Check Out These Bigfoot Prints

Researchers check out what might be the biggest trackway of bigfoot prints ever left in the snow. Are they the real thing?


  1. There is absolutely NO reason why one of these cannot be tracked if they are leaving footprints in the snow. Absolutely none. Any reason given is merely an excuse that won't hold water if the tracker is determined.

    1. I would say go back and learn the basics. You cannot follow these trackways over the terrain that’s needed without a concerted professional effort. If you’d but do some reading and not wait for TV teeny-pop programmes to come around, you’d prevent yourself from coming across so ignorant during your role playing.

    2. How much effort does it take to follow tracks in the SNOW? You have little faith in all your Bigfoot "researchers" out there. There is no reasons why these footprints can't be tracked to conclusion. Absolutely none.

    3. Clearly more effort than city boys who have watched an Attenborough box and think they’ve seen the world know. I have every faith in amateur researchers, but when such tracks go straight to cliffs and impossible inclines, then it’s a matter of recourses and expertise. You don’t know the first thing about how complex these trackways are, stick to your TV and box sets.

      Even sceptical analysts such as Parabreakdown have found 3 mile-long trackways in the snow compelling;

    4. More excuses. It's always some contrived excuse with you. What kind of idiot do you have to be not to be able to follow tracks in the SNOW? Impossible cliffs and inclines? Can Bigfoot now fly? Best trackers in the world - HA! Only when it serves YOUR argument. There is absolutely NO reason why one of these cannot be tracked if they are leaving footprints in the snow. Absolutely none.

    5. Open that little video and note how out of breath those people are following those tracks in the snow. You’re such a “big man” that can’t even have your name to your insults and trolling you partake in, so let’s not pretend you’ve ever been out in wilderness areas after heavy snow fall in terrain like that.

      And like any primate tuned to its environment, climbing, jumping, negotiating any terrain is nothing like anything we’re able to accomplish with our basic agility. It’s why tracking them, even by the best trackers in the world like native Americans is so difficult. These hominin can also travel vast distances over such terrain which makes it almost impossible to follow them unless you have the adequate resources and time to follow tracks for potentially days on end.

      So basically, you knew nout pal. Go back to your Finding Bigfoot and Attenborough box sets and stop telling everyone else how to go about what you’re too scared to do.

    6. Like I said, yet another contrived BS excuse from you. All you have is excuse after excuse after excuse.

      Any knucklehead can follow tracks in the snow, even you.

    7. You have to be a special kind of stupid not to be able to follow tracks in the SNOW. I get the impression none of theses "researchers" are serious about proving Bigfoot exists. Gee I guess we can never take this seriously if they can't even follow simply tracks in the SNOW!

    8. Right you are tough guy. Like “anyone can shoot a Bigfoot”, when your hoaxers in gorilla costumes never turn up dead, right? You don’t know what the **** you’re talking about. You don’t know the first thing about what’s reported, about trackways and the behaviour of these hominin, and it’s embarrassing having to b-slap you in writing when you think you’re getting even for being bullied about in real life.

      Your naivety and stupidity is everyone else’s “excuses”. Take some responsibility in your life, sad ****

    9. How naive and stupid do you have to be not to be able to follow tracks in the snow? Man, I have heard every excuse in the world but this tops the cake! I have seen tracks being reported WHERE THERE ARE NO HILLS OR MOUNTAINS yet somehow they are never followed. They are never followed to conclusion because the people reporting WANT to believe they are not man-made and WANT to believe they have experienced something unusual. These aren't "researchers" they are merely people who have already reached the conclusion it is real....all without definitive proof. As for hoaxers in gorilla costumes never turning up dead, do you actually think their fellow hoaxer FILMING them is going to shoot them? Boy, you ARE a special kind of stupid!

    10. Ok, care to show me that case “WHERE THERE ARE NO HILLS OR MOUNTAINS”?? I’m not denying they exist, I’m just challenging you to see if you actually know what you’re talking about, and so you can for once explore the reasons these people cannot track them to conclusion.

      Unfortunately Rummo, whether people blindly believe outright before they field research, have actually themselves witnessed a Bigfoot, or have merely been convinced by the evidence... There is solid scientific data to back that up. What’s definitive, is that level of evidence is impossible to hoax. Don’t like it? Try harder to give yourself some peace of mind.

      Aaaaaaaaargh, so the ad-hoc narrative progresses. So let’s get this clear, every single eye witness report is by a group of hoaxers trying to film others in gorilla costumes? What about those that according to you misidentify? What about those hoaxers in gorilla costumes that don’t end up on TV? Surely if every report has a hoaxer with an accomplice with a camera, we’d have far more hoaxed videos per sightings report? Where are the reports of people being seen hoaxing? Please answer these questions so we can better ascertain your latest delusion.

