Bigfoot: Fact Or Fiction?

Discussion in 'SHH Community Forum' started by Assassin32, May 11, 2004.

?

Fact Or Fiction?

  1. Fact

  2. Fiction

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Truthteller Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2002
    Messages:
    27,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    BFRO's Quick FAQ on the 12/02 'Death of Bigfoot' Story.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    John Green on the 'Birth of Bigfoot' at Bluff Creek.
    More Commentary of the 'Death of Bigfoot' Story
    Samples of other Wallace Claims
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Question: How many successful bigfoot hoaxes did Ray Wallace perpetrate during his lifetime?

    Answer: None. Wallace didn't even claim publicly to have perpetrated any successful bigfoot hoaxes. These assertions were publicized after Wallace's death, by Wallace's heirs, and a freelance publisher/writer on the East Coast. Wallace cannot be given credit for any successful hoaxes because researchers in general were never duped by his fake evidence. Many who knew Wallace said he indeed faked some evidence to sell at his shop. He told lots of people tall-tales about his alleged interactions with sasquatches, but he did all these things while firmly believing sasquatches existed somewhere in the forests of the northwest, according to friends who knew Wallace for years.


    Question: Did Wallace ever fake any bigfoot evidence?

    Answer: Yes. Over the years Wallace faked perhaps a dozen or so bigfoot track casts, and a smaller number fake bigfoot photos and films. He started faking evidence long after the first "Bigfoot" story hit the media in the late 1950's. For decades he tried to sell crudely faked casts at his roadside tourist shop in southern Washington State. He wasn't interested in perpetrating a major hoax, as much as he was eager to sell fake casts to tourists. He didn't sell much. He was more prolific at telling outrageous stories. His stories and his evidence had been repeatedly examined over the years, by a long list of qualified researchers, all of whom concluded that it had no credibility.


    Question: Was Wallace responsible for the various high-profile bigfoot evidence referred to in the 12/02 news stories?

    Answer: No. Wallace's material was always clearly identifiable as fake, and thus was disregarded along with many other pieces of fake evidence that various people tried to sell over the years in roadside shops in the northwest. The facts and physical evidence clearly demonstrate that Wallace had nothing to do with the many tracks and casts, and the best footage, found in more remote areas in the northwest, which are thought to be authentic. Wallace never publicly claimed to have faked any of that high-profile, credible evidence, though his heirs are now claiming that he took responsibility for it all shortly before he died.


    Question: Why would Wallace's heirs claim he faked all the evidence and started the Bigfoot mystery if he really didn't?

    Answer: Many assume it is because his heirs inherited lots of worthless, unsold, fake evidence from his roadside tourist shop. They believe his heirs may be hoping that their stories about Ray, and his personal belongings, will be much more valuable if there is a big sensational story attached to it.


    Question: Why did the 'Death of Bigfoot' story become such a big, worldwide news event so quickly, if the physical evidence clearly shows that Wallace was not responsible for the original "Bigfoot" tracks?

    Answer: The first story was a long, slanted obituary wherein the family and the freelance publisher made their claims about Ray Wallace. This obituary instantly became a hot item on the AP wire service, and became progressively distorted as it exploded out across other wire services, newspapers, television and radio stations, around the world. This happened over the course of a few days in early December. There was apparently no time for any newspaper (except the Denver Post), to seek out the truth behind the Wallace story. Every other newspaper was eager announce the 'Death of Bigfoot', mainly because other 'confession' stories purporting to debunk major mysteries, such as Loch Ness and crop circles, were always major world headlines when they first appeared. The investigation by the Denver Post is still ongoing.


    Question: What is the physical proof demonstrating that Wallace did not create the original "Bigfoot" tracks?

    Answer: The fake track stompers said by the Wallace family to be those which created the famous "Bigfoot" tracks, physically do not match the casts of the famous "Bigfoot" tracks. Wallace's fake track stompers are crude, carved representations of some Bluff Creek tracks from that era, based on copies of casts shared among locals years after the fact. The details of Wallace's stompers show they are simply not the molds, so to speak, which created the original tracks found in the ground by Jerry Crew and Bob Titmus in Bluff Creek in the 1950's.


