
My point in quoting you was to point out that there is LOTS of unexplored terrain, dense forests etc...


I'm sorry, but people find dead bears all the time. And later they find dead bear bones. And if they made tools or dwellings we'd find those too, and a hell of a lot faster.

And no, there is very little truly unexplored terrain. They have mapped the entire planet with satellites. Hunters and loggers and oilmen and prospectors have gone all over the Pacific Northwest. I'm not saying they have been in every single grove of trees, but a single grove of trees (or a single ravine or even a single mountain) is not going to hide an entire humanoid species.

[Zguy28]

I remember reading a book when I was a kid about bigfoot that I got at a book fair. I might still have it. It scared me pretty bad, they were all supposed true stories, at least eyewitness stories. I remember some of the stories took place on mount st. Helens. Maybe thats why they're not around much anymore.

[redskins4life234]

Well there is this kid in out school we call Sasquatch, so Yes, he does exist.

[Bang]

About the new species everyday thing. I think those are usually smaller animals such as insects etc. You rarely hear of a new species of large mammal being found although I will concede that it happens. My point about this is that people have searched extensively for this animal and it's existense is far from being proven.

As you concede, it does happen, and recently, too. This article comes with photos.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4501152.stm

'New mammal' seen in Borneo woods
By Richard Black
Environment Correspondent, BBC News website



You don't find new mammals that often, and to do so must be extraordinary

In the dense central forests of Borneo, a conservation group has found what appears to be a new species of mammal.

WWF caught two images of the animal, which is bigger than a domestic cat, dark red, and has a long muscular tail.

Local people, the WWF says, had not seen the species before, and researchers say it looks to be new.

The WWF says there is an urgent need to conserve forests in south-east Asia which are under pressure from logging and the palm oil trade.

The creature, believed to be carnivorous, was spotted in the Kayan Mentarang National Park, which lies in Indonesian territory on Borneo.

The team which discovered it, led by biologist Stephan Wulffraat, is publishing full details in a new book on Borneo and its wildlife.

"You don't find new mammals that often, and to do so must be extraordinary," said Callum Rankine, head of the species programme at WWF-UK.

"We've got camera traps there, which are passive devices relying on infra-red beams across forest paths," he told the BBC News website.

"Lots of animals come past - it's much easier than pushing through the forest itself - and when an animal cuts the beam, two cameras catch images from the front and back."

Click the link for more.


It looks like a pretty good sized mammal no one found before this year.
And it looks like it lives in an area about the size of Long Island as opposed to the vastness of the northwest.

Whether the bigfoot is real or not is still up for debate, but this proves that there are things out there bigger than a teaspoon that we have yet to find.

~Bang

[Leonard Washington]

nevermind.

[Who Del]

I have a pet Sasquatch named Derrick.

[Stophovr6]

About what Bang posted



^ To be fair that thing is hardly a large mammal. It's slightly larger than a cat and looks like it could easily live in the canopy(up in the trees) of the dense jungle. I have a hard time imagining Big foot chillin in a spruce. That creature is also clearly nocturnal which again gives it an advantage at not being spotted.

Furthermore, the scientists weren't looking for anything in particular. They weren't in search of that animal, they pretty much stumbled upon it.

Wouldn't it make sense then, that the many scientists that have been activily searching a specific animal could come up with better stuff than shotty video work, random hair samples and footprints. If a trained tracker were brought in and shown anyone of those supposed footprints, shouldn't he have been able to track this animal?

I'm guess what I'm trying to suggest is that all the "experts" never quite go far enough in their search for this creature, because deep down they know it not to be true, but keeping the legend alive sure helps their cause. And since cathching something that doesn't exist is out of the question, the fame they have now is all they can get.:2cents:

That's my opinion.

[Predicto]

It looks like a pretty good sized mammal no one found before this year.
And it looks like it lives in an area about the size of Long Island as opposed to the vastness of the northwest.


~Bang

Ummm, Borneo is the third largest island in the world, with about 287,000 square miles of thick jungle. Long Island has about 1000 square miles.

Borneo and its sister island New Guinea may be the least explored places on the planet. The Pacific NW is forested, but it is nothing like that. And still you are not talking about a humanoid species, which would leave evidence of its presence and which people have been actively searching for for decades.

Sorry, it ain't there.

[Kilmer17]

I have a pet Sasquatch named Derrick.


