My Theories About Bigfoot
Editor's Note: This is guest post by Dan Shirley. His theory comes from four years of research conducted in the Sierra's of Northern California.
Where I conduct my research? In the Tahoe National Forest, east of Lake Tahoe, in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. I've been researching this area for the past 4 years. I also have over a half dozen hot spots which keeps me very busy. One of these hot spots was seen on National Geographic. Up in the Sierra's Bigfoot is thriving. Bigfoot is rouge with some males and also they live in groups. Bigfoot's hair color comes in three (3) shades; black, reddish brown and grey. I believe the grey ones are grey from aging. I have also seen the same type in Oregon. I have personally observed this creature on three (3) different occasions. On one occasion, in 2013, Garland and I observed a sasquatch for fifteen minutes. It was a large male between 8 and 9 ft tall, weighing at least 800 pounds and had a black hair coloring. What I saw was prime ape with human characteristics.
Bigfoot's Origins:
It started in Asia about 200,000 - 300,000 years ago. A time period when Gigantopithues, Homo Habilis and Homo Erectes co-existed with each other and more than likely knew of each others existence. Giganto living in the highlands and Habilis and Erectes living in the lowlands. Time to time their path's would cross. At that time period, Giganto was at the verge of extinction.
My belief is, at that time period, Giganto cross-breeded with either Habilis or Erectus. Is this theory possible? I believe it is! The time was right. Even though Giganto was ape, Habilis and Erectus also had at least 75% ape DNA which would leave 25% human. This stated, that would have given the two (2) species, with the help of nature, the ability to reproduce, in hence creating a new species. What you would classify a hybrid, that went on to evolve to other hybrids through evolution. This new species formed a branch of their own that co-existed with the branch that would become modern human. As they still do today, this unknown species is what we call today, Bigfoot. This explains why they have some similar human traits, such as, their feet, hands and facial features and also have the ability to "think."
How did Bigfoot come to North America?
This new species and humans crossed the Bering Land Bridge about 35,000 years ago during a frozen time period, thus allowing them to cross from Asia to North America. Since the two (2) continents were connected at the time when they arrived and the habitat was good, they stayed in this region. Once the ice melted away the sea's and oceans started to rise, the land bridge existed no more. Asia broke away from North America, and the new species were here to stay. This explains why Bigfoot can be found in places like Alaska, Canada, Washington State, Oregon, California and places back east such as Tennessee and Kentucky.
Conclusion Summary:
So we have two (2) species that might have cross-breeded with Giganto but which one? It could be Homo Habilis, but my money is on Homo Erectes as the one who breeded with Giganto. Although Habilis, Erectes and Giganto did become extinct, they left behind our new species. As time goes by, that species evolved and broke away from the branch that would become modern man. They formed a branch of their own that has run parallel to our branch, even to date we still co-exist. So is Bigfoot a real living creature? Yes it is real and it does exist!
Peace!
ReplyDeleteGood Morning! Morning Star!
ReplyDeleteWell at least he makes some definitive statements about observing them (not much chance of simple misidentification). Of course it begs the question of why no video or photos.
ReplyDeleteIf this is true why did the others become extinct and not bigfoot? xx
DeleteHypothetically, it could have more intelligence. However, I personally doubt Bigfoot exists.
DeleteHI EVA R. The forest giants survived from the onslaught of the homo sapien sapiens as they stayed to the forest and had abilities out their far above the their cousins with strength speed ( far better athleticism ) cunning intelligence and much better noctural vision. At least that is my op. So much we think we know about the past and yet we really know so little.
DeleteChuck
So 4:19, the guy is lying through his teeth when he says that he has seen bigfoot three times.
DeleteIs that what you're saying?
It's really sad that you would say the guy is lying for I'm his partner and I've also seen them the same time he did so what you need to do is shut the hell up and get a life!!
DeleteBigfoot does not exist.
ReplyDeleteWe know this because despite a ridiculous amount of effort there have been zero bigfoots, zero bigfoot parts, zero evidence of any bigfoots ever actually existing anywhere ever.
Any sane person can look at the lack of any bigfoots and correctly objectively conclude that bigfoot dont exist.
Indeed any sane person could but how many sane people are involved in chasing the monkeyman?
Delete"Bigfoot" does not exist.
DeleteHowever... There is physical evidence of an unclassified bipedal primate, that is twice the size of normal human primates, leaving their sign on the environment of North America. Science is founded on the premise that we exist in a rational reality and from this premise it follows that every scientific belief can and should be based on evidence, otherwise it is not science. To be completely clear as to what is science it can be defined in one simple sentence; science is the unbiased effort to understand reality based on the observable physical evidence.
Plenty found, none caught.
None found,none caught.
DeletePlenty found;
Deletehttp://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU
http://youtu.be/luue2Mv_VNM
http://youtu.be/lOxuRIfFs0w
http://youtu.be/l96zvON3Rk8
http://youtu.be/xI8gcikwUEQ
http://youtu.be/BfuWuhEa3yI
http://youtu.be/ZlMQ9b2lnE4
http://youtu.be/h4QcYdT6keQ
http://youtu.be/cjEWDkcqjXI
... None caught.
Plenty claimed.
DeleteNone substantiated.
Sightings, footage = substantiated with dermals and hair.
Delete4× the size of HSS ,Not 2×The size YOU VAPID DULLARD!!
DeleteDr B S
(yawn)
That depends what information you cherry pick, Dr Bull Sh*t.
Delete"Bigfoot does not exist" Ahh go back to Bigfoot Forums with the rest of the paid trolls-you all sock and no matter how many times you write it, nobody takes you seriously because you can't even convince yourself that what you're saying is true. You know they are real. Now go back to your little website and talk about all the meanies who are insulting you and breaking the rules
DeleteThat's Mr, Dr B Sykes to you !! 7:10.
DeleteD B S
You don't exist Anonymous coward!!!
Deletemore tall tales! why come out with these reports about witnessing bigfoot multiple times
ReplyDeleteIf you say you are a bigfoot' researcher why would you walk about the woods for years without a camera.
ridicules child like nonsense
I Begg to differ!
DeleteShould he get a video or a photo of a Sasquatch, would you take his word for it that the sources are genuine? Why would you request such when the existing available sources are not good enough?
Ridiculous child like rhetorical nonsense.
Whether or not he would accept them as genuine is beside the point. The person in question has supposedly observed them multiple times. No camera recording is a legitimate criticism.
DeleteI can't possibly disagree more... What's the difference to people who have already claimed to have seen them multiple times, and shot footage of them? No camera COULD be down to a multitude of reasons; blobsquatches, not being threatening towards them, etc.
DeleteI would be more apt to buy that answer if the person did not claim to be a researcher and claims "hot spots".
DeleteAnd why is that? Because the topic is not believable to you? Your mindset is swaying you against the topic from the outset, yet you have an issue with the manner in which this guy doesn't present a sources of evidence you will question anyhow?
DeleteIf that's your logic, I don't think many people should care for your opinion on what does or doesn't exist.
Its a primate that is not yet proven to science. If you claim to be a researcher, evidence gathering and recording would seemingly be an objective.
DeleteHe apparently has some scientific interest as he puts forth a hybrid origin theory.
I can't disagree with that... I just think that given the stance that some cynics approach the topic with, should he present the evidence, it's likely to not be considered outright anyway.
DeleteCynics may laugh initially, but if the evidence is good and well presented it won't matter in the end.
DeleteYeah... That's happened with the consistent science that's been applied already right?
DeleteAgree with anon fully!
DeleteYou would, and though I find his approach refreshingly courteous and intelligent... You simply can't hoax forensic sign, and this is considered "not good enough" by cynics who push the extraordinary claims (move the goal posts) stance.
DeleteI'd say forensic sign can be misinterpreted. It happens all the time in the American justice system. I'm not necessarily suggesting that's the case here, but caution is warranted, especially regarding the evaluation of evidence for this subject. In fact, I'd argue the more caution, the better the reasons to take the evidence seriously. Just got Bindernagel's Discovery of the Sasquatch in the mail...fascinating read so far.