    Question: Is it possible that someone else could have faked all the best evidence obtained around Bluff Creek in the 1950's and 1960's?

    Answer: As any school child will point out, anything is possible. It is possible that everything in the world which appears to be natural and organic, is actually fabricated by pranksters. By the same token it is possible that all the physical evidence of sasquatches from across the continent is fabricated by pranksters. What is not possible is the idea that the consistent, subtle hallmarks of all the tracks believed to be authentic could have been fabricated without a lot of expensive, high-tech mechanical engineering. Wallace's methods for faking tracks, by contrast, were very crude and produced obviously fake casts. Wallace endeavored for decades to sell every bit of fake bigfoot garbage that he could, but never had anything better than his typical crude casts for sale in his shop. He never displayed any casts in his shop that had these subtle hallmarks of authentic casts. Neither Wallace nor his heirs have ever displayed, or claim to possess, any of the advanced technology or collateral items required to fake the original Bluff Creek tracks. No one else has ever been able to demonstrate the methods or elaborate gear required to fake the authentic casts, and this gear would had to have been in use since the 1940's, when sasquatch tracks first started to be investigated. Because of the time-line of the evidence, one couldn't rely on the most modern technology to fabricate the distinguishing characteristics.


    Question: What has been the effect of the 'Death of Bigfoot' story on the researcher efforts into the bigfoot/sasquatch phenomena?

    Answer: Long-time reseachers are stunned at the lack of integrity and diligence on the part of the wire services and the mainstream media. The media (and even Jay Leno) implied that bigfoot researchers were hoaxed for years by Ray Wallace's efforts. Bigfoot researchers say the AP wire service, etc., were hoaxed by the 'Death of Bigfoot' story. The fact is, Ray Wallace's efforts at fabricating evidence and stories were well known to researchers for decades. Ray Wallace was a fountain of bogus stories, and everyone knew it. He always sought attention for his stories, but never got much. Nor was he the only pathological liar out there spouting ridiculous stories and peddling crudely faked evidence. The only Wallace story that made big news happened after his death -- the 12/02 'Death of Bigfoot' story. Ironically, this bogus story didn't come directly from Wallace, but was attributed to him by members of his family. It was as if someone helped the heirs realize that a "deathbed hoax confession" story was the only story the wire services and mainstream media would circulate without hesitation or any due diligence.

    http://www.bfro.net/news/wallace_faq.asp
     
  2. spiderjaybe143 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2003
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    0
    dude,that's interesting.....that's veeeeery interesting:D
     
  3. Truthteller Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2002
    Messages:
    27,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    Footprints in the snow? Yeah, right... Check this out:

    Report # 2393 (Class A)
    Submitted by witness David K. on Thursday, March 09, 2000.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A group of military police report an encounter while guarding a chopper accident site
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    YEAR: 1985

    SEASON: Summer

    MONTH: September

    STATE: Georgia

    COUNTY: Lumpkin County

    LOCATION DETAILS: The location was northwest of Dalonega, Ga about 5-6 miles in the Chatahoochee Forest, 4 miles north of Camp Darby [Camp Frank D. Merrill] (US Army Ranger training camp). The main N - S Park access (dirt and gravel) road was about two miles from the location. The Park starts about 1/2 mile north of Camp Darby and the access road is the road from Darby into the Park - follow this road for about 2 miles and take the right (north) fork. About 2-3 miles north of the fork and on the west side of the road is a large mountain (I dont know the name of it, and was probably only known as a number on the military maps, however I do not recall what it is) the incident occured near a ridge, about 1/3 of the way up mountain. If I had a military map of the area I could show you the exact location.


    NEAREST TOWN: Dalonega

    NEAREST ROAD: state park access road about 2 miles away

    OBSERVED: In 1985 I was assigned as a Military Policeman to the US Army Garrison at Fort McPhearson, Ga.(Atlanta). We recieved a alert for my squad to go and secure the crash site of an AH-1 (Cobra) helicopter that belonged to the Texas Army National Guard that crashed in the Chatahoochee Forest, North of the Ranger Camp.

    We were helicoptered into the ranger camp with our gear and we boarded a "Duece" (2 1/2 ton truck) for the ride to the crash site.

    We made it to within about 1/4 mile of the site and had to carry our gear in.

    We relieved the Rangers that were guarding the site (the crash occured about 12 hrs earlier) and set up camp. Our job was to keep people out of the area (curiosity seekers, news people, etc.) until the crash investigation team arrived and took over.

    The crash site was small, about 100 feet by 30 feet because the Cobra crashed in one piece and then burned, so the whole area had that fuel smell and that "burned flesh" smell.

    The photos below are from the official accident investigation report. It is uncertain whether these photos were taken the day before or the day after the animal encounter.

    The accident investigation report was obtained by Larry Lesh, MSgt, USAF (Retired)

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    We set up camp adjacent to the wreckage about 50 feet away and posted our guard shifts. (I will not name complete names here because of 2 reasons, 1. some of the people involved refused to even talk about it afterward. 2. I do not know where they are today.)

    My squad consisted of 5 men:

    SGT Ken R. - Patrol Supervisor (NCOIC)
    SPC Rodney T. - MP
    SPC Shaun N. - MP
    PFC Tim A. - MP
    PFC David K. (Me)-MP

    We finally got the camp set around 6:00 pm and the sun was going down. A large fire was built in our perimeter (which was pretty stupid in retrospect due to the large amount of fuel on the ground from the crash) and had set 4 hour shifts. Myself and SPC Shaun N were on the second shift (10:00 pm-2:00 am) we finally racked out about 8:00pm to get some shut-eye.

    Around 10:00 pm I woke to the most god awful howl/scream you could imagine and when I looked at SGT Ken R, SPC Rodney T and PFC Tim A, you would have thought that they saw a ghost! All three had their 45's out (we were armed with [45's] with two 6 round magazines) cocked, locked and ready to rock!

    All were visibly shaken. Myself and SPC Shaun N got up and asked what the hell was that, the only answer we got was another howl/scream that was about 50 feet to our east (from the direction of the wreckage) at which time SGT Ken R started dousing the fire from a 5 gallon water can and then told us to spread out online. He told us to keep our flashlights off until he told us and then told us to move out to the wreckage keeping online. His words were "If these locals wanna F*** with the Army then lets give em what they want."

    At this point as we started to move out I could hear metal being pulled, thrown and moved around at the crash site and I kept looking for a light down there as I was moving. About 30 feet away SGT Ken R turned on his mag-lite and what I saw scared the S*** out of me: 3 creatures were there among the wreckage and they were not bears! the closest one (about 10 feet away) was holding a piece of metal from the heicopter and stood on 2 legs at least 7 1/2 feet tall, covered in hair except for the face, which looked like a chimp, the one behind him(15 feet away) was dragging part of the pilot's body from the wreckage, he (or she) was larger than the first one, however it was stooped while dragging the body. My estimate was over 8 feet tall with the same facial features. I only saw the 3rd one briefly 40 feet away as it was fleeing.

    SPC Rodney T. was the first one to fire which sent everyone into "Dodge City" mode (basically shooting everywhere). After SGT Ken R. got everyone to stop shooting and got us calmed down (yea right!) we reloaded a fresh clip and circled the wagons so to speak. This all lasted about 20 min from start (when I heard the scream) to finish(when we stopped firing) however we stayed locked and loaded till sunrise and did not move from our 360 at the wreckage.

    Around 6:00 it started getting light, so we moved out to see if we killed one of the creatures or could at least get a bloodtrail. We found no creature bodies or bloodtrails.