Is 'e an 'alibut?

[Stophovr6]

I have a pet Sasquatch named Derrick.

:shhh:Shh, I gave that one to you as a secret gift.
Of course we keep them up here in the NW as pets but we don't tell the "regular" folk about them.


























oh crap, this isn't a pm... :paranoid:

[Buford]

pffft, I've got one at home. His name is Lenny Leonard.

[Stophovr6]

This thread got Sasquatch by Tenacious D stuck in my head.

Link to the episode featuring Sasquatch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7_b1OMwU2A&search=tenacious%20d%20sasquatch

Link to song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig_2k9aDhpE&search=tenacious%20d%20sasquatch

[Bang]

Ummm, Borneo is the third largest island in the world, with about 287,000 square miles of thick jungle. Long Island has about 1000 square miles.

Borneo and its sister island New Guinea may be the least explored places on the planet. The Pacific NW is forested, but it is nothing like that. And still you are not talking about a humanoid species, which would leave evidence of its presence and which people have been actively searching for for decades.

Sorry, it ain't there.


I'm looking at the sliver of land the had highlighted.

And the only reason i tossed that up is because while not a HUGE mammal, it's not an insect or a tiny tree frog either.

~Bang

[Painkiller]

Yes. . .sasquach does exist.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040510/040510_damon_vmed_5p.widec.jpg

Come on now, a sasquach thread without a picture of Johnny Damon in an hour??? Man, you guys are slipping :laugh:


"Hey I'm really sorry, we thought you guys didn't exist anymore..."

"Yeah, well next time how about doing a little research mkay?!"

"You can save up to 100 dollars by switching to Geico"

:laugh:

[Mickalino]

Wasn't it Sasquatch that inspired Laser Hair Removal ?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v464/beachmick/Spiff.jpg

[Jaron]

They analyzed the Patterson film and said there's no way anybody could make a monkey suit that good, with swinging breasts and everything.

Swinging breasts.......


Has anyone asked Bill Parcells if he owns a Sasquatch suit???

[Pete]

I remember seing a show some time ago that had compared the so called recorded screem of a bigfoot, to a Gibon. They did all the state of the art tests and the two were extremely similar.

The one that threw me off was the movie, "The legend of Boggy creek" which came out in the early 70's. It was based on stories from residents of Fouke Arkansas and their encounters with big foot. In that movie, the creatures feet had three toes. Like a giant sloth. I was about 12 when I saw the movie, and it scared the livin dodo out of me :laugh:

The thing I always tend to remember is, most legends are based is some sort of fact somewhere along the line. With the ammount of reported sightings over a great deal of time, in many locations around the world, there must be something to it IMO.

I also heard a story on the radio not to long ago about Loch Ness. They had an interview with an old guy who's dad on his death bed told him how he ran a circus way back when and let an elephant swim in Loch Ness. Some folks passing by a distance away spotted three humps moving through the water, and a head raise up at one point. The trunk was the first hump, the top of it's head the second, and it's back the third. When it brought it's trunk up to get more air, it looked to be a serpants head comming out of the water. Instant sea monster. The guy who ran the circus took atvantage of this, and promoted it. Every other sighting was said to be a comlete hoax.

Don't know if the story is true................

[KAOSkins]

I'd have to say I'm sasquatchnostic. It's never smart to flat out say things don't exist that are within the realm of possibility. That being said, it does seem a little far fetched that with all the people around the northwest no one has ever found a dead one.

[Jofizz]

I'd have to say I'm sasquatchnostic. It's never smart to flat out say things don't exist that are within the realm of possibility. That being said, it does seem a little far fetched that with all the people around the northwest no one has ever found a dead one.

I don't know the possibility of this, but say these creatures lived deep down in caves under the ground and they only come out to gather food..Or maybe they even bury each other when another dies..?

It's really hard to determine what the truth is in this ancient mystery. Like pete said, there has got to be some truth about this somewhere down the line. It's been going on for thousands of years on every continent.

[KAOSkins]

I don't know the possibility of this, but say these creatures lived deep down in caves under the ground and they only come out to gather food..Or maybe they even bury each other when another dies..?

It's really hard to determine what the truth is in this ancient mystery. Like pete said, there has got to be some truth about this somewhere down the line. It's been going on for thousands of years on every continent.

