Sasquatch! Monster or Myth?

[herr gruber]

The legend of Sasquatch provides some ram-shackle stores with a good income but is there more to it? Is there a large humanoid beast out there or is it just a guy getting sweaty in a suit? So, all you Cryptozoologists and anti-Cryptozoologists out there lets see if we can make sense of this.

[Gear]

I believe in Sasquatch. It's not like there aren't creatures out there that havent yet been discoverd. Look, people didn't believe in a giant squid for a long, long time, they thought that it was just drunk sailors trying to make sense of ship wrecks but then they found one so now its a proven fact that there are, at least, 'big' squid in the ocean. My grandfather had a big foot experience while he was hunting in eastern Oregon with a friend. I havent seen big foot but I think he exsits. Of coarse some big foot sightings and evidence is fake just like with aliens, U.F.O's, ghosts, ect. but I think its a bit rediculous to say that every sigle Sasquatch story is a lie.

[ClintonHammond]

Penn & Teller summed up "Bigfoot" (And all so called cryptozoology) in one episode of their HBO TV show BullSh!t!

[herr gruber]

Shocking and conclusive new proof of Sasquatch's existence.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PyxJFXIzAEY

[WillKill4Food]

And, a commentary on the unlikelihood of such existence:
http://www.skepdic.com/bigfoot.html

[Papa Jones]

Uhm...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=f53hbasxbLM&feature=related

Yeah... :confused:

[eroc]

Believe in the Chupacabra!!!!!

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k213/enshreve/chupacabra.gif

[crowmagnumman]

Penn & Teller summed up "Bigfoot" (And all so called cryptozoology) in one episode of their HBO TV show BullSh!t!

Penn and Teller often make good points, but it really bothers me how amateur and childish they are in so many of those episodes. Sometimes their lack of research makes me cringe. But I still love their magic shows. Those guys are insanely good at magic.

[herr gruber]

No doubt these cheeky Penn and Teller guys get paid a lot of money for performing acts that are just as real as the creature they are 'dissing'.
Sasquatch, on the other hand, gets paid nothing for dissing no-one.
Who has the higher moral ground? The humanoid!!

:D

[Lao Che Pun]

Penn and Teller often make good points, but it really bothers me how amateur and childish they are in so many of those episodes. Sometimes their lack of research makes me cringe.

:rolleyes: oh dear....you must be a believer in aliens...:eek:

[Snakes]

Maybe there will be a fight with a Chupacabra in KOTCS! :eek:

[crowmagnumman]

:rolleyes: oh dear....you must be a believer in aliens...:eek:

No, not really. :confused:

[Kingsley]

Maybe there will be a fight with a Chupacabra in KOTCS! :eek:
Yeah! :gun:

[adventure_al]

watched programs recently on one of the documentary channels about both sasquatch and chupacabra. I find them interesting but Im undecided on such myths.

[WillKill4Food]

Let me help you then, they are either completely fake or the animal is extinct and the newer sitings are all fake.

[adventure_al]

Believe in the Chupacabra!!!!!

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k213/enshreve/chupacabra.gif

see but something like that if you imagine it hunched over might resemble a hyena type creature. While unlikely its not completely impossible.

the stories must come from somewhere. I like the idea but I know its unlikely they exist.

[WillKill4Food]

The Story of the Chupacabra:
The first purported attacks occurred in March 1995 in Puerto Rico. In this attack eight sheep were discovered dead, each with three puncture wounds in the chest area and were completely drained of blood. In 1975, similar killings in the small town of Moca, were attributed to El Vampiro de Moca (The Vampire of Moca). Initially it was suspected that the killings were committed by a Satanic cult; later more killings were reported around the island, and many farms reported loss of animal life. Each of the animals had their bodies bled dry through a series of small circular incisions.

Puerto Rican comedian and entrepreneur Silverio Pérez is credited with coining the term "chupacabras" soon after the first incidents were reported in the press. Shortly after the first reported incidents in Puerto Rico, other animal deaths were reported in other countries, such as the Dominican Republic, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Brazil, the United States and Mexico.

In July 2004, a rancher near San Antonio killed a hairless dog-like creature, which was attacking his livestock. This animal, initially given the name the Elmendorf Beast, was later determined by DNA assay conducted at UC Davis to be a coyote with demodectic or sarcoptic mange. In October 2004, two more carcasses were found in the same area. Biologists in Texas examined samples from the two carcasses and determined they were also coyotes suffering from very severe cases of mange. In Coleman, Texas, a farmer named Reggie Lagow caught an animal in a trap he set up after the deaths of a number of his chickens and turkeys. The animal was described as resembling a mix of hairless dog, rat and kangaroo. Lagow provided the animal to Texas Parks and Wildlife officials for identification, but Lagow reported in a September 17, 2006 phone interview with John Adolfi, founder of the Lost World Museum, that the "critter was caught on a Tuesday and thrown out in Thursday's trash."

In April 2006, MosNews reported that the chupacabra was spotted in Russia for the first time. Reports from Central Russia beginning in March 2005 tell of a beast that kills animals and sucks out their blood. Thirty-two turkeys were killed and drained overnight. Reports later came from neighboring villages when 30 sheep were killed and had their blood drained. Finally eyewitnesses were able to describe the chupacabra. In May 2006, experts were determined to track the animal down.

In mid-August 2006, Michelle O'Donnell of Turner, Maine, described an "evil looking" rodent-like animal with fangs that had been found dead alongside a road. The animal was apparently struck by a car, and was unidentifiable. Photographs were taken and witness reports seem to be in relative agreement that the creature was canine in appearance, but in widely published photos seemed unlike any dog or wolf in the area. Photos from other angles seem to show a chow- or akita-mixed breed dog. It was reported that "the carcass was picked clean by vultures before experts could examine it". For years, residents of Maine have reported a mysterious creature and a string of dog maulings.

In May 2007, a series of reports on national Colombia news reported more than 300 dead sheep in the region of Boyaca, and the capture of a possible specimen to be analysed by zoologists at Universidad Nacional of Colombia.

In August 2007, Phylis Canion found three animals in Cuero, Texas. She and her neighbors purported to have discovered three strange animal carcasses outside Canion's property. She took photographs of the carcasses and preserved the head of one in her freezer before turning it over for DNA analysis. Canion reported that nearly 30 chickens on her farm had been exsanguinated over a period of years, a factor which led her to connect the carcasses with the chupacabra legend. State Mammologist John Young estimated that the animal in Canion's pictures was a grey fox suffering from an extreme case of mange. In November 2007, biology researchers at Texas State University-San Marcos determined from DNA samples that the suspicious animal was merely a coyote.

In January 11, 2008, a new sighting appeared at the province of Capiz in The Philippines. Some of the resident from the barangay believed that it was the chupacabra that killed eight chickens. The owner of the chickens saw a dog like animal attacking his chickens.

The most common description of Chupacabra is a reptile-like being, appearing to have leathery or scaly greenish-gray skin and sharp spines or quills running down its back. This form stands approximately 3 to 4 feet (1 to 1.2 m) high, and stands and hops in a similar fashion to a kangaroo. In at least one sighting, the creature hopped 20 feet (6 m). This variety is said to have a dog or panther-like nose and face, a forked tongue and large fangs. It is said to hiss and screech when alarmed, as well as leave a sulfuric stench behind. When it screeches, some reports note that the chupacabra's eyes glow an unusual red, that gives the witnesses nausea. Some witnesses have reported seeing bat-like wings.

Another description of Chupacabra, although not as common, is described as a strange breed of wild dog.This form is mostly hairless, has a pronounced spinal ridge, unusually pronounced eye sockets, fangs, and claws. It is claimed that this breed might be an example of a dog-like reptile. Unlike conventional predators, the chupacabra is said to drain all of the animal's blood (and sometimes organs) through a single hole or two holes.

