For YOU Crypto Types

[guohua]

I have enjoyed his informative video.
He does do research and admits when he thinks something is fake or a made up story.

 

He also UFO.Aliens and Bigfoot.
He does not really consider Bigfoot a Cryptid though I think.

[Mystic Wanderer]

Oh boy!  Some entertainment for later tonight.  

[BIAD]

I had an essay on the first one that I'll have to fish out. The Dogman shouldn't even be contemplated
-never mind seen, yet the many reports outweigh the logic.

Along with the Sasquatch sightings in the US and other 'Wild Man' accounts from around the world,
actually accepting that there maybe something that walks upright and thinks on a similar level as us
throws the whole idea of hominid evolution into the air.

Is every single sighting a lie or mistaken identity...? because if the answer is no, then our very reality
as a species would have to be reset.
And where we're supposed to have originated from.

[guohua]

Oh boy!  Some entertainment for later tonight.  

Try his site, I think you will be happy.
Source

[Mystic Wanderer]

Those were all great!! 

Of course, my favorite was the second one about the glimmerman, being as I have seen this "thing" myself. It's great to get validation, or at least have others come forward saying they have seen it too.  I know it's one of those things that is hard to believe, and if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I probably wouldn't believe it either.


Thanks Ms. G.!  Awesome information!   (And I did subscribe to his channel.)

[BIAD]

There's one thing that strikes me in regards of discussing Bigfoot or whatever name one chooses, and that is that
it seems like a modern-day phenomena and hence, has no credibility in the academic and scientific community.

History is used by man to enhance a certain subject to give it credence and yet when it comes to explaining what
thousands of people are seeing during woodland hikes, witnesses describing a large bipedal are mocked by the
media and explained away as mistaken identity or a prank from unknown parties.

A pragmatic person could suggest the appearance of an elusive 'man-like' creature merely the result of a global
society that exists in a better world where fantastical abstract musings can be afforded and I can appreciate that.

Maybe -if we ignore any evidence from the past, it's all just a tourist-gambit with the observers not necessarily
involved, but the perpetrators performing the act in hope of acquiring fame and wealth through maintaining the
Sasquatch belief.

Social media and television programmes certainly promote this acceptance with tales of hairy monsters attacking
unwary campers and prowling the forests attempting to avoid blurry cameras.


An old article from the US. (Notice the stick)

Surely we can put the matter to rest due to the usual question from the sceptics and scientists "Where's the body?"
-and sadly, the response that the remains of a Bigfoot body would be quickly  lost due to nature's ravenous hunger
is not enough for today's demand of 'no pics or it didn't happen'!

However, the shaggy beast does have some historical evidence, even if those same agnostics attempt to tear down
the accounts with assurances that all the tales of yore are merely allegorical and guileful for reasons of religious
persuasion. They certainly make sure that cogency comes across.

But first, let's set-off in that scientific environment, where the idea of shambling giants are smirked at and microscopes
have replaced St.Peter's gates. These guys never make mistakes like putting the skull on the wrong end of a dinosaur
skeleton or even wrongly portray these creatures in their manner of balance.
No, we cannot be doubted and we eat our own.

Take Marcellin Boule, a French paleontologist who discovered a relatively complete skeleton in a cave in the
area known as La Chapelle-aux-Saints in France. it was 1908 and unearthing the find, Boule began a three-year
study on the remains that culminated in his publication known as 'L’homme fossile de La Chapelle-aux-Saints.'

The skeleton included the skull, jaw, most of the vertebrae, several ribs, most of the long bones of his arms and legs
plus some of the smaller bones of his hands and feet. The well-preserved skull shows the low, receding forehead,
protruding midface, and heavy browridges typical of Homo neanderthalensis.

The fossilised fetal position of the discovery and the scattering of flint-tools fitted well with the contemporary
knowledge that early man did have some idea of communal existence. Yet academics believed the cave wasn't
a living area as we know it, but possibly a place where the the elderly man -who would later produce his bones
for Boule, was kept until he was buried there.