Like an elephant graveyard kinda. I suppose that is possible. But still, it seems like something would show up sometime. The statistics of not finding one with all the people around are a sort of counter to the statistics of all the rumors IMO.

[Mickalino]

I don't know the possibility of this, but say these creatures lived deep down in caves under the ground and they only come out to gather food..Or maybe they even bury each other when another dies..?

It's really hard to determine what the truth is in this ancient mystery. Like pete said, there has got to be some truth about this somewhere down the line. It's been going on for thousands of years on every continent.

Or maybe they're cannibalistic and eat each other's corpses, hence the fact we never find their remains

[Pete]

I'd have to say I'm sasquatchnostic. It's never smart to flat out say things don't exist that are within the realm of possibility. That being said, it does seem a little far fetched that with all the people around the northwest no one has ever found a dead one.

How about the South West? Smokey and the Fouke monster (http://www.smokeyandthefoukemonster.com/)

To close to the mirror (http://www.tooclosetothemirror.com/)

They say they have pic of the bones of one of the creatures. Of course, I'm not going to buy the book.

[Jofizz]

Or maybe they're cannibalistic and eat each other's corpses, hence the fact we never find their remains

That's a good possibilty. There is still a chance of finding bones, but if they live in undiscovered caves, theres your reason.


Like an elephant graveyard kinda. I suppose that is possible. But still, it seems like something would show up sometime. The statistics of not finding one with all the people around are a sort of counter to the statistics of all the rumors IMO.

That's kind of what I had in mind there (elephant graveyard) And yes, I do agree with your point; all of this talk for so long and nobody has any evidence to convince everyone. Yes, there are numerous videos and photographs, but you really have no evidence that they are not a hoax. And good point about the stat on the people not finding one countering the rumors.

[KAOSkins]

How about the South West? Smokey and the Fouke monster (http://www.smokeyandthefoukemonster.com/)

To close to the mirror (http://www.tooclosetothemirror.com/)

They say they have pic of the bones of one of the creatures. Of course, I'm not going to buy the book.

Yeah, I think the nostic part is going to keep my conscious clear if I don't buy the book either. I love the name. The Fouke Monster. Just rolls right off the tongue.

Then again, I once saw a ghost so I will keep the possibility open. Generally, we don't claim Arkansas as being in the SW. Not thet thar's anthin rawng wid it.

[Pete]

"I’m sure more than one Bigfoot creature has died. The question is when Bigfoot died. Since rumors are running wild on the subject of bigfoot’s existence, Smokey Crabtree, author of two books on the Fouke Monster subject wants to express his personal opinion on the bigfoot story Ray Wallace’s family released in early December 2002, stating that Ray Wallace, his father, had passed away on 11/26/02, which we are all sorry to hear and my condolences go out to his family and loved ones.



The article stated that Ray Wallace was the man who designed and manufactured the fake feet used to create the Bigfoot tracks that in turn created thousands of stories about Bigfoot existing in the Northwest. Opinion is that Ray Wallace did actually create those tracks for a hoax and kept it to himself all these years. I’m sure he did not want it revealed or he would have revealed the fact himself. If my father had participated in a hoax I would have let the story go to the grave with him. I’m sure the set of feet they boast of having are not the first set created to mislead people and won’t be the last ones either.



The story was released to ruin the dreams of thousands of good hearted believers in the facts that there are strange creatures out in the wilderness that are very hard to believe even after you have had the pleasure to witness them. I would have never exposed my dead father and his secrets for what the Wallace family could ever get out of releasing the story. The story couldn’t possibly have been referring to the Fouke Monster because the Fouke Monster was spotted in Fouke, Arkansas long before Mr. Wallace’s tracks were fabricated.



Neither I nor any one else that I know in the Fouke area had heard of the Bigfoot of the Northwest. Until the moviemakers of “The Legend of Boggy Creek” stormed in on us, wanting to film on my family and me no one tied the Fouke monster in with the Sasquatch of the Northwest. The moviemakers are the ones who wanted to tie the Fouke Monster to the Northwestern Sasquatch.



To separate the two species I would like to say that it was strictly impossible for the Ray Wallace fabricated, wooden footprints to have made the thousands of three-toed tracks found here in the southern part of Arkansas and Texas. So, who’s Bigfoot died? Some disbelievers in this world have never stopped saying that Jesus is dead, or trying to prove He never existed. Well, I wish to let the readers know that those disbelievers have never convinced we believers that Jesus or Bigfoot is dead.



