When I wrote earlier about a 'hidden' reality belonging Governments in order to ridicule the idea of such a creature
we know as Bigfoot, I think I should expand on that area somewhat.
To convince a public that such a phenomena doesn't exist, one doesn't need the whole of the communications
system to 'be in on it'. It would be easy to assume that if the media treat a Bigfoot sighting as light-hearted and
dubious, someone in the echelon of the companies may know the truth and aware of the fallout if the reality was
exposed.
But you don't need a global conspiracy to thwart the revelation of a giant creature wandering the forests of the
world, you just need the simple lack of evidence. This is where the wall of belief stands strong due the amount of
false starts when a sighting is first reported usually assures interest quickly wanes.
As you see from the Ape Canyon example, it always seems that when it comes to physical evidence, it's not the
media that ignore it, it's the convenient occurrence that a dead body has disappeared, forensic material is either
corrupted or belongs to a known animal and the teller of the experience has nothing except their testimony of
the experience.
Visual evidence -such as recorded footage of these creatures is also not reliable. The famous Patterson-Gimlin
of 1967 consisted of two reels and as of writing, the original footage is missing. Youtube is abound with blurred
scenes and doubtful insistence that the shadows among some leaves are Bigfoot watching the watcher!
..........................
A genetic test performed on donated samples in 2014 by The Institute of Human Genetics, Wolfson College,
University of Oxford with assistance from several museums, didn't help the debate over whether such creatures
exist.
Here's their findings.
Table 1. Origin and GenBank sequence matches of hair samples attributed to anomalous primates.
(All sequence matches were 100%.)
Hair samples submissions were solicited from museum and individual collections in a joint press release issued
on 14 May 2012 by the Museum of Zoology, Lausanne and the University of Oxford.
A total of 57 samples were received and subjected to macroscopic, microscopic and infrared fluorescence
examination to eliminate obvious non-hairs. This excluded one sample of plant material and one of glass fibre.
Of the screened samples, 37 were selected for genetic analysis based on their provenance or historic interest.
Lengths (2 – 4 cm) of individual hair shaft.
Ref No........location....................attribution........... GenBanksequencematch.............. common name
25025--------Ladakh, India-----------yeti----------------------U. maritimus---------------------polar bear
25191--------Bhutan--------------------yeti/migyhur-----------U. maritimus--------------------polar bear
25092---------Nepal--------------------yeti---------------Capricornis sumatraensis-------------serow[Goat]
25027--------Russia-------------------almasty------------------U. arctos-------------------------brown bear
25039--------Russia-------------------almasty---------------Equus caballus---------------------horse
25040--------Russia-------------------almasty-----------------Bos taurus-------------------------cow
25041--------Russia-------------------almasty---------------Equus caballus----------------------horse
25073--------Russia------------------almasty----------------Equus caballus----------------------horse
25074--------Russia------------------almasty----------------U. americanus----------------------American black bear
25075--------Russia------------------almasty----------------------P. lotor-------------------------raccoon
25194--------Russia------------------almasty-------------------U. arctos--------------------------brown bear
25044-------Sumatra------------orang pendek-------------Tapirus indicus----------------------Malaysian tapir
25035------AZ, USA-----------------bigfoot-----------------------P. lotor---------------------------raccoon
25167------AZ, USA-----------------bigfoot--------------------Ovis aries---------------------------sheep
25104-----CA, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25106-----CA, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25081-----MN, USA-----------------bigfoot---------------Erethizon dorsatum---------------N. American porcupine
25082-----MN, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25202-----OR, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25212-----OR, USA-----------------bigfoot------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus---------wolf/coyote/dog
25023-----TX, USA-----------------bigfoot-------------------Equus caballus------------------horse
25072-----TX, USA-----------------bigfoot-------------------Homo sapiens-------------------human
25028-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25029-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus---------wolf/coyote/dog
25030-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot---------------------Bos taurus----------------------cow
25069-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot----------Odocoileus virginianus/hemionus-----white-tailed/mule deer
25086-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot---------------------Bos taurus----------------------cow
25093-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus---------wolf/coyote/dog
25112-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot---------------------Bos taurus----------------------cow
25113-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus----------wolf/coyote/dog
SOURCE:
Do all the people who provided the samples and those who analysed the hairs, work for the agencies burdened
with keeping Sasquatch in the realms of just silly tourist bait?!
On the internet, there's always the idea that when a group or individual questions a 'wished-for' notion, it's really
a faceless Government office is subtly dissolving the confidence and commitment of a belief, and at times I can
see it does have merit.
But what about the families of these bureaucrats...? Does working for such control-departments demand a life
of deceit and denial?
The evidence for a unknown species of large ape-like creatures living beside modern man is just not there at this
time and even though I believe in them, the critical world of science demands more than just faith.
But if we do grasp that conviction and accept that out there in the woods, there is a large bipedal being with the
capacity for introspection and the capability to maintain a distance from humans, then the question of what the
reality of Bigfoot could mean to Joe Q. Public may arise.
According to most anthropologists, the major divisions in the species of human are three-to-four basic differences.