The popularity of the chupacabras has resulted in it being featured in several types of merchandise. Some mystery novels that use aspects of the myth as the centerpoint of the plot have been published. Other kinds of book include those that provide a scientific explanation for the phenomena and fairy tales. The Chupacabras has also been featured in films such as Scooby-Doo and the Monster of Mexico and in independent productions including "El Chupacabras" and" Vuelve el Chupacabras". The Chupacabras has been featured in television programs including The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy, The X-Files and The Venture Bros. The Fantastic Four one-shot comic "Isla de La Muerte" has the four heroes encounter several Chupacabras while they were vacationing in Puerto Rico; in this story, the creatures are a subterranean race that has fallen under the control of the heroes' old enemy, The Mole Man.

CNN's Ed Lavandera has described the Chupacabras as the "Bigfoot of Latino Culture" and has stated that "El Chupacabras also symbolizes the fear of something that doesn't exist". Following the incident in Cuero, Texas the popularity of the Chupacabras myth was receiving global attention. Phylis Clayton, who was responsible for capturing the alleged specimen, claimed that t-shirts highlighting the event were shipped to countries such as Italy, Guam and Iraq . The publicity that Cuero received following this event has led to some suggesting changing the town's mascot.

-Wikipedia

[Nurhachi1991]

Sasquatch is 100 percent real in my book here is why.............



They never proved the patterson footage to be a hoax. Yes some idiot always claims he was the man in the suit but here is a question where is the suit? exactly because they are lying


Second would a guy risk being shot dead to pull a prank? because if I was hunting and saw one of these things i would fill it full of lead and if it was a guy in a costume it would not be your fault so there not gonna risk it

Third have any of you ever heard the sasqautch howls? There is no way in hell those are faked either


and its not really that unbelivable there are billions of unknown species out there sasquatch is just another one of them

[|ZiR|]

I have some family history with Sasquatch. It's kind of embarrassing, so no one in my family will talk much about it. It's among one of the many skeletons we keep in the closet.

See, I had a great uncle who lived out in the woods all over North America researching and looking for evidence of Bigfoot. He collected samples, took photographs, interviewed countless people, and was planning on publishing a book on the subject when he was finished. This was all back in the 70s/80s, mind you.

He was in the process of writing the book when he went out on one last field trip to verify something, and when he came back he gathered up all his materials, unfinished maniscripts, samples, etc., and locked them in a trunk which he stored up in the attic. He refused to say what happened on that last expedition; apparently he came into contact with something and was so visibly shaken by whatever had occured my great aunt never pressed for further details, and he never spoke of it again. He passed away in '93.

To date, no one has opened the trunk and gone through it. My great Aunt is still in possession of it and supposedly she's willed it to go to me. As horrible as it sounds, the tiniest part of me is looking forward to the day when it will finally pas to me. I wanna open that sucker up.

edit: I realize this all sounds as ambiguous as hell, so I don't expect any of you to believe me. But this is a subject it's hard to get information on as everyone in my family pretends that that aspect of my uncle's life didn't happen. Everything I know about him was gleamed slowly, in bits and pieces, from various relatives over the years. No one wants to talk about him.

[Hawkeye]

Sasquatch is 100 percent real in my book here is why.............



They never proved the patterson footage to be a hoax. Yes some idiot always claims he was the man in the suit but here is a question where is the suit? exactly because they are lying


Second would a guy risk being shot dead to pull a prank? because if I was hunting and saw one of these things i would fill it full of lead and if it was a guy in a costume it would not be your fault so there not gonna risk it

Third have any of you ever heard the sasqautch howls? There is no way in hell those are faked either


and its not really that unbelivable there are billions of unknown species out there sasquatch is just another one of them


Exactly what I was gonna say! :up:

[WillKill4Food]

They never proved the patterson footage to be a hoax. Yes some idiot always claims he was the man in the suit but here is a question where is the suit? exactly because they are lying
Wonderful logic, friend.
Where is the suit? Where are your baby clothes? Could I find them if I wanted to? No, probably not. So I guess that means that you were never a baby, right?
Second would a guy risk being shot dead to pull a prank? because if I was hunting and saw one of these things i would fill it full of lead and if it was a guy in a costume it would not be your fault so there not gonna risk it
Second, being shot during hunting is very, very rare. The latest statistic is that there are 5.56 accidental shootings per 100,000 hunters. Do you realize how low that is?
However, consider the innumerable amount of car accidents per year. And still, people drive in their cars to do stupid, meaningless things, like watching high school football games or buying Indy toys.
Third have any of you ever heard the sasqautch howls? There is no way in hell those are faked either
Have you never heard Chewbacca? I guess he's real, too.
and its not really that unbelivable there are billions of unknown species out there sasquatch is just another one of them
Of course, but they're mostly bugs and deep sea fish. Sasquatch is neither, and most likely fake.

[Hawkeye]

I have some family history with Sasquatch. It's kind of embarrassing, so no one in my family will talk much about it. It's among one of the many skeletons we keep in the closet.

See, I had a great uncle who lived out in the woods all over North America researching and looking for evidence of Bigfoot. He collected samples, took photographs, interviewed countless people, and was planning on publishing a book on the subject when he was finished. This was all back in the 70s/80s, mind you.

He was in the process of writing the book when he went out on one last field trip to verify something, and when he came back he gathered up all his materials, unfinished maniscripts, samples, etc., and locked them in a trunk which he stored up in the attic. He refused to say what happened on that last expedition; apparently he came into contact with something and was so visibly shaken by whatever had occured my great aunt never pressed for further details, and he never spoke of it again. He passed away in '93.

To date, no one has opened the trunk and gone through it. My great Aunt is still in possession of it and supposedly she's willed it to go to me. As horrible as it sounds, the tiniest part of me is looking forward to the day when it will finally pas to me. I wanna open that sucker up.


I can't say I blame you. That trunk sounds freakin' awesome!

[The_Raiders]

I have some family history with Sasquatch. It's kind of embarrassing, so no one in my family will talk much about it. It's among one of the many skeletons we keep in the closet.

See, I had a great uncle who lived out in the woods all over North America researching and looking for evidence of Bigfoot. He collected samples, took photographs, interviewed countless people, and was planning on publishing a book on the subject when he was finished. This was all back in the 70s/80s, mind you.

He was in the process of writing the book when he went out on one last field trip to verify something, and when he came back he gathered up all his materials, unfinished maniscripts, samples, etc., and locked them in a trunk which he stored up in the attic. He refused to say what happened on that last expedition; apparently he came into contact with something and was so visibly shaken by whatever had occured my great aunt never pressed for further details, and he never spoke of it again. He passed away in '93.

To date, no one has opened the trunk and gone through it. My great Aunt is still in possession of it and supposedly she's willed it to go to me. As horrible as it sounds, the tiniest part of me is looking forward to the day when it will finally pas to me. I wanna open that sucker up.


Wow, that sounds friggin awesome! interesting story. :up:

[WillKill4Food]

Okay, stories such as |Zir|'s are at least respectable. But, really, it was probably just a bear. Those things are just as frightening. I lost a great uncle to one.

[The_Raiders]

Okay, stories such as |Zir|'s are at least respectable. But, really, it was probably just a bear. Those things are just as frightening. I lost a great uncle to one.


Yeh I have a family story similar my mom told me when i was little. I beleive it a bear story now, and ib et my mom does too, I think she jsut said sasquach because I ws interested in it. But someone on her side of the family was hunting with some friends and they kept noticing this aweful stench, and found hair in some brush, then something started coming after them, ans whatver it was it was what was pruducing the smell. So they all ran from it. She never told me what it was, and says no one really saw it either, just glimpses, I'll bet it was a bear, but my mom probably exagerated, becasue i was little and interested.

[|ZiR|]

Okay, stories such as |Zir|'s are at least respectable. But, really, it was probably just a bear. Those things are just as frightening. I lost a great uncle to one.

Oh! I'm didn't mean to offer my great uncle as proof that bigfoot is real. I was just sharing his story. I want to make the clear. As for what happened on that last trip -- no one living knows. He could've been attacked by something, sure. Though it seems odd that an attack by a bear would make him lock away his research on sasquatch, but hey... each theory is as plausible as the next! And bear's are scary as hell.


I can't say I blame you. That trunk sounds freakin' awesome!

Wow, that sounds friggin awesome! interesting story.

