Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A few years ago, scientist stabilized the Bigfoot in the film like they did with Kennedy in the Zapruder film and you could clearly see definite muscle movement and it had breast.
i saw the same analysis. it was pretty far from conclusive.
i was a child of the '70's, i was weaned on "in search of". nothing would please my inner child more than evidence of the existence of bigfoots (feet? what would be the plural?). but........ for massive biped primates roaming all over north america without leaving a single carcass or bone behind ( and having the numbers to perpetuate the species) is basically in the realm of fantasy.
I'd like to believe there's a bigfoot out there, but I've seen no evidence that would convince me there is one. I've spent a lot of time in the woods too. I see shows like Finding Bigfoot and what I see are a bunch of people who come from a largely urban background mistaking every bear and deer and moose snapping a twig with having sasquatches all around them.
There's no conspiracy by scientists here to ignore it either. If someone is convinced they have hair or tissue samples from a bigfoot, plenty of credible labs would be willing to test it for DNA if you pay them for their efforts. The lab involved in this is not very credible.
If there actually are sasquatch, and their numbers are as low as these people speculate, the chances of finding remains would be extremely, extremely low. In the thousands of hours I have spent in the deep woods, I can recall the number of times I've encountered a carcass on one hand. It's amazing how quickly nature cleans up its dead. Even on sides of the road, I have yet to encounter a dead wolf or cougar, and I grew up in an area where both existed.
The only "evidence" that has made me think have been a couple sound recordings I've heard. If they weren't doctored, I can't tell you what the heck was making those types of sounds.
i saw the same analysis. it was pretty far from conclusive.
i was a child of the '70's, i was weaned on "in search of". nothing would please my inner child more than evidence of the existence of bigfoots (feet? what would be the plural?). but........ for massive biped primates roaming all over north america without leaving a single carcass or bone behind ( and having the numbers to perpetuate the species) is basically in the realm of fantasy.
Well there are a lot of hair that have been found where sightings took place the last decade or so and DNA suggest a unknown primate after analysis was done. Also don't forget that the Mountain Gorilla was just discovered 100 years ago.
well, 110 years ago but ....... think of all the technological advancements and population growth over the past 110 years.
i don't doubt that there are species yet to be discovered, just not this one.
I think they are small in numbers but very elusive. The U.S. Air Force published a great survival training map for aircraft crew members for 5 different areas for the state of Washington
From the U.S. Air Force Training Manual "Evasion Chart (EVC) TRNGUS-02A -Training Chart - 1st Edition May 2003."
The document reads as follows:
"TERRAIN - CLIMATE"
"NORTH EAST " (Washington Area)
Generally, the climate is a combination of alpine, subalpine and montane. Hot dry summers and moderately cold and snowy winters. Frequent chinooks moderate winter temperatures. Temperatures average in the 80/90's in mid-summer to lows in the 10-20's in winter. A strong elevational gradient in precipitation occurs, ranging from 15 to over 40 in per year. Elevations range from about 2000 ft. to over 7000 ft. The expansive conifer forests throughout this mountainous region contain hemlock, yew, larch, cedar, spruce, pines and fir. The area has beaver, badger, grouse, waterfowl, rabbits, moose, deer, marten, coyote, squirrels, chipmunk, bears, cougars, bobcat, porcupines, and many sasquatch sightings."
If there actually are sasquatch, and their numbers are as low as these people speculate, the chances of finding remains would be extremely, extremely low. In the thousands of hours I have spent in the deep woods, I can recall the number of times I've encountered a carcass on one hand. It's amazing how quickly nature cleans up its dead. Even on sides of the road, I have yet to encounter a dead wolf or cougar, and I grew up in an area where both existed.
The only "evidence" that has made me think have been a couple sound recordings I've heard. If they weren't doctored, I can't tell you what the heck was making those types of sounds.
Lets consider that:
1) There are many thousands of people hunting, hiking, fishing, camping everyday. Some folks live all their life in the woods. Thousands of publicized encounters and not a single carcass, skeleton or identifiable body part! Not even a clear photo, film or video beyond the blurry questionable stuff. So many hunters and not a single Sasquatch killed over hundreds of years?
2) There needs to be a sustainable population, one animal cannot survive forever. It cannot be only a single Sasquatch in the entire north west. Those who investigate, talk about several thousand in North America.
3) In places like Alaska many aviators fly their planes. Not even one filmed or shot a Sasquatch from above.
4) Skeletons of such huge animals cannot disappear instantly. Animals may eat the flesh, but the large bones will survive even many years.
most likely not; yet that is their claim. and to fully sequence 3 nuclear and 20 mitochondrial genomes and annotate them, as they assert, could easily take five years with a small number of personnel and tight budget.
The very fact that this is their claim is compelling evidence that they are not being honest with us. It would have been a profligate waste of resources and time to have actually sequenced 3 complete nDNA genomes. If that is what they have actually done, then their incompetence is already rather starkly demonstrated by their experimental design. We can ignore the mtDNA since even a poorly equipped lab could have done 20 such sequences in a few days. Based on the information publicly available, her lab is almost certainly not capable of sequencing an entire genome in the first place. They certainly have never accomplished such a feat even a single previous time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga
but it would be a hoot to read their in-peer-review 'publication,' assuming it actually exists.
Lets consider that:
1) There are many thousands of people hunting, hiking, fishing, camping everyday. Some folks live all their life in the woods. Thousands of publicized encounters and not a single carcass, skeleton or identifiable body part! Not even a clear photo, film or video beyond the blurry questionable stuff. So many hunters and not a single Sasquatch killed in hundreds of years?
2) There needs to be a sustainable population, one animal cannot survive forever. It cannot be only a single Sasquatch in the entire north west. Those who investigate, talk about several thousand in North America.
3) In places like Alaska many aviators fly their planes. Not even one filmed or shot a Sasquatch from above.
You know I have hunted all my life in the woods and as much as I deer hunt and there are large populations of deer where I go, I think I have come up on just several carcasses my whole life. Rarely do you see one. Also maybe they bury their dead.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