Ethnographic division into races from Meyers Konversationslexikon of 1885-90 is listing:
Caucasian races (Aryans, Hamites, Semites)
Mongolian races (northern Mongolian, Chinese and Indo-Chinese, Japanese and Korean,
Tibetan, Malayan, Polynesian, Maori, Micronesian, Eskimo, American Indian),
Negroid races (African, Hottentots, Melanesians/Papua, “Negrito”, Australian Aborigine,
Dravidians, Sinhalese)
There's also 'Australoid', which some still debate can be classed as separate or just stay within the Negroid category.
Now if we go along with the 'Out-Of-Africa' theory that around 270,000 years ago -or a more recent proposal that humans
explored other lands 1.8 to 0.5 million years ago, our basic ancestors migrated from Africa and began to populate other
regions of the planet, then where does Bigfoot fit in with this conventional pattern of human dispersal?
Separation of culture, physical appearances and social development are generally believed to have taken place after this
disjointed movement and even though it could be offered that our Bigfoot retained it's early humanoid appearance and left
within the given time-frames, then why are similar-descriptive sightings reported from all over the world?
As of to-date, there's been no archaeological discoveries of bones to connect Sasquatch to the humanoid evolutionary tree
and as the readings above suggest, no scientific evidence that he's with us now. Footprints, vague photography and anxious
verbal accounts can be persuasive to someone who wants Bigfoot to be real, but the established judges will not accept such
evidence, it's simply not enough.
Apart from hair-colour variances, Bigfoot is Bigfoot! Tall, hairy and elusive. The archetypal giant that avoids human interaction.
The obvious answer to this whole situation would be that this creature belongs in mythology and serves as a vehicle for warnings
to children, nothing more.
An alternative notion could be that Bigfoot isn't a 'cousin' of ours and that just can't be, that would ruin everything!
But what if the parameters of the traditional structure of where we originated from are flawed...? What if there is another 'division'
to add to the ethnographic list? It would mean such an error could drastically alter the global perception of humanity and that
established strata that we live in today could seriously effect -not only religions, but who we are as main custodians of Earth.
Bigfoot may not know how to drive a car, but what if he has rational beliefs that counter our own accepted doctrines?
The way we treat each other due our differences now is bad enough, how do approach a relation of humans that thinks in an
entirely different pattern of living?
Would that problem be worth a combined effort to ban Bigfoot from the world stage? I'm sure a selfish, conscientious and
malevolent group of upright animals would arrive at a rational conclusion and take into consideration of our current society.
I'm sure you know what the answer would be.
Jeez... and then there's the DogMan! (Next?)
we know as Bigfoot, I think I should expand on that area somewhat.
To convince a public that such a phenomena doesn't exist, one doesn't need the whole of the communications
system to 'be in on it'. It would be easy to assume that if the media treat a Bigfoot sighting as light-hearted and
dubious, someone in the echelon of the companies may know the truth and aware of the fallout if the reality was
exposed.
But you don't need a global conspiracy to thwart the revelation of a giant creature wandering the forests of the
world, you just need the simple lack of evidence. This is where the wall of belief stands strong due the amount of
false starts when a sighting is first reported usually assures interest quickly wanes.
As you see from the Ape Canyon example, it always seems that when it comes to physical evidence, it's not the
media that ignore it, it's the convenient occurrence that a dead body has disappeared, forensic material is either
corrupted or belongs to a known animal and the teller of the experience has nothing except their testimony of
the experience.
Visual evidence -such as recorded footage of these creatures is also not reliable. The famous Patterson-Gimlin
of 1967 consisted of two reels and as of writing, the original footage is missing. Youtube is abound with blurred
scenes and doubtful insistence that the shadows among some leaves are Bigfoot watching the watcher!
..........................
A genetic test performed on donated samples in 2014 by The Institute of Human Genetics, Wolfson College,
University of Oxford with assistance from several museums, didn't help the debate over whether such creatures
exist.
Here's their findings.
Table 1. Origin and GenBank sequence matches of hair samples attributed to anomalous primates.
(All sequence matches were 100%.)
Hair samples submissions were solicited from museum and individual collections in a joint press release issued
on 14 May 2012 by the Museum of Zoology, Lausanne and the University of Oxford.
A total of 57 samples were received and subjected to macroscopic, microscopic and infrared fluorescence
examination to eliminate obvious non-hairs. This excluded one sample of plant material and one of glass fibre.
Of the screened samples, 37 were selected for genetic analysis based on their provenance or historic interest.
Lengths (2 – 4 cm) of individual hair shaft.