I am thoroughly convinced, through research, and being raised in the wilderness, that there is definitely things out in the woods that just simply are not supposed to be out there. All my work and research has been to convince myself that at times there is a creature out there, not in trying to convince some city slicker, non-believers that there is a creature in the woods that simply shouldn’t be there. There is something strange out there in the woods and I could care less what a non-believer thinks.



If people who would create a wooden foot print to fool the general public really want to know what is out there in the woods, let them go out there among the snakes, ticks, chiggers, rabid skunks, raccoons and such, and find out for themselves what is really out there. The negative publicity will always get the front page when it comes to something being published. It’s books, like mine, about the truth and facts that will very seldom ever be mentioned because it’s much easier to sit in an air-conditioned office and elaborate on a hoax or make up a false story than it is to go out in the woods and wilderness and gather information and facts."



“Smokey” Crabtree

Fouke, Arkansas

That pic sure looks like a big decayed foot....................

[KAOSkins]

:laugh: I like the old boy and his bedamned attitude. Nice read. :applause:

[Pete]

Yeah, I think the nostic part is going to keep my conscious clear if I don't buy the book either. I love the name. The Fouke Monster. Just rolls right off the tongue.

Then again, I once saw a ghost so I will keep the possibility open. Generally, we don't claim Arkansas as being in the SW. Not thet thar's anthin rawng wid it.

I didn't know what region of the country to call it being it's just a few miles from the Texas border. None the less, the pic is weird.

I had an encounter with a UFO in the early 80's, so I also keep an open mind on subjects like these. I'm not goofing around either, I'm dead serious.

[Jofizz]

I had an encounter with a UFO in the early 80's, so I also keep an open mind on subjects like these. I'm not goofing around either, I'm dead serious.

Care to tell your tale?

[KAOSkins]

I didn't know what region of the country to call it being it's just a few miles from the Texas border. None the less, the pic is weird.

I had an encounter with a UFO in the early 80's, so I also keep an open mind on subjects like these. I'm not goofing around either, I'm dead serious.

I wasn't either. I saw La Llorona when I was 18. Woke up in my Nova down by river after I'd passed out at a party. Got stuck trying to get at 3:00 am (at which point I had sobered up some) and she floated right on by through the salt cedars. Scared the living crap out of me. FYI - Arkansas is in the south, though maybe you won't claim em either. jk

[Jofizz]

This page has tons of info and scientific research on sasquatch

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dtrapp/bigfoot.htm

[Gigantor]

ok, some people here are talking about how we have explored every corner of the country and there is no way for a large animal like BF to hide. Lets look at the stats, population density in the state of washington and I do want to point out that British Columbia and Alberta Canada are even less populated.

From population density (http://www.ofm.wa.gov/popden/popden.pdf) per square mile for the state of washington:

The entire state (including major cities like seattle - 94 people per sq/mile

Adams County - 8.83

Columbia county - 4.72

Ferry county - 3.36

Garfield county - 3.38

Lincoln County - 4.37

Okanogan County - 7.52

Skamania County - 6.22

In fact, the most densely populated county in washington state is King county with 850.55 people per square mile, practically a ghost state.

Now look at the pictures below of the Olympic National Forest in Washington and tell me there is no place to hide. Are you kidding me?!

http://www.terragalleria.com/images/np-pacific/olym2060.jpeg

http://www.terragalleria.com/images/np-pacific/yose1270.jpeg

http://www.terragalleria.com/images/np-pacific/olym11100.jpeg

http://www.terragalleria.com/images/np-pacific/mora5827.jpeg

I also would like to point out that the guesstimate for the entire BF population is between 2000 and 10000 depending on who you ask, that's not very many.


Finally, BF is supposedly nocturnal, dumb as a gorilla and nomadic, so no tools, fire or dwellings.

All this is very interesting but I'm still not convinced. I do think it's very possible and people shouldn't dissmiss the possibility out of hand.

[Pete]

Care to tell your tale?

It was opening day of deer season in NY, and myself and my buddy Butch were heading up to Stewart AF Base. At the time, Stewart was small, and gave day permits to hunt their undeveloped land.

It was about 4:00am on the NY State Truway just north of the Haramen toll plaza. I wasn't sleepy, drunk or stoned. It was pitch black out as I drove north, and out of nowhere there was a blinding white light next to my car on the drivers side. As quick as it came, it was gone again. Maybe a total of 10 to 15 seconds.