I know! My family is seriously screwed in some ways, but for every half dozen stuck up WASPs I'm related to, there's at least one genuinely awesome person to make up for it. :)

While I don't think that I'm going to find any undeniable evidence for bigfoot whenever I finally get to open the trunk, but just reading what he wrote and seeing all the photos and samples will be fascinating enough. He allegedly kept super accurate journals of his life in the wilderness, and I really want to read the account of that last trip out.

edit:The Story of the Chupacabra:

Duuude, El Chupacabra used to give me nightmares as a kid. I had this book on crypties (Mothman, Dover Demon, UFOs, etc.) and the illustration for the Chupacabra freaked me out so bad. I was certain that it was going to come into my room and suck my blood, despite bein' human and not a goat an' all. :dead:

[WillKill4Food]

Oh! I'm didn't mean to offer my great uncle as proof that bigfoot is real. I was just sharing his story. I want to make the clear. As for what happened on that last trip -- no one living knows. He could've been attacked by something, sure. Though it seems odd that an attack by a bear would make him lock away his research on sasquatch, but hey... each theory is as plausible as the next! And bear's are scary as hell.
Maybe he discovered that he had just been researching a bear the whole time and wanted to dispose of his research to save face.
Seems to me that if he found anything he'd have it published, not lock it away.

[adventure_al]

Wonderful logic, friend.
Where is the suit? Where are your baby clothes? Could I find them if I wanted to? No, probably not. So I guess that means that you were never a baby, right?


I wouldn't say thats the most sensible counter argument for his logic on your part. i think baby clothes which everyone wears is quite different from a bigfoot costume!

[WillKill4Food]

I wouldn't say thats the most sensible counter argument for his logic on your part. i think baby clothes which everyone wears is quite different from a bigfoot costume!
Naturally, I was illustrating his absurdity by being absurd.

[|ZiR|]

Maybe he discovered that he had just been researching a bear the whole time and wanted to dispose of his research to save face.
Seems to me that if he found anything he'd have it published, not lock it away.

Well, we won't know until someone opens that friggin' trunk. Maybe you'll hear about it a few years from now on the news, supposing it actually turns out to be something. :p

As for mistaking his subject for a bear, well that seems unlikely seeing how he was a zoologist. (Which I neglected to add earlier as it didn't seem relevant to me.)

But like I said before, each theory is as plausible as the next.

And I never intended to join in the debate on whether or not sasquatch exists - I actually don't believe it's real, for what it's worth. I simply saw the thread and thought I'd mention that my uncle used to research bigfoot.

[WillKill4Food]

Well, we won't know until someone opens that friggin' trunk. Maybe you'll hear about it a few years from now on the news, supposing it actually turns out to be something. :p

As for mistaking his subject for a bear, well that seems unlikely seeing how he was a zoologist. (Which I neglected to add earlier as it didn't seem relevant to me.)

But like I said before, each theory is as plausible as the next.

And I never intended to join in the debate on whether or not sasquatch exists - I actually don't believe it's real, for what it's worth. I simply saw the thread and thought I'd mention that my uncle used to research bigfoot.
Well, then. Perhaps it is not a common bear. Perhaps the real Sasquatch is funky bear. Or, perhaps, some of my earlier postulations are true.
But, thanks for the mention. At least it is some solid controversial evidence, as opposed to Nurhachi's hogwash.

[Nurhachi1991]

Wonderful logic, friend.
Where is the suit? Where are your baby clothes? Could I find them if I wanted to? No, probably not. So I guess that means that you were never a baby, right?

Second, being shot during hunting is very, very rare. The latest statistic is that there are 5.56 accidental shootings per 100,000 hunters. Do you realize how low that is?
However, consider the innumerable amount of car accidents per year. And still, people drive in their cars to do stupid, meaningless things, like watching high school football games or buying Indy toys.

Have you never heard Chewbacca? I guess he's real, too.

Of course, but they're mostly bugs and deep sea fish. Sasquatch is neither, and most likely fake.


Like the other guy said baby clothes are major differance between a sasquatch costume


If the original costume was never found than how come it has never been replicated? Here is what happen when BBC tried to recreate the costume see for yourself

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YktEWmLVTvM&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YktEWmLVTvM&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>


So if in 2006 with the best costume money can by and not even hollywoods top monster costume designers can even make one like the patterson footage

You mean to tell me that in 1967 they had a perfect costume that we can not even replicate today?Have you seen 1960s halloween costumes? Look at the fake fur material opposed to the fur in the video which looks like real animal fur


Please friend enlighten me

[WillKill4Food]

Like the other guy said baby clothes are major differance between a sasquatch costume
If the original costume was never found than how come it has never been replicated? Here is what happen when BBC tried to recreate the costume see for yourself

So if in 2006 with the best costume money can by and not even hollywoods top monster costume designers can even make one like the patterson footage
You mean to tell me that in 1967 they had a perfect costume that we can not even replicate today?Have you seen 1960s halloween costumes? Look at the fake fur material opposed to the fur in the video which looks like real animal fur

Please friend enlighten me
As I said before, my comment about baby clothes was allegorical and pure satire.

Ever seen the Patterson film? It looks bloody awful. You cannot see the detail, and in actuality, many people have replicated it perfectly. The only part that might be difficult for a hoaxer is the face, and it was never shown fully.

And people had the ability to make costumes that "believable" back in the '60's. Ever seen Planet of the Apes? Only the faces were a little weird, and the Patterson monster has no visible face, save a profile, thus allowing the hoaxers to get off Scott-free.

Again, please read: http://www.skepdic.com/bigfoot.html

[Hawkeye]

Ray Wallace was a liar, and John Chambers denied having any involvement. The arms on the Patterson creature are too long, and the saggital crest is typical of great apes. Also, further enhancements have shown that the creature has an indian braid in her hair. Plus, why would there be breasts on a costume, when it's so much easier to make a costume without breasts?

http://www.bfro.net/REF/THEORIES/pgfdebunkings.asp

[herr gruber]

There was a recent scientific experiment in which an actor/performance artist was tring to replicate the movements of the 'creature' in the Patterson film. It was concluded that it would be nigh on impossible for the human body to sustain the style of movement as shown in the footage...

[WillKill4Food]

Yeah, I saw something like that on Discovery or History. But, who says that he filmed it walking forward? Maybe he walked backwards and they reversed the film, giving him the weird gaunt. Food for thought.

[herr gruber]

Yeah, I saw something like that on Discovery or History. But, who says that he filmed it walking forward? Maybe he walked backwards and they reversed the film, giving him the weird gaunt. Food for thought.

Possibly. However, any experiments worth their salt would have taken that into consideration and tried it, too. I'm not sure if they did.

[Nurhachi1991]

As I said before, my comment about baby clothes was allegorical and pure satire.

Ever seen the Patterson film? It looks bloody awful. You cannot see the detail, and in actuality, many people have replicated it perfectly. The only part that might be difficult for a hoaxer is the face, and it was never shown fully.

And people had the ability to make costumes that "believable" back in the '60's. Ever seen Planet of the Apes? Only the faces were a little weird, and the Patterson monster has no visible face, save a profile, thus allowing the hoaxers to get off Scott-free.

Again, please read: http://www.skepdic.com/bigfoot.html



well in the patterson footage when magnified with modern tools you can see that the creatures muscles move and that kind of technology was invented far after 1967

and Planet of the Apes? Come on man you can do better than that you said the patterson footage was bad have you even seen the 1968 Planet of the Apes............... yeah they look horrible. Why do all you skeptics always bring in Planet of the Apes?

[WillKill4Food]

Possibly. However, any experiments worth their salt would have taken that into consideration and tried it, too. I'm not sure if they did.
Probably not.
I've discovered that all too often shows like Monster Quest and other moster-seeking shows try to be ambiguous and not solve anything.
It's like they just want people to watch and leave the show without learning anything. I honestly think that they are afraid to be conclusive either way, in case irrefutable evidence shows them wrong.

well in the patterson footage when magnified with modern tools you can see that the creatures muscles move and that kind of technology was invented far after 1967
and Planet of the Apes? Come on man you can do better than that you said the patterson footage was bad have you even seen the 1968 Planet of the Apes............... yeah they look horrible. Why do all you skeptics always bring in Planet of the Apes?
Yeah, I think nature gave us rippling muscles long before special effects departments.
But a bulky, beastly man in a suit and have him walk funky through the woods and whammo! Instant monster footage.
And, if you took a profile view of an Ape from PotA and blurred it, you'd see that it looks just like your Patterson footage.

So, I guess either the Bigfoot is real or they hired a herd of them for Planet of the Apes. Wonder what PETA would have to say about that...

[Nurhachi1991]

so your going to see a moving muscle from a suit? I do not care how realistic it looks if its a suit your not going to see mucles moving man.



and no one walks like that look at the arms swaying while its turing a man does not walk like that in a costume and they have proven that


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IJjUt2sXo5o&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IJjUt2sXo5o&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>


THE PATTERSON FOOTAGE WAS NEVER DECLARED A HOAX END OF STORY

all these sites that say they worked on the costume is a bold faced lie it would be on national news if it was and they would have to show evidence to back up their claim and they have none! At least bigfoot has video evidence of what we believe is a bigfoot


and does that look blurry to you? Nope its clear man

[WillKill4Food]

so your going to see a moving muscle from a suit? I do not care how realistic it looks if its a suit your not going to see mucles moving man.
Yeah, I really don't see any moving muscle. Pretty sure that's just that's just the actor's muscles. Perhaps they got the German Mechanic's father to play him. Who knows?
and no one walks like that look at the arms swaying while its turing a man does not walk like that in a costume and they have proven that
Watch him going backwards. This is just my idea, but he looks like my dad trying to do the moonwalk, so who's to say that it's not a reversed film of an actor? Hmmm?
THE PATTERSON FOOTAGE WAS NEVER DECLARED A HOAX END OF STORY
And it was never proven, either.
For me to believe in this creature, they'll have to get some irrefutable evidence. Film is inadmissable in court, so why should we accept this?
all these sites that say they worked on the costume is a bold faced lie it would be on national news if it was and they would have to show evidence to back up their claim and they have none! At least bigfoot has video evidence of what we believe is a bigfoot
If it were anyone else, I'd read this and assume they were being satirical. But, I guess you're actually serious.
I don't neccessarily believe those people, but honestly, is this your best attempt at logic?
and does that look blurry to you? Nope its clear man
Really? Where do you live? Do they not have HD TV there? The only thing that is clear is that this film is a hoax.
Oh, and an interesting point. When they play the film in reverse, everything seems to be perfect, except his walk is a little funky. Maybe I'm on to something. Seriously, everything looks extremely blurry until they play it in reverse and then everything seems to fall into place. I'm thinking about making my theory heard.

Finally, look at the costume, excuse me, fur, again. It's really shiny. My dog has to eat special dog food to get his hair to look like that. So, then, do we have people feeding Iams to these buggers? The hair looks like polyester or some synthetic fabric.
And, what about that pose where he turns towards the camera. If I was a hominid and I saw someone pointing a black box at me, I'd run. Wild apes always either investigate, fight, or flee the scene at the sight of a human. Only domesticated animals (and hoax animals) are brazen enough to look at people and think nothing of it. If bigfeet (I guess that's the plural form :confused:) are real, then they obviously haven't had much contact with humans. So, then, how are they so domesticated? They couldn't be.
So, again, Sasquatch is a myth, albeit a damn good one.

[Nurhachi1991]

Sasquatch is as much of a myth as the people trying to declare it a hoax they have no proof at all nothing but theories. This is video evidence is it real i think so but who knows but its alot more of evidence than any skeptics could show

[adventure_al]

as much as i love the idea of these creatures and believe there are many species not yet discovered I think anyone who watches the paterson footage and believes its a real creature needs to have a quiet word with themself.

I don't see anything in the movement that would render it impossible for a human being to do.

Also there is a few steps where you notice the soles of the feet. Big grey pads. I can see that with my naked eye I don't see how with a bit more analysis they couldn't prove this to be a fake!?

While I think its highly unlike I like the notion that the creature could exist

however, lets be honest, the patterson footage is laughable.

[EDIT] backwards theory is very good.
you'll notice the part when it appears to look towards the camera, when played in reverse, it is as if it is just looking behind it (so if walking backwards to avoid tripping)

[WillKill4Food]

Sasquatch is as much of a myth as the people trying to declare it a hoax they have no proof at all nothing but theories. This is video evidence is it real i think so but who knows but its alot more of evidence than any skeptics could show
I am most assured that we have concluded the exact opposite.
Even sasquatch believers are willing to admit that the Patterson film is a fake.
If it makes you feel better, the sasquatch could still exist, even if the Patterson film is a hoax, however that is very unlikely.
All that I am trying to show is that the film is a hoax, and my prior statements have verified that.
I am trying to think of how I could make known my backwards theory, I think it really holds up.
And, by the way, please learn to use punctuation. Your paragraphs are huge run-on sentences. You don't have to write perfectly, but please write legibly.
If you need help, here's a site you can use: :rolleyes:
http://www.arts.uottawa.ca/writcent/hypergrammar/endpunct.html
[EDIT] backwards theory is very good.
you'll notice the part when it appears to look towards the camera, when played in reverse, it is as if it is just looking behind it (so if walking backwards to avoid tripping)
Thanks al. I really think we've stumbled onto something with the backwards theory.

[Nurhachi1991]

You make very good points man the backwards theroy is good really good


I still think the video is real though :p

[Nurhachi1991]

as much as i love the idea of these creatures and believe there are many species not yet discovered I think anyone who watches the paterson footage and believes its a real creature needs to have a quiet word with themself.

I don't see anything in the movement that would render it impossible for a human being to do.

Also there is a few steps where you notice the soles of the feet. Big grey pads. I can see that with my naked eye I don't see how with a bit more analysis they couldn't prove this to be a fake!?

While I think its highly unlike I like the notion that the creature could exist

however, lets be honest, the patterson footage is laughable.

[EDIT] backwards theory is very good.
you'll notice the part when it appears to look towards the camera, when played in reverse, it is as if it is just looking behind it (so if walking backwards to avoid tripping)


Wow you must have one hell of an eyesight because I do not see any grey pads at all. Maybe those are....... I don't know the bottom of it's feet?

[WillKill4Food]

Wow you must have one hell of an eyesight because I do not see any grey pads at all. Maybe those are....... I don't know the bottom of it's feet?
But wait, I thought you said you could see the video very clearly. I guess not. My guess is that the film was intentionally blurry to keep people from noticing such details.

[The_Raiders]

I must say that Patterson video is pretty crappy, sorry :( , it's all jumpy and blurry. And yes I could see the "pads" on the feet, they don't look like they are even the shape of the foot, just round pads.

[Indy fan 235]

This is a great thread, really good discussions and arguments going on and good theories. Not really sure where I stand with it personally, but I am enjoying this.

Though Indy did find Bigfoot. He was with Han Solo's corpse. hehe

Seriously though, good thread idea.

[Kooshmeister]

I can't say for certain if Sasquatch is real or not. But if he is, then don't mess with him. Like, say, offer him a ride and then speed up as he reaches for the door handle, or shake up a can of beer and give it to him, or swat his butt with a towel. And especially don't do any of these things to him whilst munching on beef jerky. You'll live to regret it. ;)

[Indy fan 235]

I can't say for certain if Sasquatch is real or not. But if he is, then don't mess with him. Like, say, offer him a ride and then speed up as he reaches for the door handle, or shake up a can of beer and give it to him, or swat his butt with a towel. And especially don't do any of these things to him whilst munching on beef jerky. You'll live to regret it. ;)

LOL I love those commercials.

Those hikers got what they had coming to them.

[Stoo]

Have you guys ever seen the "Tenacious 'D'" Sasquatch episode?:D
"Just tell 'em...it was a fwiend..." *sniff sniff*

There's a stabilized version of the Patterson film which is really cool to watch.
From what I recall, he says that he shot the film on horseback (and the horse was upset).

[adventure_al]

This is a great thread, really good discussions and arguments going on and good theories. Not really sure where I stand with it personally, but I am enjoying this.