Ref No........location....................attribution........... GenBanksequencematch.............. common name
25025--------Ladakh, India-----------yeti----------------------U. maritimus---------------------polar bear
25191--------Bhutan--------------------yeti/migyhur-----------U. maritimus--------------------polar bear
25092---------Nepal--------------------yeti---------------Capricornis sumatraensis-------------serow[Goat]
25027--------Russia-------------------almasty------------------U. arctos-------------------------brown bear
25039--------Russia-------------------almasty---------------Equus caballus---------------------horse
25040--------Russia-------------------almasty-----------------Bos taurus-------------------------cow
25041--------Russia-------------------almasty---------------Equus caballus----------------------horse
25073--------Russia------------------almasty----------------Equus caballus----------------------horse
25074--------Russia------------------almasty----------------U. americanus----------------------American black bear
25075--------Russia------------------almasty----------------------P. lotor-------------------------raccoon
25194--------Russia------------------almasty-------------------U. arctos--------------------------brown bear
25044-------Sumatra------------orang pendek-------------Tapirus indicus----------------------Malaysian tapir
25035------AZ, USA-----------------bigfoot-----------------------P. lotor---------------------------raccoon
25167------AZ, USA-----------------bigfoot--------------------Ovis aries---------------------------sheep
25104-----CA, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25106-----CA, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25081-----MN, USA-----------------bigfoot---------------Erethizon dorsatum---------------N. American porcupine
25082-----MN, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25202-----OR, USA-----------------bigfoot------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25212-----OR, USA-----------------bigfoot------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus---------wolf/coyote/dog
25023-----TX, USA-----------------bigfoot-------------------Equus caballus------------------horse
25072-----TX, USA-----------------bigfoot-------------------Homo sapiens-------------------human
25028-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------------U. americanus-------------------American black bear
25029-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus---------wolf/coyote/dog
25030-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot---------------------Bos taurus----------------------cow
25069-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot----------Odocoileus virginianus/hemionus-----white-tailed/mule deer
25086-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot---------------------Bos taurus----------------------cow
25093-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus---------wolf/coyote/dog
25112-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot---------------------Bos taurus----------------------cow
25113-----WA, USA----------------bigfoot-------------C. lupus/latrans/domesticus----------wolf/coyote/dog
SOURCE:
Do all the people who provided the samples and those who analysed the hairs, work for the agencies burdened
with keeping Sasquatch in the realms of just silly tourist bait?!
On the internet, there's always the idea that when a group or individual questions a 'wished-for' notion, it's really
a faceless Government office is subtly dissolving the confidence and commitment of a belief, and at times I can
see it does have merit.
But what about the families of these bureaucrats...? Does working for such control-departments demand a life
of deceit and denial?
The evidence for a unknown species of large ape-like creatures living beside modern man is just not there at this
time and even though I believe in them, the critical world of science demands more than just faith.
But if we do grasp that conviction and accept that out there in the woods, there is a large bipedal being with the
capacity for introspection and the capability to maintain a distance from humans, then the question of what the
reality of Bigfoot could mean to Joe Q. Public may arise.
According to most anthropologists, the major divisions in the species of human are three-to-four basic differences.
Ethnographic division into races from Meyers Konversationslexikon of 1885-90 is listing:
Caucasian races (Aryans, Hamites, Semites)
Mongolian races (northern Mongolian, Chinese and Indo-Chinese, Japanese and Korean,
Tibetan, Malayan, Polynesian, Maori, Micronesian, Eskimo, American Indian),
Negroid races (African, Hottentots, Melanesians/Papua, “Negrito”, Australian Aborigine,
Dravidians, Sinhalese)
There's also 'Australoid', which some still debate can be classed as separate or just stay within the Negroid category.
Now if we go along with the 'Out-Of-Africa' theory that around 270,000 years ago -or a more recent proposal that humans
explored other lands 1.8 to 0.5 million years ago, our basic ancestors migrated from Africa and began to populate other
regions of the planet, then where does Bigfoot fit in with this conventional pattern of human dispersal?
Separation of culture, physical appearances and social development are generally believed to have taken place after this
disjointed movement and even though it could be offered that our Bigfoot retained it's early humanoid appearance and left
within the given time-frames, then why are similar-descriptive sightings reported from all over the world?
As of to-date, there's been no archaeological discoveries of bones to connect Sasquatch to the humanoid evolutionary tree
and as the readings above suggest, no scientific evidence that he's with us now. Footprints, vague photography and anxious
verbal accounts can be persuasive to someone who wants Bigfoot to be real, but the established judges will not accept such
evidence, it's simply not enough.
Apart from hair-colour variances, Bigfoot is Bigfoot! Tall, hairy and elusive. The archetypal giant that avoids human interaction.
The obvious answer to this whole situation would be that this creature belongs in mythology and serves as a vehicle for warnings
to children, nothing more.
An alternative notion could be that Bigfoot isn't a 'cousin' of ours and that just can't be, that would ruin everything!
But what if the parameters of the traditional structure of where we originated from are flawed...? What if there is another 'division'
to add to the ethnographic list? It would mean such an error could drastically alter the global perception of humanity and that
established strata that we live in today could seriously effect -not only religions, but who we are as main custodians of Earth.
Bigfoot may not know how to drive a car, but what if he has rational beliefs that counter our own accepted doctrines?
The way we treat each other due our differences now is bad enough, how do approach a relation of humans that thinks in an
entirely different pattern of living?
Would that problem be worth a combined effort to ban Bigfoot from the world stage? I'm sure a selfish, conscientious and
malevolent group of upright animals would arrive at a rational conclusion and take into consideration of our current society.
I'm sure you know what the answer would be.
Jeez... and then there's the DogMan! (Next?)
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe.