Friday, January 22, 2016

Do These Ten Things Prove That Bigfoot Is More Than A myth


The author of this article looks at ten items that they feel is evidence that bigfoot actually does exist. A lot of people feel that the evidence of bigfoot's existenc isn't enough, and that it really isn't evidence at all. The flip side of that is that those that have seen the creature, feel strongly in the evidence that people present. Which side are you on?

To most people the subject of Bigfoot is instantly dismissed and filed in the category of nonsense, hogwash and hokum – alongside ghosts, werewolves, vampires and fairies. People who believe in such myths are often met with mocking or derision.

But more than any other mythical creature in the world of ‘Cryptozoology’ there does seem to be at least some credible, tangible evidence for Bigfoot. Even in 2016 the question of its existence just won’t go away. Let’s take a look at some reasons that may just breathe life into the legend.

10. Gigantopithecus

Science has discovered evidence that a massive relic ape roamed our earth between 1 million to 100 000 years ago. Gigantopithecus is estimated to have stood up to 11 feet tall and weighed a staggering 1000lb. Sound familiar? Although there is not enough evidence to conclude that Bigfoot is a direct ancestor of Gigantopithecus, the fact an ape of gargantuan proportions survived successfully for so long supports the notion of Bigfoot’s existence as a realistic possibility within the realms of biological physiology and evolution.

To continue the list, click here.

58 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. looks like a big bunch of joerg to me. I have decided that from now on i am going to make one youtube video a day where i yell out "Oh my Joerg" really loud. I bet i soon will have more subscribers than DS, and joe wont be able to stay away. He will gock at it for days.

      Joe just got blown the f#ck out. I mean dag on!!!

      Delete
    2. MMC just got blown the f#ck out!!

      Delete
    3. FFS! Viable Hybrid = BF FFS!

      FFS! little boy = Anonymous FFS!

      FFS! Iktomi what's up bro? I see you're still dealing with these little kids trolling...FFS!

      FFS! Believe it! FFS!

      Delete
    4. bigfoots are alien hybrids, Melba Ketchum proved that

      Delete
    5. Harry and his wife just got blown the f@ck out!!

      Delete
    6. FFS! Gross Mr. Anonymous your wifes hairy? FFS! Dude $1 shave club just saying FFS!

      Delete
    7. BIGFOOT - taking them women and having their way with them like them islam men are doing with them European women ...
      Cologne imam said women dressing provocatively its the women fault dressing that way !!!

      Delete
  2. Darn it , T.G. Joe beat you here.. sad...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. joe just got blown the f#ck out once again. Man oh man this is a bad day for him

      Delete
    2. it's an even worse day for those who waste their energy on here and don't even believe . Yes i'm talking to you toddlers

      Joe

      Delete
    3. MOUNTAIN MONSTERS starts Sat 23rd the HUNT is on for BIGFOOT
      them boyz getting close, but how close is to close

      Delete
    4. Joe, how many thought provoking conversations do the believers have here among themselves? I see you call people a lot of names but that's about it.

      Delete
    5. if the trolls left this place would be only that, intelligent discussions.
      I am being nice to the trolls, they don't belong here
      So what brings you here outside of being a troll ?

      Joe

      Delete
    6. more MOUNTAIN MONSTERS PLEASE!!!

      Delete
  3. I tried to begin a discussion earlier about the central problem in this particular field:
    Bigfoot has an enormous amount of apparent evidence behind it: evidence that grows significantly every month. Yet this evidence has to be juxtaposed against the fact that the physical evidence is deemed insufficient for the main body of the scientific community to say it exists.
    For example:
    Melba K: simply not taken seriously.
    Jeff Meldrum: goes squirmy and coy when asked for a direct yes or no.
    Sykes: is coming! Has come! Sold a book! Is gone away again! And is basically a NO but the investigation has thrown up some fascinating results. These results don't actually even vaguely point towards Bigfoot, perplexing and interesting as they are.
    I've always been interested in cryptozoology and relict hominids in particular, but end up repeatedly dismayed by this one central issue.
    One reads all kinds of stuff describing bigfoot diet, social grouping, proposed population, migratory routes etc and all this from organisation without a single clear picture, a published, peer reviewed (even partial) genetic profile or even a consensus on what its nose looks like.
    Fathoms beneath the ocean and deep in rainforests, there are clear pictures of creatures we know next to nothing about
    But Bigfoot is a creature of which we seem to know vast amounts but don't have one clear picture.
    Because it is able to deliberately evade deliberate detection.
    Despite being accidentally spotted thousands of times.
    So what needs to be done to get beyond this? Ten thousand trail cams, web streaming in real time? A high powered Bigfoot satellite trained on the Pacific Northwest?
    Or the entire National Guard to keep sweeping that area, locked and loaded until one is in the bag.
    Or maybe there is something much simpler, I'm missing Something.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is much much simpler. Bigfoot does not exist.