      “Special kind of stupid”... you sound like that crazy dude DS who thought gouls & goblins were hiding behind every tree.


      It took me under 30 seconds to find that. I can assure you there are no mountains or impassable hills in that part of Nebraska. Here's another without any effort in Minnesota. No mountains there.

      I have never seen a documentary where the investigators follow suspected Bigfoot tracks in snow. They are sighted seemingly everywhere it gets snow. There is just no excuse for not following suspected Bigfoot tracks in the snow. Surely even you can comprehend that?

    12. Jesus Christ.

      Let me get this straight.

      To prove your point, you’ve either backed me up or done F all else?

      Are you serious?

    13. It come as no surprise to me that you are so dim-witted not to comprehend what I say. Let me explain for you: The reason that no documentary on Bigfoot will EVER show tracking supposed Bigfoot tracks to their conclusion in the snow is because then the jig will be up. They would be forced to show they are not Bigfoot tracks at all but human made or some animal tracks being misinterpreted. Not good entertainment. Much easier to show thermal blobs, shadows, fallen branches and such to keep the mystery arrive.

      And YOU fall for every time.

    14. Your first link doesn’t work at all.

      Your second link, to a feckin Facebook account (cringe), pretty much proves my point, you dumb ****. You did not provide a reason why those tracks were not followed, therefore as substance to your argument you have a mere assumption with no facts.

      You were challenged to see if you actually knew what the feck you’re talking about, so you can for once explore the reasons these people cannot track them to conclusion. Why were those tracks in the Facebook account not followed? Where are these details? Are you basing your drivel on assumptions? “You have never seen a TV programme where they’ve followed tracks in the snow”. Ha ha ha!! Again, this is the brunt of your idea of Bigfoot. If it doesn’t happen on TV, it doesn’t happen at all. THIS is the best that Bigfoot Evidence offers up as debate these days. I’m exchanging with an uneducated child who watches too much TV.

      Allow me to show you how adult debate works. When I stated that tracks in snow, sometimes three miles long end up impossible to track because of difficult terrain, I provided you a sceptical source that proved my point. As a counter a argument you’ve merely provided a photograph of tracks in snow. It is impossible at this point to quantify how idiotic you are for thinking that is a logical argument. Speechless.

      And even if there were NO BIGFOOT TRACKS EVER recorded or documented, there is 80 years of miles of trackways that provide enthusiasts with an amazing plethora of data, so much so that Gaussian distribution can be pointed to, and average height and weight ratios of a breeding population ascertained. There is no mystery with something like a track cast that I can smash you over the head with. You stupid ****.

      If you want a thermal go check something like this out;

      I’m sorry there is no video linked with the web page, let me know if you want me to hold your hand through the data.


    15. How strange....and how convenient the first link did not work for you - it certainly worked for me after I tried it just now. No matter - here is another one from another source:

      You asked me to show you a case “WHERE THERE ARE NO HILLS OR MOUNTAINS” which I did and of course you move the goalposts as you always do. You complete idiot - I asked YOU the reasons why these tracks can't be followed because there is no difficult terrain involved in the examples I gave you. How can any one believe that with Bigfoot supposedly seen in every state and supposedly seen often can escape not leaving tracks in the snow and having them followed to conclusion by at least ONE group boggles the mind. I have a feeling some actually have and been discovered to be man-made or a identifiable animal. How boring. No entertainment value there. So it's not reported.

      Debate??? How can you debate with a fanatic who won't even start to consider other explanations??? There is no logical reason why these footprints can't be tracked to conclusion. You can use drones, dogs, or rediscover the trail on better ground. Tracks in the snow are one example where Bigfoot can't hide by cloaking itself by turning it's hair clear - ha ha ha ha!

    16. Nargh! Still don’t work boyo. Not a good look I’m afraid. But this is what’s left as the opposition on BE these days. People who can’t even source accessible links.

      “Ok, care to show me that case “WHERE THERE ARE NO HILLS OR MOUNTAINS”?? I’m not denying they exist, I’m just challenging you to see if you actually know what you’re talking about, and so you can for once explore the reasons these people cannot track them to conclusion.”

      So now I’ve jogged your memory, please... find me that info or shut the **** up. In the one example you provided, there are no details as to how long the trackway is and what terrain it leads to. You have merely shown a photo of Bigfoot tracks in snow. You insufferably dense patoot.

      So... chop, chop tough guy. The logical reasons are that these trackways either end up going through impossible terrain, or end up going for too long a distance to realistically track for long periods of the day in dangerous wilderness areas.