In his explanation, Marcellin offered evidence of the posture and gait of the being he regarded as Neanderthal.
But because of his postulation that such early hominid must have struggle to walk upright -due to his findings
from the shape of the spine and other bones, we now see the stereotypical 'caveman' as a brutish being without
contemplation and animal-like.



It's said that Boule made an error due to missing the gross deforming osteoarthritis in the bones and science
rushed in to show how this disease was the obvious reason the French fossil-hunter described such walking habits.

Historians of science have argued that Boule’s story is an example of bias and preconceived ideas influencing
scientific study of fossils and creating an accepted belief to the mainstream culture of a dolt-like creature that
behaved with no real difference from other animals.

The media of our time still show this appearance and with lack of body-hair on the dumb-ass caveman, it gives us
a feeling of progress, an assurance of being better. And that's one of the main problems that the current scientific
community, the lack of hair.

The Scientific American explains why.

What is the latest theory of why humans lost their body hair? Why are we the only hairless primate?

'Mark Pagel, head of the evolutionary biology group at the University of Reading in England and editor of The
Encyclopedia of Evolution, fills us in:

We humans are conspicuous among the 5,000 or so mammal species in that we are effectively naked.
Just consider what your pet dog or cat (or, for that matter, a polar bear) would look like, and how it might
feel, if its furry coat were shorn.

Scientists have suggested three main explanations for why humans lack fur.
All revolve around the idea that it may have been advantageous for our evolving lineage to have become less
and less hairy during the six million years since we shared a common ancestor with our closest living relative,
the chimpanzee.

The aquatic-ape hypothesis suggests that six million to eight million years ago apelike ancestors of modern
humans had a semiaquatic lifestyle based on foraging for food in shallow waters. Fur is not an effective insulator
in water, and so the theory asserts that we evolved to lose our fur, replacing it, as other aquatic mammals have,
with relatively high levels of body fat. Imaginative as this explanation is—and helpful in providing us with an excuse
for being overweight—paleontological evidence for an aquatic phase of human existence has proven elusive.

The second theory is that we lost our fur in order to control our body temperature when we adapted to life on the
hot savannah. Our ape ancestors spent most of their time in cool forests, but a furry, upright hominid walking around
in the sun would have overheated.

The body-cooling idea seems sensible, but even though lacking fur might have made it easier for us to lose heat during
the day, we also would have lost more heat at night, when we needed to retain it.

Recently, a colleague and I suggested that ancestors to modern humans became naked as a means to reduce the
prevalence of external parasites that routinely infest fur. A furry coat provides an attractive and safe haven for insects
such as ticks, lice, biting flies and other "ectoparasites."

These creatures not only bring irritation and annoyance but carry viral, bacterial and protozoan-based diseases such as
malaria, sleeping sickness, West Nile and Lyme disease, all of which can cause chronic medical problems and, in some
cases, death.

Humans, by virtue of being able to build fires, construct shelters and produce clothes, would have been able to lose their
fur and thereby reduce the numbers of parasites they were carrying without suffering from the cold at night or in colder
climates.

Human lice infections, which are confined to the hairy areas of our bodies, seem to support the parasite hypothesis.
Naked mole rats, animals that can be described as resembling "overcooked sausages with buck teeth," also seem to
support the theory: They live underground in large colonies, in which parasites would be readily transmitted.
But the combined warmth of their bodies and the confined underground space probably negate the problem of losing heat
to cold air for these animals, allowing them also to become naked.

Once hairlessness had evolved this way, it may have become subject to sexual selection—being a feature in one sex that
appealed to another. Smooth, clear skin may have become a signal of health, like a peacock's tail, and could explain why
women are naturally less hairy than men and why they put more effort into removing body hair.

Despite exposing us to head lice, humans probably retained head hair for protection from the sun and to provide warmth
when the air is cold. Pubic hair may have been retained for its role in enhancing pheromones or the airborne odors of sexual
attraction...'

Scientific American:

So Bigfoot can't exist.
Bigfoot cannot be real because it walks upright like man, looks like a primate -and if it belongs on our evolutionary tree, it
should've lost its legendary 'fur' like we did. We did and that is the rule.
.................................