    The crash invesigators arrived at 8:00 am and we said nothing to them (upon agreement) and we left and returned to Fort McPhearson.

    When I think about that night I really get the "Willies" about what I saw and as I said earlier some of the guys with me absolutely refused to talk about it. I honestly think (looking back on this) that these creatures ment us no harm - they were only scavaging. I think they may have smelled the burned bodies in the same way you can smell someone bar-b-quing, how good it smells? They sensed a free meal - even though we were 50 feet away - and were willing to take the risk.

    The howl/scream? one of the creatures calling the others to his find. I have only talked to 2 other people about this and because I am still in the military (though I am no longer an MP) I wish to remain unknown to the public - at least until I retire (in 4 years). As an investigator you are free to contact me any time and I will answer any of your questions that I can.

    OTHER WITNESSES: 5 total witnesses involved 2 were sleeping - (myself and SPC Shaun N.) 3 were guarding - (SGT Ken R., SPC Rodney T., PFC Tim A.)

    TIME AND CONDITIONS: 10:00-11:00 pm Light Conditions: dark but clear Weather: clear and about 60 degrees


    ENVIRONMENT: Geography: mountain terrain (by Georgia standards) with elevations around 3000 feet (highest peak in the area). It has many fast flowing creeks and streams with deep beds. The terrain tends to be very steep in most places with lots of gullies and draws.

    Heavily wooded with areas of clearcut. underbrush is thick with lots of deadfalls. Virgin forest and 2nd generation forest about 50 / 50. Mostly Oak and Pine, some Walnut and a few Elm. Blackberries and wild plums abound. Enviorment of Encounter Area: 2nd generation hardwood forest (about 20-30 yrs old) and thick underbrush (oak scrub) about 200 meters (175 yards) from the edge of virgin timber (hardwood)

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Follow-up investigation report:

    Primary BFRO investigators: Matt M. and Army Ranger Instructor Carl J.

    Matt M. has spoken with the witness David K. by phone from Korea. Carl was able to confirm that there was a helicopter crash with fatalities at the described location in 1985.

    If you are one of the other witnesses mentioned in the report, please contact [email protected].

    Witness David K. and Ranger Instructor Carl J. would both like to speak with you about the incident. This an animal observation case, not a criminal case. You have nothing to worry about by coming forward. No reasonable person is going to suggest that five MP witnesses are all crazy. As the first witness noted, this database puts your encounter in the proper context. You're not the only one who has seen these animals.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Q&A with witness David K.

    Q: How did David K.'s group explain the missing ammunition when they returned?

    A: To answer the question about the rounds, ask any MP and he will tell you that he carries his own [small arms] rounds. As a matter of fact most Infantry do too! My section had their own rounds and that is what we used. We had planned to do some [target practice] while we were there.

    Q: How did they explain to the crash investigation team that the pilot's remains had been removed from the wreckage? The point of that being that the scene was to supposed to be kept undisturbed until the investigators arrived.

    A: In the interview David K. mentioned that the only time his unit worried about others learning what happened was the following morning. Soon after the investigators arrived they started shouting and asking how and why the remains were outside the wreckage. David said his unit was very nervous at that moment. They could only shrug it off.

    It's important to keep in mind that the MP unit's order were not to keep the site completely undisturbed. Their instructions were to "keep people away from the crash site." They camped at a spot where they would be able to deter people approaching from the nearest road. They didn't need to camp right next to wreckage.

    Q: Can David K. explain why none of the three creatures were hit at such close range although many rounds were fired?

    A: David never said that none of the creatures were hit. All he knew was that his unit didn't find any dead animals the next morning, nor did they find a blood trail. That does not mean that none were hit. He doesn't know one way or the other on that.

    On the phone he explained that as the guys approached the wreckage, they were holding their guns and only one was holding a flashlight -- the sergeant. After the sgt and the rest of the unit got a good look at the animals in the flashlight beam, the sgt dropped the flashlight to go for his gun. So they were all suddenly laying down panicky cover fire blindly in the dark. If the animals were already starting to flee, the MPs could have easily missed them.