    17. This comment has been removed by the author.


    18. "The maximal speed that a Sasquatch is capable of attaining has not been reliably tracked, although many casual reports refer to observers driving in a vehicle parallel to a running Sasquatch. Before rejecting unbelievable sounding speeds or step intervals, it is well worth keeping human records in mind. For example, the world record walking speed over 20 km is about 11 mph (18 kph), the top running burst speed about 27 mph (43 kph), the longest single jump near 30’ (9 in), and the longest triple jump—in effect, three running steps—about 60’ (18 in), all this with a physique of decidedly smaller scale than that of a Sasquatch. I would estimate the top running speed of the Sasquatch to be near 35 mph (56 kph), the speed of a galloping horse."
      - Henner Fahrenbach

      Kelly Shaw has in the past found prints showing one had leapt a creek of over 15′ in one stride. Coonbo measured one from a subject that would have had to have leaped 20 feet plus from a standing position, and then longer after it took off. We also have eyewitness testimony such as this;
      "I am not sure as to total distance, but I can say what we witnessed leaped entirely across a logging road that was easily 20+ feet, more likely 25 from tree line to tree line. It was airborne all the way into the opposing tree line from its departure. I cannot relate accurately how fast that thing was… It was fast enough to still be a living “blobsquatch” in my memory. Never did get to see anything other than vague size and shape. And that was literally a car length ahead of us or so."
      - Steven J

      If trackways stop, it does not mean things disappear into another dimension. Clown.

    19. "not been reliably tracked"
      "casual reports"
      "Before rejecting unbelievable sounding speeds"
      "I am not sure"
      "I cannot relate accurately"
      "Never did get to see anything other than vague size and shape."

      Wow - all that doesn't inspire any confidence in a convincing argument especially when you are basing it with no Bigfoot EVER to be examined as to it's capabilities. What has all that got to do with tracking a Bigfoot in the snow anyway? Speed has nothing to do with tracking in the snow. 35 miles an hour or 1 it still can be tracked.

      Hey YOU were the one who said Bigfoot can cloak not me. Besides if trackways stop where does Bigfoot go? You believe Bigfoot can do almost anything - you tell me.

    20. There are three databases of modern eyewitness testimony to examine that attest to the speed and agility of these hominin. You can cherry pick words out of context but those are just two reports from the last 200 years where we can point to example upon example of behaviour and just how tuned to its environment they are with repeated rough estimates, ACTUAL measurements, climbing, jumping, negotiating any terrain is nothing like anything we’re able to accomplish with our basic agility. The Leaping Russian Yeti footage shows the exact creature that we see in the PGF leaping feet in the air, landing on all fours and darting through wooded terrain like it’s nothing. The subject of their agility when leaving traceable sign was put to you in the very first comments I punished up top, feckin dumbo. And in the second report you have rough measurements, but if something can leap 20 feet plus from a standing position then tracks are going to be very hard to track in difficult wilderness terrain. At that range you can leap into treelines, up trees, down/up cliffs, even into flat terrain where tracks aren’t noticed to the untrained amateur field researcher. When the subject of these databases of reports is being shown to exist in 80 years of track castings, then you’re going to have to try a little harder than cherry picking words out of context, showing me photographs of Bigfoot tracks in snow from enthusiastic sources (cringe, like it somehow props up your argument), and making up comments of others to agitate because you realise you’ve got feck all and really are that desperate for someone to give you the attention your lonely existence craves.

    21. Sooooo - you can vouch and have evidence that every single report and footage from these three "databases" is complete misinterpretation, no lying or hoaxing. What? You can't? Well then your argument is flawed and your statements can't be trusted. I have yet to see an unbiased investigation by true academics who have nothing to gain - no books, convention or TV appearances, selling footprints etc. reaching these conclusions. Pretty bold statements in light that no supposed Bigfoot has EVER been caught and tested to it's abilities. Showing you pictures of supposed Bigfoot tracks in the snow in passable terrain was what YOU asked for and I obliged. I just wanted to know why these are never tracked (hint - I think I already know).

      You have an excuse for every question about why Bigfoot escapes detection. They are smarter, stronger, faster, acute hearing, more knowledgeable of the environment, can use infrasound to confuse, can detect game cameras and most absurd of all can cloak themselves. What can't they do? The only creature on earth that could cover all of this doesn't exist. Tell you what - just ignore me if I agitate you. The only attention I want is from people with an open mind who can decide for themselves if my questions are unreasonable.

      Yet another year has gone by with no proof of Bigfoot. What a pity.