Though Indy did find Bigfoot. He was with Han Solo's corpse. hehe

Seriously though, good thread idea.

Yeah me too. One of the better threads on here recently. :up:

[Indy fan 235]

I enjoyed the UFO/MEN IN BLACK thread as well, though I didn't post on it, I did read the whole thing.

[Nurhachi1991]

But wait, I thought you said you could see the video very clearly. I guess not. My guess is that the film was intentionally blurry to keep people from noticing such details.


Yeah I said I could see the details when magnified by modern science.............. I have a theory why the footage was blurry............ It was in the 1960s there cameras sucked ....

[roundshort]

I think the Beastie Boys had a run in with him.

[ValenciaGrail]

Is it possible that an undocumented bipedal primate exists in mountainous areas?
Yes - the Gigantopithecus, believed to be long extinct, may be a possibility:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus

There is precedent for "extinct" animals being found alive.
The Coelacanth, thought extinct since the Cretaceous, is probably the best example of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth

And one plausible (but not particularly probable) Lock Ness Monster explanation is that people have been seeing a Plesiosaur

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plesiosaur

<insert “other shoe dropping” sound effect>

But my biggest problem with Sasquatch is this:
No bodies, no skeletal remains, no undisputed tangible forensic evidence...and this for a creature whose sustained population would have to be large enough to account for the numerous reported sightings all across North America...many of which are not in the deep woods, but close to campgrounds, roads, and other populated areas.

As an counterexample – I give the Giant Squid...it was never filmed nor photographed alive in the wild until less than three years ago.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/0927_050927_giant_squid.html

But - did anyone doubt its existence? No...

That's because we had bodies aplenty, the longest being over 60 feet...many large museums have them.
Even though this animal spends nearly all of its time in areas even more devoid of humans than Sasquatch - ocean depths of 3,000 ft - we still had undisputed evidence of their existence. Namely, actual bodies caught in nets or washed ashore.

Animals can hide from people and avoid being seen, but their dead bodies cannot.

This is the vital piece of evidence which Sasquatch apologists conveniently have not been able to produce.

If there were a living, sustained population, then somewhere, somehow their remains would have been found and would be in museums. It’s just the law of averages.

Like the Giant Squid, the debate would be over …then it would be just a matter of getting a living specimen on film…of a tad higher quality than the Patterson film

But until then – I remain an “open minded skeptic”

[FILMKRUSC]

Well they have found in the footprint casts that the prints show dermal ridges (similar to your thumbprint but on the bottom of a foot). It's found in apes as well. That's actually good evidence.

Not a monster or a myth. Just a unknown species (probably ape related) that most scientists are too lazy to leave academia to look for.

[|ZiR|]

Bigfoot was allegedly sighted on may 19th, here in New Mexico.

Where's the paranoid smilie when you need it...?

[herr gruber]

Bigfoot was allegedly sighted on may 19th

He was probably off to the cinema...

[ValenciaGrail]

Well they have found in the footprint casts that the prints show dermal ridges (similar to your thumbprint but on the bottom of a foot). It's found in apes as well. That's actually good evidence.

Not a monster or a myth. Just a unknown species (probably ape related) that most scientists are too lazy to leave academia to look for.

Maybe it's an unknown species....
An animal this large and seen in as many places as has been reported would leave more than just a few footprints as evidence of its existence.

So why no bodies?

Could it be that faking footprints is a whole lot easier than faking an entire body?

"Academia" is not too lazy to look for it. Rather, "academia" has made a judgement that the evidence is not sufficent to warrant serious study. There are on the order of tens of millions of species to be studied whose very existence is not a topic of debate.

While some of the footprints allegedly contain actual dermal ridges, many others are known and proven fakes. A small fraction of them are real-looking enough to raise eyebrows.

Footprints are not bodies; as I said, there is no undisputed evidence.

[Indy fan 235]

Has anyone ever heard of the "Skunk Ape" beast that roams the swamps of Florida? It's sort of like Bigfoot I guess, only it lives in the swamps.

[Horchata]

it was recently on cnn a thought to be bigfoot carcus found in oregon.

its no that hard to believe is it? it'd be different if we were talking about dragons or something

[ValenciaGrail]

it was recently on cnn a thought to be bigfoot carcass found in oregon.

its no that hard to believe is it? it'd be different if we were talking about dragons or something

It's not that hard to believe that such a bipedal ape might exist.
That's an issue of plausibility, which I'm not questioning.

Unicorns might exist (or might once have existed).
Take away the supernatural / magical aspects, and there is nothing particular astounding about an equine species with a single horn. (Perhaps taxonomists could debate this point.)

But – there are no remains of an actual unicorn in existence, fossilized or otherwise…ergo, it is taken that they do not exist, nor have they ever.

So whether Bigfoot actually does exist is a different issue.
We're not debating plausibility, we're speaking of probablity.

And - the probability takes a big hit with the absence of bodies.
We have only piecemeal, hit or miss evidence .... footprints here, grainy videos there....but no bodies at all, not even skeletal remains.

With all the sightings, the darned things should be all over the place…..

Are these creatures engaging in some sort of systematic effort to hide their existence from people, including the carcasses of their deceased?
Belief in the existence of Sasquatch assumes this, since there’s no other way to explain why not a single undisputed body exists.

Occam’s razor states that the potential solution to any problem which requires the least speculation is most probably the correct one. In this case: no bodies is explained most simply by no ape.

Horchata, being open minded on the issue, I searched cnn.com, but did not seem to find any news stories on Bigfoot or Sasquatch in Oregon.

Some of the historical sightings could be explained by fleeting glimpses of animals such as bears, others by outright hoaxes, still others by attention seekers.

“We cannot afford to take mythology at face value”
As long as there is no body, there is no science…only folklore.
Scientists will study this creature once there is something to study.

[Great Cloud]

it was recently on cnn a thought to be bigfoot carcus found in oregon.

Do you have a link for this?

[Ignatius Stone]

He's out there, allright.

[adventure_al]

It's not that hard to believe that such a bipedal ape might exist.
That's an issue of plausibility, which I'm not questioning.

Unicorns might exist (or might once have existed).
Take away the supernatural / magical aspects, and there is nothing particular astounding about an equine species with a single horn. (Perhaps taxonomists could debate this point.)

But – there are no remains of an actual unicorn in existence, fossilized or otherwise…ergo, it is taken that they do not exist, nor have they ever.

So whether Bigfoot actually does exist is a different issue.
We're not debating plausibility, we're speaking of probablity.

And - the probability takes a big hit with the absence of bodies.
We have only piecemeal, hit or miss evidence .... footprints here, grainy videos there....but no bodies at all, not even skeletal remains.

With all the sightings, the darned things should be all over the place…..

Are these creatures engaging in some sort of systematic effort to hide their existence from people, including the carcasses of their deceased?
Belief in the existence of Sasquatch assumes this, since there’s no other way to explain why not a single undisputed body exists.

Occam’s razor states that the potential solution to any problem which requires the least speculation is most probably the correct one. In this case: no bodies is explained most simply by no ape.

Horchata, being open minded on the issue, I searched cnn.com, but did not seem to find any news stories on Bigfoot or Sasquatch in Oregon.

Some of the historical sightings could be explained by fleeting glimpses of animals such as bears, others by outright hoaxes, still others by attention seekers.

“We cannot afford to take mythology at face value”
As long as there is no body, there is no science…only folklore.
Scientists will study this creature once there is something to study.

I really DO NOT want this thread to turn into a evolution/creation debate but...

'Missing link' springs to mind, yet darwins theory of evolution is still taught and widely believed. and a the entire human race is alot bigger than a species of reclusive ape creature. Just recently that unknown tribe have been discovered (brazil I think it was?) so to think there are still groups of humans we don't even no about!

[ValenciaGrail]

I really DO NOT want this thread to turn into a evolution/creation debate but...

'Missing link' springs to mind, yet darwins theory of evolution is still taught and widely believed. and a the entire human race is alot bigger than a species of reclusive ape creature. Just recently that unknown tribe have been discovered (brazil I think it was?) so to think there are still groups of humans we don't even no about!