DeleteI'm less cautious when you have so many forensic experts offering their opinion. This is something that doesn't happen within the justice system, and is more akin to peer review processes (though I have no faith in such a system). When you have so many impartial scientists coming to the same conclusion, there is no reason to lean towards the requirement of more extraordinary sources of evidence to warrant enthusiasm, because the topic is not so extraordinary once you asses the available physical evidence in line with the plethora of anecdotal evidence. It should be there in support of the witnesses should they be genuine, and quite simply is there according to scientists who know better than 99% of their peers.
DeleteI have not read it sir, I will check it out at the first opportunity.
Any of you guys see the Paper on the stacked deer bones found around Mt.St.Helens and Forensic Dentistry done on the teeth marks?DNA work on the saliva left behind? Compelling evidence may come in less flamboyant ways than a body or a film.
ReplyDeleteYGNALI
DeleteYGSANLIVMAA
DeleteGod most of u anon guys are so so ignorant. Not stupid but horribly ignorant about the subject of BF. It's laughable. Truly.
DeleteEven if his hypothesis were correct, hybrid sterility would stop evolution in its tracks.
ReplyDeleteThis guy Dan Shirley, has seen more Bigfoots, than other Bigfoots have!
ReplyDeleteThis Guy Dan Shirley is so full of it!
This Guy Dan Shirley doesn't travel more than a couple hundred yards from a road, before he gets winded
PRIME APE! Good lord...
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSkeptics....LOL!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFDLHpaSZrM
please leave dr.....we know what you are. A DAMN HOXER
DeleteHey DS!!!!
DeleteBigfoot is BS with a capital B. Bigfoot is a multi-million dollar industry. As long as money can be made, bigfoot will continue to "exist."
ReplyDeleteI've been following bigfoot since the 70s. I always hoped and believed that some day bigfoot would be proven to science. To this day, there is no more proof than 40 years ago. I finally gave up on a bigfoot a few years ago. Bigfoot is folklore and nothing more.
Deleteoh yea?? Well!!!!!!, I (me &myself) have seen One of them twice and two of them once, does that make me want to strangle neighborhood pets??
DeleteSure you did.
Delete1:07... Yeah, I'm sure Mr Shirley up top is raking it in. People like you are too invested in too much TV. You see your monster shows that are a product of pop culture and you think everyone involved in the topic are bringing home massive pay checks... Just like the way people like you watch an Attenborough box set and think every corner of the world is accounted for. With the exception of people who are writing books, people really aren't making that much money from spending their time looking for evidence for Sasquatch, and people who have professional careers to look after with everything to lose by making their accounts known actually risk losing income. No amount of money or pop culture effects the scientific evidence, it does however make people more prepared to find the courage to come forward and reveal their encounters.
Delete1:10... I would say stay patient. For all this time people have mostly been looking for a bipedal gorilla, ultimately something that isn't there. Folklore don't leave tracks, and certainly don't manifest in dermals and hairs.
Dan Shirley you're joking.
ReplyDeleteDan Shirley's theories can now all be officially tossed in the round file because Kewaunee recently got it straight from the horses mouth, and in writing. Danny boy, you should have waited just one more week before you published.
ReplyDeleteI believe. I`ve never seen one personally, but know many who have, with witnesses including my dad. So many prints all over the world and Indian stories, The Gorilla itself is unbelievable, yet it exists. Every year new species are identified. People like to think we are the most clever, but we still have much to learn. Never say never.
ReplyDeleteDan Shirley has plenty of photo evidence. He's not about to share it with u morons!
ReplyDeleteThe interbreeding idea between Giganto and Homo habilis/erectus is the same nonsense that Ms. Melba tried to shovel at us a couple of years ago. BS then, BS now.
ReplyDeleteDan Shirley knows the habitat they like,same as Mike.He's seen them
ReplyDeleteI can't take a theory by anyone that writes so poorly remotely seriously.
ReplyDeleteWhere's the evidence to back up the claims? Reference to other proof?
Blimey...
And who the fuck are you may I ask?????? Just another jealous asshole I take it!!!
DeleteYour not funny punk!!! What you need to do is grow up and try to be at least half the man your mother is!!!
ReplyDelete