    22. This comment has been removed by the author.

    23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    24. Nope! Embellishments, misinterpretations, lying, hoaxing & wishful thinking most certainly occur. The problem is that list of potential circumstances does not account for those in denial, or that for those three databases that transition thousands of years of anthropological data, there is 80 years of trackways, footage, audio, thermal... all these things that one expects for an actual living & breathing creature at the end of such a quantity of reports, thriving among a breeding population. In academia, science and every single last circle of adult debate, this is referred to as substance. This is something that you have never once provided to back up your role playing, because of one simple fact; there is too much data going for the existence of this hominin to debunk. Your position is so impossible because it is so absolute. For thousands of years every report and piece of evidence needs to 100% be false every time, encompassing every expert, every tracker/Hunter with decades of experience under his/her belt, and every pillar of society who would be believed regarding any other subject who has everything to lose for their report. In contrast, 90% of the evidence and reports I endorse can be false yet Bigfoot can still easily exist.

      Nobody expects or needs you to trust anything. Your behaviour is that which needs to be both perversely dishonest and agenda driven on a daily basis, this very exchange is not to convince you as your standard of evidence when you are not role playing is some of the most baseless in science that anyone has the courage to endorse in this subject. You and I both know it. Think about that a minute. Where you are sitting and where I am sitting, we both know that you are someone who believes in pareidolia and the most harmful paranormal take on this subject. The fact that you need to retaliate and project that on you others once it’s pointed out says more to do with your confidence in your own belief system as much as it does your pathology. For example, you ask for experts who you might find credible yet I was proved correct again just the other day when you bigged up a primatologist without knowing the first thing about her background, and ended up with egg on your face again. Scientists being negative about this subject have done so in very, very, very few instances after examining the evidence properly and being aware of all the facts. This has been proven time and time again by me in exchanges with you. Knowledge is spread and hard work acknowledged by documenting, travelling, exchanging ideas - basic hard work. People who have something worthy of listening to deserve to be paid for that hard work. Everything about your attitude towards that reeks of both bitterness (we know you have tried your hand at field research and failed), and a typical rhetorical stance that means that every last expert, scientist, academic who broadens this subject has an “outright agenda so can’t be trusted anyway”... YET you are happy enough to endorse the 5% of those people who apply comparatively 5% of their time and efforts to apply lesser standards of science to a subject they only know 5% of. These are your standards. They are pretty damning if you expect to be perceived as having integrity. Again, Bigfoot have been found to exist in North America for hundreds of years, reported and documented to such extent that we can point to consistent behavioural traits before indigenous peoples even knew what a none-human primate were even meant to know looked like. And I asked for reasons why tracks in easily negotiable terrain were not pursued proving that people allegedly don’t really want to find out... and as an effort at substance you actually thought you proved your point by showing me just tracks in snow and no other context whatsoever. If you tried that in any other forum you would be laughed off the scene. Makes me wonder if I need me head read for giving you the time.

    25. And here’s news for you Eddy boy. In their own environment, primates are known to be smarter, stronger, faster, have acute senses, and basically more knowledgeable in such environments. The fact that these basics of anthropology/primatology need to be pointed out sums it all up. There are even reputable studies in primatology that show that for the majority of the time, chimps for example are caught on trail cams NOT because they are stupid... but because they don’t care. The “many eyes” factor makes them very confident. If you know important details regarding primate behaviour such as this along with their almost photographic memories that embarrass human primates every time in laboratory tests, then it totally transforms things. The creatures that enjoy these capabilities exist and at times take three years to track in the wild. They are sometimes only witnessed via fleeting glimpses after weeks of tracking. Oh and I won’t ignore you old boy, I’m going to continue to respond to you for one simple fact that you cannot grasp after all this time. When you are chasing me and others around trying to agitate (and then tellingly and very narcissistically lay claim to achieving that), you are keeping me around bevause I have what I need. I need an idiot to bounce facts off so that if some kid comes along googling for “Bigfoot Evidence”, then I can not only show them what an amazing subject this is... but by the amount you like to use waves & cycles of rehashed failed arguments, I can repeat myself and make sure the same arguments are preached to others, without preaching on my part.

      : )

      Happy f’n Xmas Rummo. Let’s hope it hasn’t been as lonely for you as your behaviour suggests. No psycho nerd deserves that.

    26. Ha ha ha ha ha - you speak of SUBSTANCE yet you have no body to substantiate any claims you make. What a hoot! Now let me get this straight - THOUSANDS of years of reports and evidence yet Bigfoot is STILL not recognized as actually existing? "Every expert, every tracker/Hunter with decades of experience under his/her belts" and not one can even follow Bigfoot tracks in the SNOW to find out what made them? You know what would make my position impossible to defend? A body. Just ONE body and you win. Just ONE body and the world will listen. Just ONE body and all skeptics will be silenced forever. What are the odds of ONE body not being discovered with THOUSANDS of years, THREE databases of reports, ADVANCED technology, and with all these so-called witnesses and evidence? Seems to me I'm not the guy with the impossible position. Oh how I wish more people could be reading this but you have enough people on this site who think your nuts giving Bigfoot all these abilities (now they have photographic memories - LOL) so I guess I will have to be content with that.