      Delete
    2. FFS! Not sure? however what changed my perspective was the Patty film, still to this day it can't be replicated...Not to mention why would the guys put boobs on it? Just doesn't add up, you can tell what ever is in the film is a real! So the mystery continues :) FFS!

      Delete
    3. I get your point FFS.
      But you can't say for certain it is IMPOSSIBLE to replicate without a specimen.
      Saying that: the fact that every attempt to replicate it on budgets that were undoubtedly bigger than nearly broke Patterson are always laughable is also very telling.
      It's just a pity he fell off his horse!

      Delete
    4. Mr. 8:40, what you have to understand is that people like Iktomi (who do not personally profit from bigfoot) are drawn to the subject because of their personal failures in life and the need to feel like they have a "special" knowledge on a topic that mainstream science totally rejects.

      In their own self-created and delusional micro-world, they are trailblazing revolutionaries who are more intelligent and courageous than the entire scientific establishment.

      Whether bigfoot exists is irrelevant to Iktomi -- it's just a vehicle by which he can pretend to be someone important.

      Delete
    5. I humbly, disagree Mr 10:01. One shouldn't make assumptions about personal circumstances, I feel. Unfortunately he is entrenched in the Bigfoot argument as evidenced by his complete inability to let anyone who presents a skeptical/ doubtful opinion on Bigfoot beyond poopooing it simply have the right to that opinion. You'll notice he rarely tackles a fair point head on but prefers to present a grand raft of familier arguments and lists that he holds to be self evident truths.
      And it is the fact that HE thinks that, that is the trigger for a response, rather than the subject matter.
      You dismiss Bigfoot, you dismiss Iktomi.
      This is why he reacts to any negative comment here with the vitriol of the personally affronted.
      We don't know who he is or what he does but we know he has become so entrenched in his own Confirmation Bias that he has conferred a status of authority upon himself. He actually thinks he is defending open minded opinion whilst failing to notice that he demands you must agree with what he thinks is an open minded opinion.
      Oh no, Iktomi cares very much about the Bigfoot Debate- because in his head he has been open minded enough to see it isn't a debate because he's solved it.

      Delete
    6. FFS! We do know that the Patty film was quite some time ago right? They surely did not have the technology we do now :) So why can't a suit just like Patty be made? Short answer because whatever it is in the video is a real creature! Just saying...I'm not into all the science and mumbojumbo I'm an outdoors man :)
      FFS!

      Delete
    7. I've never once seen that Iktomi made claim of absolutes. He is here on a quest like the rest of us. Except of course for you couple assholes that want to declare your reasoning superior to all.

      Well, I have seen it as well as thousands of others. I can't proove what it is------------------------------------------------------ but the thousand foot tall stack of even weak evidence points to something much larger than a collective mass delusion.

      You need to get over yourself, and your fears.

      The oldest claimed written document in the WORLD, contains a discription of a bigfoot.

      How F'n hard-headed can you screwballs be?

      Let people believe what they want, it's in our constitution!

      Ps, my I.Q. is well above Genious and I've seen it -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Give me one reason why I should even consider AAAANNNNNNYYYYYY of your crying statements.

      Your completely IGNORANT of the subgect in every facit.

      Delete
    8. FFS! Now hold on 10:27 "we don't know who he is" You don't know him, so you shouldn't say things like that about him period. Because in retrospect the same can be said about all the Mr. Anonymouses out there! So convinced that because there's no specimen there can be no creature...(Confirmation Bias) I'm open to both sides of the argument, but I can still have an opinion :) Just saying FFS!