Well, another application of Occam's razor here...perhaps the lack of a missing link simply means that there is not one ;)

I am not a literal Creationist, because Scripture is meant to be interpreted literarily, not literally.

But - I am an intellegent designist, meaning the evidence supports a sudden appearance of a large number of creatures, not a slow evolutionary process

Darwin himself conceded that his theory would have to account for some very implausible things. For example, the seperate emergence of two-eyed beings along four seperate evolutionary paths - birds, mammals, fish, and reptiles - is not statistically viable.

The Second Law of Thermodyamics states that all systems go to increasing disorder over time. This means that all the air molecules in a room will not accumulate in one corner, causing suffocation to its occupants. Wreckage from a tornado will not assemble itself into a car.
Yet - this is just the sort of thing we're asked to believe in the Evolution model, that all the complexity that exists in life came about randomly. Even in billions of years, it's completely statisically unviable. It would take quadrillions of years even to expect the most basic molecules of life to form.

And BTW - Evolution is indeed a model, not a theory. A theory can be tested, but a model by defintion cannot. Evolution has the convenience of being enitrly unprovable; no one has ever seen anything evolve, because built into the model are timescales of millions of years.

So the conundrum is this - if Evolution is true, it defies one of the most basic cornerstone laws of physics, so it would in fact be miraculous :confused:

[adventure_al]

Yes that is what I think too.

Applying the same logic you'd assume a sasquatch does not exist though, yet still I'm open minded. Maybe I just like the idea too much.

I like these sorts or myths/legends.

but sadly like the Loch Ness monster I doubt its true, however the reason they have such an appeal is that its unlikely/impossible for them to be disproved either.

[ValenciaGrail]

Yes that is what I think too.

Applying the same logic you'd assume a sasquatch does not exist though, yet still I'm open minded. Maybe I just like the idea too much.

I like these sorts or myths/legends.

but sadly like the Loch Ness monster I doubt its true, however the reason they have such an appeal is that its unlikely/impossible for them to be disproved either.

Yup - both Sasquatch and the LN monster could simply be undocumented species, but I’ll believe it when I see a body.

I do think Sasquatch is the more plausible of the two, however.
The LNM evidence is less tangible and a lot more easily explained away:
- No tangible forensic evidence exists of the LNM equivalent to the Sasquatch footprints, for example
- The most famous photo (The 1934 “Surgeon’s Photo”) has been proven a fake by a deathbed confession. It was just a modified toy submarine.
- There are many very plausible explanations for the sightings: a large Sturgeon fish, interference patterns in the waves looking like a humped creature, rotting logs floating to the surface as they emit gases due to bacteria, etc….
- The LNM is limited to too small of an area (a single lake)…so either there is a single, immortal creature to explain centuries of sightings, or there is a large enough population to sustain its survival for centuries. But if the latter were true, then it wouldn’t be so difficult to find and document its existence.

The problem is proving a negative; you can’t even prove Santa Claus doesn’t exist by this standard

One could fly over ever inch of the earth’s surface north of the Arctic Circle, and not find Santa’s workshop.
A true believer would simply claim that his abode is hidden from view by mystical means.

One could claim that his home was never visited at Christmas, nor were any of his friends’.
A true believer would say that he only visits the homes of true believers
This would continue ad nauseum …

Of course, one answer is that Santa Claus really DID exist…he was a 4th Century Bishop whose spirit lives on through parents who continue to pass the tradition on to their children. ;)

But legends are indeed fun, as you point out, and make great story telling opportunities.
Even the slight possibility of some truth in them makes them even more compelling.

My kids and I loved The Water Horse, for example.
And wouldn’t Bigfoot make for a cool Indy Jones MaGuffin, if it were handled properly?

[Stoo]

And wouldn’t Bigfoot make for a cool Indy Jones MaGuffin, if it were handled properly?Agreed. Unfortunately the only treatment we've seen so far has him turning out to be Chewbacca.:eek: :o
Curious about that CNN report, though. I wonder what it was.

[adventure_al]

Yup - both Sasquatch and the LN monster could simply be undocumented species, but I’ll believe it when I see a body.

- The LNM is limited to too small of an area (a single lake)…so either there is a single, immortal creature to explain centuries of sightings, or there is a large enough population to sustain its survival for centuries. But if the latter were true, then it wouldn’t be so difficult to find and document its existence.


There is quite a new theory that there is basically a massive network of tunnels running from Loch Ness and opening up in scandinavia somewhere. (I think the theory was something along those lines). Using sound waves theyve found large cavaities but apparently they are too deep to examine thoroughly. Maybe just another way to keep the legend alive?

Still don't think it exists but its good for the tourists :p

[ValenciaGrail]

There is quite a new theory that there is basically a massive network of tunnels running from Loch Ness and opening up in scandinavia somewhere. (I think the theory was something along those lines). Using sound waves theyve found large cavaities but apparently they are too deep to examine thoroughly. Maybe just another way to keep the legend alive?

Still don't think it exists but its good for the tourists :p

...and even cooler for an IJ Maguffin, if he were to branch out into underwater archaeology. ;)

[ValenciaGrail]

Agreed. Unfortunately the only treatment we've seen so far has him turning out to be Chewbacca.:eek: :o
Curious about that CNN report, though. I wonder what it was.

Yeah, I don't really follow the comics very closely for IJ or SW (I'm a bigger fan of the EU novels in both cases), but I DID see that panel with Indy finding the Millennium Falcon...hilarious

A good supernatural twist here would be reincarnation...where Indy sees himself as a rougue star pilot in a past life...in a GFFA, of course :D

[adventure_al]

...and even cooler for an IJ Maguffin, if he were to branch out into underwater archaeology. ;)

no thats far too dirk pitt! :rolleyes: :p

[metalinvader]

Bigfoot Bounty: Reward Offered for Mysterious Monsters (http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080604/sc_livescience/bigfootbountyrewardofferedformysteriousmonsters)

Looks like there's a price on the hairy head of bigfoot.

Get your cameras out Raveners!

[ReggieSnake]

"Excuse me Mister Bigfoot, but could I be so bold as to trouble you for an autographed photo and a DNA sample?":p ;)

[WillKill4Food]

Perhaps there's more to Bigfoot than previously thought:
http://www.ktvu.com/news/17174989/detail.html
PALO ALTO, Calif. -- It’s more than 7-feet tall. Weighs over 500 pounds and walked upright -- three "Bigfoot" seekers, including a Redwood City man, Wednesday claimed they have proof that they have found the body of the elusive creature in the wilds of Georgia.

And on Friday, at a news conference in Palo Alto, they say they will present DNA evidence to prove the carcass of “Rickmat” is that of a bigfoot.

Matthew Whitton and Rick Dyer, Georgia residents who lead Bigfoot-tracking expeditions, say they found the body of what appears to be a Bigfoot in the woods of northern Georgia and will join local Bigfoot researcher Tom Biscardi at the news conference, according to Robert Barrows, who is publicizing the event.

Among the creatures's other physical characteristics of the body -- according to the hunters website -- http://www.searchingforbigfoot.com/ -- were flat feet similar to human feet. Its footprint is 16 ¾ inches long and the length from palm to tip of the middle finger is 11 ½ inches long.

"I think you'll find that this is the real deal," Barrows said of the alleged discovery.

Whitton, a police officer in Clayton County, and Dyer, a former correctional officer, are not saying exactly where the body was found or where it is now, Barrows said.

Biscardi, a veteran Bigfoot tracker who said he went to Georgia to view the find over the weekend, said DNA tests are being conducted and a team of scientists will study the body, but declined to name any scientists involved.

Officials from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Division said the largest wildlife they are aware of in the state are black bears and white-tail deer.

[Nurhachi1991]

Perhaps there's more to Bigfoot than previously thought:
http://www.ktvu.com/news/17174989/detail.html




Told you so...............

[WillKill4Food]

Told you so...............
It's still just hearsay, though. :gun:

[Nurhachi1991]

Do you think the pics will be made public after the conferance or are they going to keep it hush hush????