      So who am I suppose to be this "Rum" or am I now "Eddy"? I find this extremely amusing since I have never posted other than anonymous but if it makes you feel better call me anything you wish. I'll extend that courtesy to you - LOL! "Failed researcher"? Why would I waste my time on something I don't believe exists? Boy, are you off the mark! For the record it was YOU who made the claim Bigfoot could cloak not me. In my view anyone who believes in the paranormal is gullible because they can't back up their claims like...well you know - "Bigfoot turning their hair clear to cloak" (that's a classic from you).

      Oh I won't ignore you either. I enjoy making you look like a fool. I only wish more people could see it.

    27. I speak of plenty of substance from the position of someone who can point to ten times the evidence at this stage of research, than field researchers enthusiastic about the Billie Ape enjoyed. And guess what type of evidence sealed their existence? Footage and track impressions. No specimen required. Yes, thousands of years of reports most of which are at the cultural core of indegenous people who have lived here far, far longer than those with European ancestry. To support that are not only 150 years documented of 7-8 foot tall skeletons in North America, but there is at least 80 years of physical evidence that points to a living population of archaic foot bearing humans being found in wilderness areas. And to those who actually are qualified, the best primatologists & conservationists on the planet are enthusiastic or at least an open minded as to the current state of evidence.

      For a comparative example, you are on record complaining that their is no such thing as a climate emergency. The amount of unqualified scientists who oppose you might be a problem if their weren’t actual climate scientists who are qualified arguing the case. Same as this subject, old boy. You can have a plethora of unqualified scientists who are ignorant of the data “not recognising” the species, this is fine. When the best primatologists on the planet say otherwise then it’s time to relinquish your paranormal tree-bark-squatch to the annals of historical fantasy. Sane enthusiasts don’t need it, they have plaster and footage to point to.

      Below is a short example of an experiment that shows that chimpanzees have startling photographic memories; they easily beat humans every time in laboratory situations. From the Primate Research Institute at Kyoto University;

      And since chimps have fewer motor neurons than us, each neuron triggers a higher number of muscle fibers and using a muscle becomes more of an all-or-nothing proposition. As a result, chimps often end up using more muscle than they need, but they can in theory lift about 16 people over their own head;

      Imagine what a primate three times the size of a chimp could achieve? They would have phenomenal strength and stealth abilities to leave a trackway dead for serious distances. Plus we already know that hiding tracks is an academically accepted behaviour with respect to chimpanzees in the wild. You could not take the average hunter and plonk him/her in the Congo and expect him/her to deliver results off the back of their tracking abilities. You stupid old patoot. Experienced primatologists regularly report that a gorilla could be feet away from them and they never know they are there. A f’n gorilla. And to the innumerable hunters who have reported these hominin in the wild, nobody in their right minds would/should open up on something on two feet.

      And I’m glad you’re bitter about failing as a researcher. You deserve to be, you f’n great hypocrite. Your behaviour reeks of failure at every turn... “getting even” on the Internet is something psychologists are all too familiar with in their studies on internet trolls in recent times. I suspect your shortcomings with field research and your narcissism means it’s “everyone else’s fault.”

    28. We are not talking about chimpanzees or gorillas. We are taking about a creature which you have absolutely no proof of existing. It's easy to claim abilities when you have never actually examined one. LOL - it's like talking to a wall and I think the wall is smarter. I have no idea who you think I am but I can tell you I have never researched Bigfoot and don't intend to. I would probably have better success researching ghosts - oh that's right you believe in the paranormal crap as well!

      You must be a bitter, bitter man never to have your dream realized. Prepare to die bitter because Bigfoot will never be proven....except in YOUR mind of course. Ha ha ha!

    29. Do you feel stupid now, that I had to teach you the basics of primate capabilities? Because if chimps and gorillas can achieve these things, then given the behavioural traits of Bigfoot that have been reported for 200 years by modern eyewitnesses, there is absolutely no reason to doubt that they can achieve the same given that there is proof that they exist in the physical sign they leave. Ultimately, I am exchanging with a child who knows sweet F all about the subject he’s harping on about daily. Facts are you’re here because you are able to get around being banned for years and there are idiots like me who give you the time... But I’ll always make you look stupid.

      Hey Rummo, why don’t you cut & paste some of this stuff on a latest comment section like you threatened? Ha ha ha!! Go do my job for me you silly little pervert.

    30. "absolutely no reason to doubt"

      ....except of course a little thing like a actual body or part. Ha ha ha

      "there are idiots like me"

      Eureka! Something we can finally agree on!