      Delete
    9. "Bigfoot has an enormous amount of apparent evidence behind it: evidence that grows significantly every month. Yet this evidence has to be juxtaposed against the fact that the physical evidence is deemed insufficient for the main body of the scientific community to say it exists."
      ... And who judges this evidence to be just that? You?? Excuse me, but I just spent a few minutes on the previous comment section drawing your attention to much of it, I really don't think you should be calling the shots and I really don't think that you should be talking on the behalf of a whole mainstream field to which aren't even aware of the current frequency of evidence.

      "The evidence is not sufficient because scientists who have not studied it say it isn't..."
      ... Can you not see the inherent problems with this approach? The frequency of physical evidence is exactly in line with what one would expect from a largely nocturnal creature, that evades in social groups and buries it's dead.

      As for trail cams... Ever hear of the Jacobs photo? I can reference you trail cam sources that have hits in the region of 8.5 and 9 feet tall subjects... And... Um... You want clearer footage than the PGF?? In your case, the simplest advice would be to either learn about the topic's evidence a bit better, or stop taking things so personally when it gets pointed out to you.

      Simples.

      Delete
    10. Apologies... Thermal sources that have the aforementioned height hits.

      Delete
    11. TK1 i just watched that link you posted on dinosaurs.That's interesting,i'm going to look at a bit more of that xx

      Delete
    12. Could you source me those trail cam sources,Iktomi? (Other than the Jacobs photo, of course.) And have you ever heard of Fate Magazine? A long running mag regarding the subject matter and an interesting read.

      Delete
    13. Hey Eva. There is a free shorter version on youtube. But for 5 bucks, you can watch the longer version.

      He also has a thirty minute virsion where he has a scientist on the phone who happened to go down to the beluxy river bottom and ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Took a steel pipe to HUMAN tracks set INSIDE a dino track ------ Huh, sounds criminal.

      The story has it, he probably did it at the request of Richard Dawkins ----------------------------------------------------- Worlds leading palentologists orders distruction of evidence to save his pathetic career ?????????

      Who thinks Dawkins is a good guy now???

      Delete
    14. Hey NC!!

      The thermals are Stacy Brown's (8.5 feet), and Bart Cutino's (two subjects in the region of 9 feet). The trail cam photos are the Jacobs and another Cliff Barrackman analysed to be in the region of 7 feet tall... I'll try and find that for you now.

      Delete
    15. Thanks. Has this been posted here? If it has apologies for being a bit busy and out of the loop. Interesting photo.

      http://malcolmscryptids.blogspot.com.au/2016/01/a-photo-of-wild-man-of-pyrenees.html

      Delete
    16. NC, that's a fascinating photo and I have never seen it. Thanks buddy.

      Delete
    17. Interesting comments Anon 8:40 and I must say your line of thought echoes mine. With all the multitude of sightings and reports and our increased technology, it's simply baffling why it remains unknown to this day. I personally no longer believe it exists but there certainly remains a mystery and I think it has much to do with perception and interpretation. For example the Jacobs photo has been interpreted as a bear to the skeptics and a young Bigfoot to the advocates.

      I see the same familiar names lktomi brings out time after time but it doesn't seem to grow. I also have to wonder if they all have the same state of mind currently or (like me) doubt has set in? I'm also curious lktomi about your basis for believing they bury their dead? Just become no bodies are found one cannot assume this is a practice they follow. If you use the giant skeleton argument then I still have to ask - how do you know they were buried by creatures we call Bigfoot?

      Delete
    18. http://youtu.be/kar3kQWzUw8

      ... The Jacobs photos is not of a bear. This video basically PROVES it's not a bear... I would like to see how you "interpret" that, Mr Curious. Oh... And the "mystery" isn't all that unknown to those who can look at the evidence for what it is. Actually... That list of names grows pretty steadily as the years go by. One begs to ask whether you're being all the observant after all.

      There are 150 years worth of giant human skeleton remains uncovered in caves and mound systems all over the US. You also have native oral histories such as the Cherokee that state that they shared burial sites with them... Percieved to be another tribe of humans. We already know that even the most primitive of ancestors to us with very small brain capacity (homo Naledi), had the capacity for burial. Why not Sasquatch given it's long history of being referred to as an ancient human by native cultures, and the fact that it pretty much is reported to be that of an ancient wild human?