    As David K. said on the phone, all his guys were trying to do at that moment was stop the animals from dragging away the remains. Their response definitely accomplished that, regardless of the surprise factor.

    Q: Was it possible the wreckage was hit? Wouldn't bullet holes have raised questions?

    A: Visible bullet holes in the wreckage would probably have raised questions among investigators. I assume David K. would have mentioned it if his unit had been called back and questioned about that later. Considering that he didn't mention that I can assume 1) they weren't called back and questioned about that, and thus 2) there were no bullet holes in the wreckage, and thus 3) they probably weren't firing toward the wreckage.

    Other Questions:

    Several other questions and comments have been sent in by readers who have doubts about this story. Their questions range the gamut, from "Were there any tracks?" to "What happened to the spent shell casings after the shooting?"

    Instead of going back to David K. with every new question and doubt that is sent in about this story, we are going to collect those questions and direct them to the other witnesses when we hear from them. David K. has told us enough. We'd like to seek answers from some of the other witnesses who were there that night.

    =============================

    This very unusual report has been posted to the BFRO site in order to encourage the other MPs involved to contact us with their version of the events that night, and their descriptions of the animals that were attracted to this crash site.

    Various readers have responded to this report with questions and comments. A few people with military knowledge have pointed out some elements they consider to be inconsistent with standard military practice. The recurring elements have been put to some active military personnel. They have said that some things seem unusual, but may be due to slightly different practices and tolerances among different units in 1985. In that time period, we are told, operational procedures in various parts of the armed forces were not as strictly uniform among all units as they eventually became in subsequent years. In other words, some units did things a bit differently depending upon the style of the individual supervisors. This may not be tolerated today, but this incident did occur 15 years ago.

    Some points, such as an apparent descrepancy in the asserted capacity of a 45 magazine, were later explained by David K. (and confirmed by other sources) as simply a difference in usage among serviceman at that time. The 45 magazine technically holds 7 rounds, but some servicemen put only 6 rounds in the magazine to prevent jamming -- hence David's reference to a 6 round magazine.

    This is one example of a circumstantial element and a superficially questionable statement that various folks have focused on. These elements are peripheral, however, to the main question the BFRO is concerned with: What animal species was encountered that night at the crash site?

    The BFRO's investigation has conclusively established two important things related to this incident.

    1) This helicopter crash happened in the area and time frame described by David K.

    2) David K. and at least some of the other MPs mentioned were among the people who guarded the crash site that night.

    We're assuming that at least one of the other former MPs is still alive and recalls this assignment. We know some of their full names and can probably locate them, but we would like them to contact us on their own when they desire to discuss the incident. According to David K. they were very reluctant to discuss the matter after it happened, so we want to be sensitive to that. Both David K. and the BFRO are confident that at least one of the other MPs will want to make a statement about the incident at some point. It's much more likely that we'll receive a full and forthcoming account from the other witnesses if they initiate the contact with us, instead of them being contacted out of the blue and questioned about it.

    If we are ever contacted by one of those former MPs we are actually expecting to hear a somewhat different version of the story than David K's version.

    The key thing that interests the BFRO is the description of the animals that were observed that night, and what those animals were observed doing when confronted by the unit. If other elements of the whole story are disagreed upon between different witnesses, it would not be surprising at all, nor would it be relevant to the key issue of this report.

    Different people will tend to have different recollections about peripheral details and sequences of events they experienced together many years before. We are only concerned about the recollections of a specific, 5-10 second observation that occured among this group that night in 1985. If there are discrepancies among versions the story, but a consistency among them as to description of the animals, it would support the credibility of that part of the story.