      "why don’t you cut & paste some of this stuff on a latest comment section like you threatened"

      Sounds like a good idea. It's far more satisfying to let everyone seen how stupid you are Mr. "Bigfoot can cloak by turning their hair clear". Only you are dumb enough to believe something like that.

    31. There is 80 years of Bigfoot being documented leaving the impression of a body part all over North America... hundreds of years if you consider the Native American artwork that had documented the same. So many impressions of a particular body part, that average height & weight ratios can be extrapolated from such body parts. That’s without the many hair samples we can point to that are all morphologically congruent, ruling out misidentification.

      It’s ok, I quite enjoy teaching someone about primatology and such. It refreshes the mind ya know? Regrettably, I gave you the credit of knowing about basic primate behaviour... it’s times like this that I have to remember that I’m not exchanging with Einstein.

    32. "leaving the IMPRESSION of a body part".

      But that's not exactly the same as a REAL body right? Gee all the native artwork I've seen isn't exactly what I would call a mirror image of what they wanted to represent. How amazing that they can extrapolate the height and weight from such. Your a master of the link - perhaps you will indulge me by sending a link of the best representation of this "artwork" so I may judge for myself.

      Poor bitter, bitter Joetimi! It must truly burn your fragile ego knowing that all you need is ONE body to forever silence your critics. Just ONE body to make me eat crow. Just one BODY and you can gloat to the world that you were smarter than anyone else. But the years go by, story after story, picture after picture, video after video, footprint after footprint and yet not ONE body. How lonely it must be to have such strong conviction in something yet never be able to give it the credibility and respect it deserves. How humiliating it must be for you to be ridiculed and scorned simply because ONE body is never produced. So to save face you give it super abilities and use paranormal explanations for why it escapes detection. You even state you don't want it to ever be found trying to appear noble by thinking of it's welfare when you know it's simply an excuse. I actually feel sorry for you........ha ha ha - no I don't. Your an arrogant, pompous fanatic who losing ground every day.

      See ya sucker!

    33. Many things in nature exhibit a Gaussian probability distribution. Take, say, size variation of leaves on a tree, or height variation of modern humans, they all fall into a Gaussian distribution. When the sizes of observed and cast tracks are carefully measured and the data expressed in a database the size variation of those tracks follows a perfect Gaussian distribution. That would not be the case if tracks were not from the real body parts. The totality of the documented Bigfoot tracks in North America follow a natural pattern and so belong to a real bipedal creature. Bigfoot has been detected to reside in North America.

      Kathy Moskowitz Strain
      U.S. Forest Service, Stanislaus National Forest, 19777 Greenley Road, Sonora, CA 95370
      ABSTRACT. The purpose of this article is to examine the association of prehistoric pictographs with contemporary stories told by the Tule River Indians about Hairy Man. Located on the Tule River Indian Reservation, the Painted Rock Pictographs are approximately 1000 years old. According to members of the tribe, the pictographs depict how various animals, including Hairy Man, created People. Other stories tell why Hairy Man lives in the mountains, steals food, and still occupies parts of the reservation. Since the Tule River Indians equate Hairy Man to Bigfoot, the pictograph and stories are valuable to our understanding of the modern idea of a hair-covered giant.

      And as for me allegedly losing ground every day... all your demands over a ten year period have in end made you look stupid. You wanted DNA, you got it. You wanted peer review, you got it. You fall short of every comparative example because you have to be brought up to scratch regarding the basic details of those examples. The Billie Ape required no such body. Comparatively, for what is being reported in North America, there are three generations of archaeologists who have documented, with photographs, the excavation of 7-8 foot remains.

      Every year that goes by more and more people find the topic less of a taboo, more and more people come forward with their experiences, more and more evidence roles in and it becomes more of a pop culture subject, whilst more and more scientists are prepared to ask questions. All the while, the people you depend upon when role playing, psuedsceptics, are nowhere to be seen.

      Where are they?

      : )

    34. OMG - you use that stick figure to prove your point that you can extrapolate the height and weight of a Bigfoot??? Ha ha ha ha - are you nuts?

      "When the sizes of observed and cast tracks are carefully measured and the data expressed in a database the size variation of those tracks follows a perfect Gaussian distribution. That would not be the case if tracks were not from the real body parts."

      Gee, I wonder if this guy's tracks fall into the Gaussian distribution? Ha ha ha ha!

      Yeah we got the DNA and the Sykes study clearly showed it was from known animals. Your "peer" review was from ONE journal which has a dubious reputation at best. Had they never actually found the Billie Ape then it never would have been proven to exist either. Your photographs are useless without an actual skeleton to back up the claims. Every year that goes by without proof makes it more of a joke as our technology advances. The subject has never been taboo because it's just plan fun to believe in. Like - you know.............Santa Claus.