      Delete
    19. Cecelia Hall has put together a Google map of North America based on 1,800 files of giant human skeletal remains;

      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Id37N6vImUc/Uu2u1ZWpGrI/AAAAAAAAxlw/FSEaeFWYrAk/s1600/1010960_526639300783862_916482378_n.jpg

      ... You'll notice the hits on the map somewhat mimic the areas of Sasquatch sightings.

      Delete
    20. Rather than a long detailed explanation I will just provide a link which gives a nice summary of the Jacobs photo - plenty there to give one doubt that it is a Bigfoot.

      http://texascryptidhunter.blogspot.com/2014/02/black-bears-bigfoot-and-jacobs-creature.html

      So the list of "professionals" grows steadily each year? Funny - seems like the same old names to me. I admit Dr. Sykes is a relative newcomer. But if you say so . . .

      We've discussed the giant thing already so I won't go into that again but I still think it's a stretch to assume Sasquatch buries it's dead when we have only circumstantial evidence to support it.

      At least we both agree there is a mystery - although you believe it is a flesh and blood one and I now take the psychological route. Like it or not there was a lot of truth to what that poster said and I for one hope that he/she will post again as I agree with many of the points made. Even you must admit that it was far more stimulating than the usual juvenile insults being bantered about here.

      Delete
    21. And here's a link of my own;
      http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp
      ... Not that I needed it, as should you have opened the YouTube link provided, you would have seen the matter put to bed.

      Yes... The list grows as the years roll by, and for anyone to suggest otherwise would be pure denial. One merely has to go take a look at the list I sourced on the previous comment section. Considering how many primates they've discovered between them in total, I doubt one would be totally confident in applying quotation marks in cynicism of their credibility if they weren't naive to those facts.

      In actual fact, Mr Curious, it is not a stretch to assume that Sasquatch bury their dead. In fact, there is more reason to assume so than otherwise, given the fact that they are quite clearly human and not a dumb animal. Even if we didn't have the hairs that are morphologically consistent with a wild human, if we didn't have the track castings that quite clearly show a large human, then the innumerable reports that basically describe what one would expect from a caveman attest to this. Given the high frequency of science journals that account for such large human remains being found, and the long standing cultures to which state that Sasquatch are another tribe of large humans, one does not require Sherlock Holmes to be able to draw a link from such data.

      I used quotation marks in using the word mystery. "Like it or not", and with total respect in mind to you, the poster up top appears to enjoy the same evidence dodging as you are subsceptible to when he's attempting to reduce this topic to one that is void of substantial supporting evidence... And if you look on the previous thread of comments, you'll notice that he's a little quick to get personal as soon as his versions are scrutinised. As much as you know I enjoy the discussion, I think he should get better used to having his ideas countered with those of others if he wants to keep from blowing his lid regularly around here.

      Delete
  4. Replies
    1. So your point of emphasis is on a near fifty year old grainy 8mm film? That's some proof.

      Delete
    2. sometimes monkeys looking like BIGFOOT so you thinking that's a BIGFOOT over there but its just a monkey in the bush

      Delete
    3. FFS! Yes you've just made my point for me Mr. Anonymous! 50 year old suit that can't be replicated to day with all the special effects make up...you know silicon and the like! Thank you for clearing that up and making it easier for these peps that don't take that into consideration :) FFS!

      Delete
    4. You tell them FFS !
      They can't handle the fact that they wont be able to replicate that suit because it isn't a suit and that is why they always fail

      Joe

      Delete
    5. FFS! Well Joe I'm just a regular ole country boy,it just seems strange that after 50 years the so called "suit" can't be replicated! and why oh why did some guys put boobs on it? The video stands the test of time and is the the major reason I'm interested :) FFS!

      Delete
    6. what about Trapper from the AIMS team he been hunting and tracking BIGFOOTS for years

      Delete
    7. AIMS and the mountain monsters series is just fun and not much else. It isn't to be taken seriously . What is to be taken seriously is the thousands of eyewitness sightings, the numerous footprints and video/photographic evidence chief among them the PGF. You just can't expect a bigfoot to waltz out of the woods and pose for any photos . They blend in so well with the forest background because of their dark skin . It makes seeing them all the more difficult but a lot of the photos out there have captured some interesting things

      Joe

      Delete
    8. but TRAPPER and WILD BILL been hunting and trapping for years

      Delete