Haha I was finally after all these years starting to accept the fact that after all these years of believing Bigfoot was just a big hoax....... Now this story comes up! :p

[Gustav]

Do you think the pics will be made public after the conferance or are they going to keep it hush hush????



I don't see why they would keep it hush hush other than to piss me off.

So they'll probably keep it hush hush.

[No Ticket]

Do you think the pics will be made public after the conferance or are they going to keep it hush hush????



Haha I was finally after all these years starting to accept the fact that after all these years of believing Bigfoot was just a big hoax....... Now this story comes up! :p

Bah. I still think it's a hoax. No pictures of the body (if it's Bigfoot then it's technically an animal eh? Why no pictures then?) ... they won't name the scientists researching the body, the guy who went to study it is a guy who is all into searching for bigfoot.

I'll believe it when I see it. I don't see ANYTHING here that sounds legit. You'd think if Bigfoot existed someone would've found him by now here in the year 2008.

[Agent Spalko]

http://www.plaidstallions.com/kenner/boxedbigfoot.jpg

[Rayder]

They're probably not going to release the photos until they have a bid for them from a magazine or a tv company so they can make some money off of it, or maybe not, it is hard to say what they'll do.

[Nurhachi1991]

No there has been a photo up since yesterday............. This isn't the full photo but you guys get the idea



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article4531119.ece



Looks fake....... But I want to believe it's the real thing but most likely it is not.

[Indy&HanFan]

i don't think it's real.

[Nurhachi1991]

I think Bigfoot itself is out there somewhere but this does not look like it to me.

[Rayder]

that must be a big frezzer, can't tell if the creature in the freezer (sounds almost like a 50's horror movie) is real or not, press confrance is tomorrow, guess we'll find out more then

[DocWhiskey]

It is the year 2008. We live in a world in which phones can take crystal clear pictures and post them to the internet. We live in a world where High Definition exists in things from tv to film. We have digital cameras that autofocus and produce exuberantly crisp photos.

Yet these idiots can't take a good clear picture of a dead corpse.

Go ahead. Take a few pictures. It's not going anywhere.

There's only one reason why the pictures stink.

FAKE.

[No Ticket]

It is the year 2008. We live in a world in which phones can take crystal clear pictures and post them to the internet. We live in a world where High Definition exists in things from tv to film. We have digital cameras that autofocus and produce exuberantly crisp photos.

Yet these idiots can't take a good clear picture of a dead corpse.

Go ahead. Take a few pictures. It's not going anywhere.

There's only one reason why the pictures stink.

FAKE.


Exactly. Fake fake fake. There just isn't a Bigfoot or we would have already found it. This isn't some really small insect or a bird that may happen to look like many other birds or buried at the bottom of the Ocean where we can't see or go. No, it's in the woods in Georgia.

There isn't a bigfoot. Well, I mean there's a monster truck called Big Foot.

[Agent Spalko]

Exactly. Fake fake fake. There just isn't a Bigfoot or we would have already found it. This isn't some really small insect or a bird that may happen to look like many other birds or buried at the bottom of the Ocean where we can't see or go. No, it's in the woods in Georgia.


And with all of our advanced technology we can find the Titanic but we still can't find the Loch Ness Monster.

[Rayder]

And with all of our advanced technology we can find the Titanic but we still can't find the Loch Ness Monster.
That's because it was also a hoax, the guy who took the origanal picture admitted to taking his kids toy boat and the head of a toy dinosaur and glueing them together.

[Johnny Jones]

That's just because they couldn't get the real one to say "cheese." Haven't you seen the movie "Water Horse?":gun:
This definitely smacks of fakeness, as you all have said, (didn't it come out right after the reward was offered?) but these people should realize how p.o.'ed everyone else will be when it is proven. Couldn't that guy lose his police job?

[monkey man]

When I was a kid we used to go to West Virginia camping and there was a tourist trap that had the corpse of the "Amazing Wolf Boy". I wanted to see it every year we went. It was an obvious fake but we still loved looking at it. Urban legends are fun and they stimulate the imagination.

It's possible Bigfoot exists but it's more likely that it's a publicity gimic to make money and/or attract tourists. A man who runs Bigfoot tours finds a Bigfoot corpse. Red flags are raised. This screams out publicity gimic. Barnum and Bailey would be proud.

If a Bigfoot corpse were found, I have a feeling that it would be in a scientific journal or National Geographic.

I recently went back to West Virginia, but alas, the Amazing Wolf Boy was no longer there.

Believe or don't believe. It really doesn't matter. No harm done.

I'm openminded about Bigfoot and if they really find one. I'll take a ticket to see it.

Long live the "Amazing Wolf Boy". This thread is fun.

P.S. I remember seeing a documentary at least 10 years ago that pretty much proved that the Patterson film was a fake.

[bennihana123]

ONLY picture I could find.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/14/article-0-0247D4BC00000578-999_468x557.jpg

[Gustav]

Are those...intestines?

[Goonie]

Murderers! They killed Vancouver 2010 Olympics mascot Quatchi!

[bennihana123]

I want it to be real, but...

[No Ticket]

If it were real it would be all over CNN all day long. They'd have full body clear photos. No it's just this fuzzy photo where you can't really tell what you're looking at. With intestines coming out? Gross. If they did kill it... what did they kill it with? A grenade?

[No Ticket]

Hey guess what I just saw on Headline News! It's a rubber monkey suit in a cooler with some animal parts! Ha! Big surprise! And the two men claiming it was real are now nowhere to be found!

... such a lame thing to do.

[WillKill4Food]

Hey guess what I just saw on Headline News! It's a rubber monkey suit in a cooler with some animal parts! Ha! Big surprise! And the two men claiming it was real are now nowhere to be found!

... such a lame thing to do.
No surprise there. But good find, No Ticket.

For the record, I never believed that this was a real bigfoot - in fact, as you can tell in my prior posts I don't believe in bigfoot at all and I think that the Patterson footage is a rewinded tape of a man walking backwords in an awkward fashion (that's my theory as to why no man has been able to duplicate the "monster"'s gait; I just posted the article because I had read it in several news stories and thought it pertinent to this thread that, previously, had no present-day tie-ins.

[DocWhiskey]

No surprise there. But good find, No Ticket.

For the record, I never believed that this was a real bigfoot - in fact, as you can tell in my prior posts I don't believe in bigfoot at all and I think that the Patterson footage is a rewinded tape of a man walking backwords in an awkward fashion (that's my theory as to why no man has been able to duplicate the "monster"'s gait; I just posted the article because I had read it in several news stories and thought it pertinent to this thread that, previously, had no present-day tie-ins.

Patterson admitted himself on his death bed that the Bigfoot footage was fake. It was all over the news when he died. So did the guy who took the picture of Nessie.

[WillKill4Food]

Patterson admitted himself on his death bed that the Bigfoot footage was fake. It was all over the news when he died. So did the guy who took the picture of Nessie.
Thanks for the info. I didn't know that about Patterson (I did about the Loch Ness Monster) but it doesn't surprise me. I've never thought that the film looked genuine.

[FILMKRUSC]

Patterson admitted himself on his death bed that the Bigfoot footage was fake. .

That's not true. Patterson never admitted that. In fact Robert Gimlin who was with him when the footage was taken to this day says the footage is of a real creature that they encountered.

It wasn't a costume as the footprint casts that were taken at the location had dermal ridges in them. Dermal ridges are like fingerprints for the feet.

Not a monster or a myth - just a undiscovered species. It's really not that hard to believe that a undiscovered ape related species could still exist in the world.


As for this latest footage of the "dead bigfoot" -
Biscardi has a history. As soon as I heard his name I ignored the story.

http://www.lorencoleman.com/biscardi.html

All the media had to do was spend 3 minutes researching Biscardi's history and
this would have never been a story.

You could even tell from the photo they provided of the bigfoot body that it was nothing more than one of Bump In the Night Productions' Sasquatch costumes that they made to sell a year or so ago.

[Nurhachi1991]

Yeah I heard it was fake last week...........




But here is my last theory.