I looked over at Butch, and he had a WTF was that look on his face. The light was so bright, there was no way to tell if it was a car with a spotlight next to us, but nobody passed us, or was behind us. Neither of us said a word as we drove along.

Before I knew what happened, the blinding light was back, only this time, it was on the passanger side. I was in the right lane, and all there was next to us was guardrail, and the light. This time though, it stayed with us for about a mile or two. I had all to do to just keep it on the road I was shaking so bad. It lit up everything around the car, and the area to our right. All of a sudden, it moved ahead of us still to our right, and flew off in an instant.

At that moment, the car started to buck and chug, overheating badly. I quickly pulled over, lit a smoke, and looked at Butch. He was as scared and confused as I was. I asked him if he could tell what was out there, and got no answer. I yelled, WTF just happened, and he replied "I'll be dipped in **** if I know"..........

We sat there for a while till the car cooled down enough to try to go again. I limped it to the next exit which was the exit for Stewart.

We heard no noises when all this happened, as if it was a chopper or plane. It moved faster then anything I had ever seen in the air. A few years later, I was watching a show on UFO's, and it was about an area of NY that is a hotbed for UFO activity. It was the same area Butch and I were driving through that night.

On my fathers grave, this is a true story. Sorry it took so long to reply, but I have goose bumps, and I get a little shakey reliving that night.

[zoony]

On my fathers grave, this is a true story. Sorry it took so long to reply, but I have goose bumps, and I get a little shakey reliving that night.


Wow... please excuse me while I go clean out my shorts.



Dam that is one hell of a story Pete. :notworthy

[zoony]

As for the thread topic, the burden of proof is on those who say he exists.

It is not enough to say that a certain creature exists on this earth and then offer up circumstantial evidence to support your claim. That is some seriously flawed logic, to say the least... and quite frankly I'm a bit surprised that some very intelligent people on ES are so quick to serve it up.

We need a body. Bones, dna, the whole bit.

Until then, Bigfoot DOES NOT EXIST.

Yes, it's that simple.

[KAOSkins]

That's a hell of story Pete. I went to the real Roswell Site during an inspection of an EPNG Pipeline Compressor Station in 94. It's not where they take the tourists, It's 37 miles of dirt road in the middle of a ranch. The station superintendent drove me there and maybe it was psychological, but my hackles were up. There are defintely some unexplainable things out there.

[KAOSkins]

As for the thread topic, the burden of proof is on those who say he exists.

It is not enough to say that a certain creature exists on this earth and then offer up circumstantial evidence to support your claim. That is some seriously flawed logic, to say the least... and quite frankly I'm a bit surprised that some very intelligent people on ES are so quick to serve it up.

We need a body. Bones, dna, the whole bit.

Until then, Bigfoot DOES NOT EXIST.

Yes, it's that simple.

Who says if you can't prove it it doesn't exist? It just means you can't prove it. Big difference. If you are going to insist that a certain creature doesn't exist how are you going to prove that any more concretely? Answer: You won't

YOU need to join the church of Sasquatchnosticality. :)

[Pete]

That's a hell of story Pete. I went to the real Roswell Site during an inspection of an EPNG Pipeline Compressor Station in 94. It's not where they take the tourists, It's 37 miles of dirt road in the middle of a ranch. The station superintendent drove me there and maybe it was physiological, but my hackles were up. There are defintely some unexplainable things out there.

An old friend of mine worked for the gas company years ago out there. Told me of a night he broke down out there, and some odd happenings. I won't go into it though, gotta call it a night now.

[Gigantor]

As for the thread topic, the burden of proof is on those who say he exists.

ofcourse.


It is not enough to say that a certain creature exists on this earth and then offer up circumstantial evidence to support your claim.

Well, that's all we have at the moment and people are trying to get more evidence. I'm just reviewing what info there is. All I'm saying is that there is enough to warrant further investigation and not dismiss the possibility outright.


We need a body. Bones, dna, the whole bit.


Yes we do. Part of the fun is the mistery, if somebody were to shoot one tomorrow, it would be proven and the fun's over... :)

[Jofizz]

Wow, Pete. That is insane.

I got a littly shaky myself reading that. There is no question that there are things that go on, or things that exist that are completely unexplainable.