      I've got to quit answering your posts here and start with the fresh topics. People have to see your stupidity. I'll be waiting for you.

    35. Unfortunately, using an example of hand-carved footprint shoes, from a city dwelling dude where Bigfoot isn’t seen, or would never fool someone, from 2012, isn’t going to go very far when trying to debunk 80 years of track impressions that yield such data. I’m almost speechless as to how you might think that is a decent argument. Not only that, but let’s just say that some fakes are indeed in within that data... it still does not go any distance to debunking the entire distribution data due to an impossible amount of track casts that show toe bending/flexing, attained from trackways with altering planter pressure and accurate archaic morphology... you don’t get these traits from static fake feet, it’s impossible. Hoaxers with carved feet would have to have guessed up midtarsal breaks and somehow guessed up the same archaic feet cast decades before, prior to these casts even being manufactured as replicas. Assuming there are fakes laying around within that pool of data... a handful of fakes out of hundreds of casts isn’t gonna make the slightest dent. We even have a hominin with flexing toes (PGF) in footage leaving footprints, game, set, match. This is the exact same type of evidence that sealed another discovery of a man sized primate in the Congo. Exactly.

      No, you got Sykes in his book disclosing to have tested a hair sample that was from a hominin observed by government employees, and it tested as human. The subject of the hair being tested was actually observed. The peer peer that made you eat the biggest crow is from a journal that is no different to the likes of Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences (for example), even sources such Smithsonian mag, in asking age old questions about the paranormal. You can google any wacky subject, and you will find scientists from all walks of life having tested it for authenticity. The JREF have made money off the back of scientists doing this for YEARS. That’s because to debunk something you must scientifically test that something. The Billie Ape is your biggest problem when seeking to compare this subject to that of primatology because it proves me correct every time... you cannot track a man sized primate unless you have anything up to three years of consistent field studying to utilise, plus in the end, it was mere footage that sealed it for science - no body needed. Science does not need a body. And especially so if this hominin is in the genus homo as it would be murder - and at that rate we can point to many a comparative anthropological study of peoples in their natural environments. And again, photographs of these 7-8 foot tall skeletons are your biggest obstacle regarding 150 years of excavation papers, science journals and newspaper reports of giant human skeletons being dug up, because by the mid-20th century the exact same type of papers were still being written but this time with photographic evidence of the same 7-8 talk skeletons in the actual burial mounds being excavated. This is absolute proof positive that plethora of evidence of the 19th is factual. I’m not sure if failing to acknowledge that simple fact on your part is down to plain stupidity of not understanding how profound a piece of substance that is, as much as it is a cowardly safe space to hide behind a repatriation law that legally prosecutes museums and academic institutions to why you cannot see native American remains to this day. Every year that goes by and the development of every piece of technology that you can think of catches evidence of Bigfoot, such as thermal images of 7-8-9 foot tall bipeds.

    36. And the subject has been so much of a taboo that eyewitnesses have refused to come forward and have spent years in denial about their experiences before coming to terms with what they saw, even being treated for PTSD. Anna Nekaris, one of the best primatologists on the planet at the moment... studied eyewitness reports and found that people simply did not want to come forward. The late John Bindernagle, who worked for the UN as a wildlife biologist (who had a major hand in helping the very famous Jane Goodall have a positive opinion on the subject)... famously said that it was always like “pulling teeth” when trying to convince eyewitnesses to tell of their experiences. But not any more. It’s ironic that the one thing that you think gives you that “all-knowing” brain power and superiority in this subject, TV, has made sure that people now have more courage to come forward and advance the field further. Bigfoot sightings in the US have increased 248 percent since the 2011 debut of the Animal Planet TV series Finding Bigfoot.

      All the while (and this being the most ironic) none of your Bigfoot hoaxers in monkey costumes seem to end up shot dead? I wonder what that means, by your logic, for the existence of hoaxers?

      : p

    37. OH! And I’ll be back tomorrow to respond to any vomit piles left as an effort at logic.


    38. Quite the diatribe. Just more of cooking up every possible excuse you can think of and moving the goalposts once again. Starting to sound to me like you don't have much faith in this "Expedition Bigfoot" crew producing any solid proof. Puzzling isn't it that all our advanced technology fails to capture just one clear and convincing image especially when we seem to be able to capture rare living animals on film. So every hair that that is tested human is now Bigfoot. Got it.

      You know what would impress and convince me? If you could back up everything you write with a body - Everything I have wrote would fall apart with All skeptics would be forced to eat crow with Your so-called "evidence" doesn't have much substance without The whole world would accept Bigfoot's existence with

      Reality is a bitch isn't it?