What if they had a real Bigfoot and the goverment threatened them to admit it was a hoax and show the public a fake bigfoot costume think about it the costume they showed being thawed out looked nothing like the picture. Biscardi may be a scammer but he is not that stupid he would of known it was a costume.

[Gear]

Good thought Nurhachi, but ever heard of punctuation?

[Nurhachi1991]

Good thought Nurhachi, but ever heard of punctuation?



I'm sick, tired and have been getting my butt kicked by a 5 year old all day gimmie a break man. :up:

[Gear]

Look, I get the whole 'screw it' thing, and on top of that my grammar isn't to hot, but every post of yours is irritating to read because you use little or no punctuation.

[No Ticket]

Yeah I heard it was fake last week...........




But here is my last theory.



What if they had a real Bigfoot and the goverment threatened them to admit it was a hoax and show the public a fake bigfoot costume think about it the costume they showed being thawed out looked nothing like the picture. Biscardi may be a scammer but he is not that stupid he would of known it was a costume.


Please. That's ridiculous. The government didn't step in to prevent the TRUE discovery of Big Foot. They'd have no reason to.

A bunch of scammers thought it'd be funny. And the costume looked exactly like the photos, it was in dirty water with real animal parts on top of it.... so some of it was real flesh while other parts (the face and feet obviously) were not.

I think he lied about touching it all-together.

[Gear]

I hate listening to people say crap like that when they themselves don't know either.



A motive could be the discovery was seen as a threat to civilization, which by the way is what the Nixon Administration said about the hippies...

[WillKill4Food]

I hate listening to people say crap like that when they themselves don't know either.

A motive could be the discovery was seen as a threat to civilization, which by the way is what the Nixon Administration said about the hippies...
Come on. You don't really think that proving the existence of sasquatch is being prevented by the US government, do you?
There's absolutely no reason that the discovery could harm America in any way (as a matter of fact, it's rather likely it might help us in the tourism industry).
There was a reason for Nixon and his minions to be afraid (very afraid) of the hippies - their lifestyles were spreading like wildfire, their drug habits were destructive, and their free sex led to free STDs.

[No Ticket]

I hate listening to people say crap like that when they themselves don't know either.


I'm just using common sense. I mean, what reason do you really have to believe they'd want to hide it from people?

Other than the fact that you sound paranoid to assume that because this turned out to be a hoax (like they always do), the government obviously stepped in and replaced the body with a monkey costume (even though the pictures look just like the costume).

It would make much more sense. Common sense. To assume that, it was a hoax all along and the reason they are alway just a hoax is because bigfoot is not real.

But if he is real, he is obviously as smart as we are because he has been able to evade capture... hide all of their dead so we never find bones or a body... and stay largely out of the public eye. But I'm more willing to bet that he isn't real at all. Even though some people really want him to be.

[Gear]

Bigfoot; the little grey man.


Think about it.

[WillKill4Food]

Bigfoot; the little grey man.


Think about it.
Yeah, because large hairy creatures and little bald men are so alike? :rolleyes:

No. If aliens existed it would be news, real news, when proof was found. It would change science as we know it.

But if Bigfeet (sic?;) ) or Yetis are found, it just means that a new animal was discovered, which happens all the time. The Okapi, the Dugong/manatee, and many other animals were once thought to be simply native legends, but they exist. Has science changed because of their existence? No. Has the government changed? No. So why in God's name would it matter if a Bigfoot was found?

[Gear]

No. If aliens existed it would be news, real news, when proof was found. It would change science [and the world] as we know it.

Exactly.

So why in God's name would it matter if a Bigfoot was found?


Because people don't like change. It scares them. If people don't think they're in charge they panic. The idea of something big roaming around the world that is unknown scares them.

[No Ticket]

Exactly.

Because people don't like change. It scares them. If people don't think they're in charge they panic. The idea of something big roaming around the world that is unknown scares them.

It's true people don't like change, but the discovery of a new animal (bigfoot) is not exactly something that I think would cause mass panic like aliens. Aliens existing would change everything... bigfoot existing would only mean, hey there really was an ape-like creature.

The government wouldn't step in over something like this. Besides, don't you think somebody would have some kind of proof by now?

[Gear]

Obviously not.


Besides, I was not advocating that the government did cover up the existence of Big Foot and that since this "find" was deemed false it was a conspiracy, but rather not to except the "gospel truth" without inquiring and thinking about it yourself.


What I was saying was, could it have been faked?: Sure.

Could it have been a cover story?: Sure.

Could it have been some loser playing around in a costume pretending he was a mythical hairy sprite?: Sure

At this point all possibilities [however unlikely] are on the table because I don't know what actually happened.

[No Ticket]

Obviously not.


Besides, I was not advocating that the government did cover up the existence of Big Foot and that since this "find" was deemed false it was a conspiracy, but rather not to except the "gospel truth" without inquiring and thinking about it yourself.


What I was saying was, could it have been faked?: Sure.

Could it have been a cover story?: Sure.

Could it have been some loser playing around in a costume pretending he was a mythical hairy sprite?: Sure

At this point all possibilities [however unlikely] are on the table because I don't know what actually happened.

So you're saying that I should just not accept gospel truths and always study everything from all possibilities... even if it's a UFO abducted Kennedy and a clone of him was the one that got shot [however unlikely], so he is probably still alive somewhere...???

I mean, that's jumping the gun to me. I am not accepting the "gospel truth," I'm just looking at the facts here and it looks like a costume in the picture (especially now that you know it is) and well... that's that.

You're basically saying "it could be fake or it could be a govt. cover-up." You sound kind of wishy-washy since you don't know so you're really not saying anything at all. Your opinion is essentially that you don't have one?

(sounds like I'm being mean but I wuv you gear guardian)

[Gear]

No, not unkind, just true.

As of this point I hardly know anything about it. I've only seen one picture and I simply skimmed over the article - so I don't really know enough to make a hard judgment (not opinion mind you). To me that would be jumping the gun.

My knee jerk reaction to the 'False Big Foot' conclusion was that it was very strange that police officers would pull off a hoax like this and that every time Big Foot 'evidence' is found it's eventually deemed fake.

You could say this is because Sasquatch doesn't exist, but I'm sure it does. C'mon, we hardly know anything about our deep oceans, scientists are only now starting to take Giant Squid seriously. Forget oceans, we hardly know anything about our deep jungles. Of course central American forests are somewhat different but you see my point.

[WillKill4Food]

...every time Big Foot 'evidence' is found it's eventually deemed fake.
Maybe that has something to do with Bigfoot being fake to begin with. :rolleyes:

You could say this is because Sasquatch doesn't exist, but I'm sure it does. C'mon, we hardly know anything about our deep oceans, scientists are only now starting to take Giant Squid seriously. Forget oceans, we hardly know anything about our deep jungles. Of course central American forests are somewhat different but you see my point.
The giant squid is just a larger version of a pre-existing species; it's not as far-fetched as Bigfoot.

[Gear]

Maybe that has something to do with Bigfoot being fake to begin with. :rolleyes:

Kinda like Extraterrestrial bacteria?


The giant squid is just a larger version of a pre-existing species; it's not as far-fetched as Bigfoot.


Wrong.

Who's to say Big Foot isn't a "larger" version of a pre-existing species? You?

[WillKill4Food]

Who's to say Big Foot isn't a "larger" version of a pre-existing species? You?
Okay, I was wrong.
You're right!
Big-foot is a larger version of a pre-existing species!
He's just a really big version of a normal foot. :rolleyes:

The Real Bigfoot:
http://www.silversteinmusic.com/billy/studio/beach/21.jpg

[WillKill4Food]

So, apparently the Bigfoot hoaxers were being used by a promoter who promised book and movie deals...

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/clayton/stories/2008/08/21/bigfoot_theft_claim.html

[metalinvader]

And..........Big foot is for sale on Ebay.


Big foot auction link. (http://cgi.ebay.com/Bigfoot-Hoax-Body-Display-Original-2008-Historic_W0QQitemZ250305207279QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item250305207279&_trkparms=72%3A1424|39%3A1|66%3A2|65%3A12|240%3A1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14)
What a steal! Only 250,000!:rolleyes:
Apparently,It's historic as well!