    If David's story is not true, in whole or in part, we assume the other MPs involved won't hesitate to tell us so, but we haven't heard from any of them yet ...

    http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=2393
     
  4. Truthteller Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2002
    Messages:
    27,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    HA! "Dodge City Mode" :D
     
  5. choskins Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Messages:
    1,505
    Likes Received:
    0
    Truthteller, all your alleged neutral fact-based, truth-telling articles come from a website called BFRO. What does BFRO stand for? Yeah, that's what I thought. Not exactly neutral. I put up an article from the actual participants that said it was a load of crap. You put up a rebuttal article from the Bigfoot Researchers Organization. Oh, Ok!
     
  6. Capt Throbberson Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Messages:
    8,558
    Likes Received:
    0
    CHEWBACCA!!!!
    ROOOGGHGHGHGH!!
     
  7. Honey Vibe Pardon, Mr. Hyde?

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2000
    Messages:
    12,853
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think that automatically makes the source sensational, choskins.
     
  8. choskins Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Messages:
    1,505
    Likes Received:
    0
    But it is not unbiased.
     
  9. Quietstorm Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Messages:
    7,213
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was watching the Discovery Channel 3 or 4 days ago about a primate who walks upright. I forget his name, but no one knew where he came from (I'm sure some of you guys know what I'm talking about). Supposedly he had 47 chromosomes, but that could have been the error of Japanese scientist who studied him. Some scientist say that maybe he was a creation of a human and a chimp, which I honestly I think is impossible. Therefore, I believe that there are animals out there yet to be discovered. :up:
     
  10. Truthteller Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2002
    Messages:
    27,038
    Likes Received:
    0
    choskins, I am familar with your source. I read it before you posted it. Its a local news station. It is no more unimpeachable than BFRO, in fact I would say less so.

    Lets be clear. I am a skeptic. In my mind the question is still open. I know there are plenty of hoaxes. That doesn't mean all accounts are hoaxes though. Some are certainly misidentification. Some are less clear.

    You seem to want to take the position that the case is closed. And by case I don't mean just the Patterson film but the whole of the Sasquatch/North American great ape existence question. If you choose to take the position that the case is closed and there is no need to consider evidence then fine. I would say that is both your choice and a premature conclusion.

    I am an Anthropologist. I am interested in the issue from both a physical science existence of a previously unknown animal question (plenty of precedent for such an event). As well as from a human folklore or oral history perspective. Both aspects have a wealth of material to study.

    Again, my position is that the case is still open, but certainly not yet proven. It looks to me though like there is better evidence than the general public is aware of through media accounts. There is plenty of habitat including food and cover for a population of several thousand of these animals in North America. I approach this like everything else, from a scientific perspective. So it is wrong if you think I have some kind of bias for the existence of the animal. Being an Anthropologist and being one who frequently likes to identify the flora and fauna of the world around me, I simply find it interesting.
     
  11. Jatslo Guest

    Anyone who knows me will tell you that I am an avid outdoorsman, and have always been so. In fact, I am happiest when I am prospecting for game fish, game animals, and precious minerals simultaneously. I have seen just about everything that walks and talks in Oregon, but I have never definitively seen, heard, smelled, touched, or tasted a "Bigfoot", nor have I witnessed primary "Bigfoot" evidence.

    I have heard the stories, yes.

    I would like to either go on an expedition of my own design, and\or sign up for one of those fancy "Bigfoot" vacation packages. I have researched financing a project of my own, and I found a place who will board any horses that I acquire for around $300.00/month. I am thinking I will require two horses, one for my camera person; the other for me. I will also need between two to four pack mules to haul my equipment, food, and water.

    I intend to do a little prospecting in the vicinity of remote Southern Oregon, and Northern California, but I also want to be setup to document "Bigfoot", if the opportunity presents itself. Realistically, I want to tranquillize a specimen, tag it with RFID Transponder (similar to how they track wolfs, and convicts), and take all the necessary DNA, and photo evidence possible. Easier said than done, right?