    39. I’m sorry, dumbo, but my argument has not changed once. You cannot claim that I am cut & pasting old arguments, and then the next claim I am moving the goalposts. When you ask for evidence, it is not the fallacy of that person presenting evidence who’s at fault... it is the person attempting to you a logical fallacy inaccurately who is. That is you. You can go back weeks and I have stated from day one that three weeks and a TV crew will not prove the existence of Bigfoot. Above you have been presided a link to a thermal source that documented an 8-9 foot subject. All this is the type of substance you are provided all the time, but you are too cowardly to even open links. Your Attenborough documentaries that document rare animals are tracked by experts who know how to track such rare animals. And there is footage source upon footage source upon footage source from amateur researchers and member of the public that have documented hominin in the US. If snow leopards were left to go be average person to document, they’d appear as blob-leapards for the majority of the time... you’re on record lauding Standing’s Blinky for Christ’s sakes. And nope, every hair sample linked to known activity of Sasquatch, track impressions and direct eyewitness accounts... that are all morphologically congruent ruling out misidentification, have turned out to be human under testing.

      Allow me to put something into context for you. If someone brought you a large human bone, how would you differentiate between it belonging to a hominid or a anatomically modern human? Let’s see how up you scratch with reality you are.

    40. Here we go. Let’s start with this...

      Is this from a bear, an anatomically modern human, or a hominid?

    41. Honest answer is I probably couldn't unless it was a skull and have to rely on someone knowledgeable in osteology to identify it. Now let me ask you this: If someone brought you in a cast of a Bigfoot print could you tell if it's real or a hoax?

    42. Precisely old boy! You wouldn’t know what the F you’re looking at, would you? And since archaic skulls have already been known to exist in the US, to which I can point to many an example being photographed and studied by anthropologists in the US, what does this mean for your little bones safe space argument now?

      Bigfoot prints are slightly different since the details & circumstances of their casting depends on their authenticity. For example how far into wilderness areas, the type of terrain, if dermals are in the actual print, mud sliding, toe flexing, impact ridges, whether it appears to be a sequential print, singular trackway with differing footfalls, and whether it belongs to certain activity known to be displayed and documented at length by “Bigfoot”. So whilst I lean on the expertise of others... I can at least admit that I do, and not pretend like I am a makeshift anthropologist in my spare time in the wilderness of the US, like you expect every hunter and hiker to be when you yourself have not a shred of responsibility when it comes to your shortfalls regarding this subject.

    43. "So whilst I lean on the expertise of others"

      Which is exactly what I admitted when it comes to bones. The short answer concerning the footprints is no one can absolutely say they are authentic or fake. You can cite details and circumstances of footprints but the singular fact remains there is no proof that what left them is indeed a Bigfoot since we still have no body (or even an actual foot). Just as you can certainly speculate about the bones but the fact remains we still have no proof of ANY bones actually coming from what a now existing Bigfoot creature. I can tell you something I do not do - pretend I am an authority on a creature which still hasn't been proven to exist by stating all it's capabilities as absolute fact. Produce a body and then you can talk with some authority.

    44. Uuuuuuuuuum no. We can say that footprints are authentic. And that’s because of testing of said casts with help from your pseudoscpetic heroes, and corroborating data that supports such footprints. Allow me to elaborate on what I means by corroborating data. Not only are the two of the three track casts that have been peer reviewed consistent with another in that study to be found on another continent, but they are comparable to already accepted and published studies of scientifically recognised hominin trackways, namely homo erectus. Below are scans of the ten original casts made by Bob Titmus nine days after the filming at the Patterson-Gimlin film site in 1967;

      And the footprints from the Laetoli site in Tanzania, dated to the Plio-Pleistocene and famous for its hominin footprints, excavated by 1978;

      That is proof of an actual archaic foot coming into contact with the ground, we can point to an archaic human leaving it because the same type of archaic feet have been studied for decades and decades. This is repeatable scientific evidence - this is the best type of evidence one can have to base a genuine field study around. In comparison you have nothing to lean on. You have an expectancy level that all hikers and hunters should have academic level awareness when they come across bones in the wild, when you yourself cannot do so. Sure you can claim to lean on academics, but that’s where are they? Where are they to debunk 80 years of trackways and casts?

      So whilst this type of data cannot be misinterpreted, a home in the wilderness can be. An intelligent hominin, just like homo erectus, that maintains its dead would ensure no bones are located. And let’s just say that those bones weren’t so safely tucked away... the average hiker/Hunter simply would not know any different. As proven with help from yourself. I’m not an authority, I just know what I’m talking about old boy.

  2. The long trackway associated with Cliff Barackman turned out to be a BS hoax. But it sure had people excited.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?