    If, and when I go, I will be in some of the most remote, and unexplored wildernesses in the United States, but more importantly, we are going to cover an immense open space on horseback. When, and if we stumble upon an area that is deemed active and hot, we will then setup in tree-stands in the most opportune places until our unsuspecting prey comes to us. We will, of course, bait the subject, so as to further entice it/provoke it.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, this is a serious matter for serious folks, and is something that I would personally like to accomplish, like gold mining. I have talked similarly about gold mining before I actually tried it, so believe me when I tell you, "There is a high likeliness that I will plan and execute a "Bigfoot" Expedition of my own design."

    I am in research and development mode presently, and I am posting here to give you the heads up, for one, but I was actually drawn here, because I am looking for the Paterson-Gimlin film. I have seen the "Stabilized Enhancement", and a lot of opinions about alleged scientific evidence; however, I would like to perform the frame-by-frame analysis on my own. Therefore, I need the empirical data, or more specifically, the unedited individual frames, so that I can complete this task.

    Anyway, I am not sure I will return here unless my research leads me here again, that is. However, you can still contact me scientifically at: http://12-Moderator-Matrix.com/Science-Forums.php ... I am not looking for anyone to talk me out of this, because I am going prospecting for precious minerals any way. As a scientist, I am naturally skeptical about any opinion regardless, if that opinion is validity or invalidity of specificity. For example, if I were to try and "Debunk" evidence, I would certainly be required to do just as much leg work as the competing party, and visa versus.

    With that said, I as am open-minded as a statistician should be, and unbiased too boot !

    - Jatslo
     
  12. Spider-Bite Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    7,995
    Likes Received:
    0
    what would classify as being bigfoot? it's possible that there is a large species of primate undiscovered lurking in the jungle somewhere. if we find one how do we know if it's bigfoot or something?

    I think the whole fascination with bigfoot is overrated for that reason.
     
  13. Jatslo Guest

    The discovery of a bipedal North American primate, will undoubtedly be classified as "Bigfoot".

    <i>Cryptozoology is the study of animals that are rumored to exist, but for which conclusive proof is still missing; the term also includes the study of animals generally considered extinct, but which are still occasionally reported. Those who study or search for such animals are called cryptozoologists, while the hypothetical creatures involved are referred to by some as "cryptids", a term coined by John Wall in 1983</i>" (Wikipedia, 2006).

    ... Bigfoot is a "Cryptid" ...

    "
     
  14. Gotendbz-2 Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]


    I think Big Foot might be real, but I think he'd be more likely to be in a Jungle than up north. Well, maybe in Canada...

    I think Bigfoot eats his own crap, so no one can find it.
     
  15. redmarvel Red, White and Buxom

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2002
    Messages:
    19,904
    Likes Received:
    7
    In the Himalaya's there's the Yeti
    In Canada it's Saskwatch
    In the U.S. it's Bigfoot

    I'ld like to think there's a reason for these various legends of beings so similar.
     
  16. Arkady Rossovich Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anyone who voted no,has something wrong with them.Reports of a large humanlike creature has been seen in other parts of the world.Not just the USA,i personally think it might be a reletive of the homo erectus or a giganthopicius-a giant ape.
     
  17. Fading ---

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    10,212
    Likes Received:
    623
    I can't vote on it cause honestly not sure. There were tales of Giant squid attacking or being attacked by whales and dragging men down. Until a few years ago everyone branded it as myth, an old wives tale or whatever, then they started turning up.

    My opinion is 70% of ppl now if not more are putting on stories when they talk about their 'experiences' with Big Foot. Maybe a good 25% of whats left actually believe they saw or heard something but didn't. Last 5% might have actually saw something, but might not be what we think of as Bigfoot.

    There might be some unknown animal that started all of this and it just grew from there, who knows. I think someone, at sometimes saw some animal that we don't have catalouged yet and it started there. Not sure if I think it's -

    [​IMG]

    or not tho lol.
     
  18. Apollo Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    9,709
    Likes Received:
    7
    bigfoot the wookie
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"