There was this guy back in the 13th century called Ugolino di Conti. He later became known as Pope Gregory IX and
came up with the idea of inquisitions to discourage heresy. But being eductated in Paris and Bologna, one would wonder
why such an industrious Roman Catholic leader would be mentioned here.

During his busy papacy of being God's right hand, he instructed a Spanish Dominican friar called Raymond of Penyafort
to scribble a few pages in order of replacing past collections of Canon Law.
These texts became known as 'The Decretals of Gregory IX'

Of course, no works of religious literature would be complete without illustrations and in these exciting images, a creature
that Europe labelled 'The Woodwose' can be seen. In modern day parlance, we might call it Bigfoot.


A knight slaying a wild man and rescuing a lady, who goes off with another knight.
The second knight is slain by a third and the woman attacked by bears.

The weirdness of this is that in most of the medieval artwork, the Woodwose carries a large staff and in many Youtube
Sasquatch/Wild Man videos, a large stick is often seen leaning against a tree. If it's all fake, then at least someone is doing
their homework!



So who's correct? The Catholic Church celebrated the hairy man of the forests and ignored the fact that it should've lost it's
fur due to hominid logic. Science says it's all wishful thinking and rednecks in gorilla suits. The scales of reason cannot help.

The thing is, if and when Bigfoot is finally proven and is possibly attached to our maturation as a species, what will it mean
for science's history? What will it mean to the current 'ethnic-rage' and our understanding of where we came from?

Maybe Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves was right when he murmured to himself regarding Will Scarlett... "I have a brother?"

[Mystic Wanderer]

@"BIAD", that story (above) reminds me of Esau, the eldest son of Isaac and Rebekah, and twin brother of Jacob from the KJV bible.

Esau was born with thick fur on his body and Jacob was "normal".  After the twins became adults, Jacob went to his father, who was blind, and tricked him into giving him what should have been Esau's birthright by wearing goat hair around his arms. When his father felt the fur, he thought Jacob was Esau and gave him the property.

So, you see, these hairy men were even discussed in the bible. 


I found your information in the above post very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

[guohua]

@"BIAD" 
That was interesting.
But what can happen if attacked and why do some attack and others don't?
 

I was wondering if this could be a Werewolf incident or Bigfoot.

[gordi]

...So who's correct? The Catholic Church celebrated the hairy man of the forests and ignored the fact that it should've lost it's fur due to hominid logic. Science says it's all wishful thinking and rednecks in gorilla suits. The scales of reason cannot help...

hmmm.... but doesn't the big fella still live IN the forests and deep woods (as opposed to roaming the open savannah)
There'd be no real reason to do a "homo-sapiens" and lose the fur... would there?

Oh, and the naked mole-rats that were mentioned... we REALLY need to look closely at those guys.
They don't "age" like we do and are naturally protected from Cancer by having an elevated amount of "extremely high-molecular-mass hyaluronan" (HMW-HA)!!

nice.

G

[BIAD]

@Guohua.

There are no Government-backed official  'Sasquatch attack' accounts that I can find and this should be something
that is discussed.

The reasons are obvious I suppose, because to to general public it indicates that these alleged creatures are just that,
alleged. But to some, that would also be suggested as the exact reason they're not recognised by officialdom!

Before I go on, I do believe such large bipeds exist as I also believe they're capable of seeing the world in the manner
we do as humans. I think we underestimate their mental aptitude due to our bias of believing 'hair-covered' is a sign
that these beings are animal-like and ergo think like other forest animals we encounter.

To put it another way, our arrogance as top predator stifles us appreciating their existence. If Bigfoot doesnt desire a
fast car and a nice house, he must be therefore, doltish and incapable of self-improvement.
I also believe this is why we're incapable of collecting decent imagery of them, they might not know what we're thinking,
but they may well know how we think.

It would be easy to broach the situation of why Government and scientific bodies do not recognise the Sasquatch as
a real entity with the obvious answer is that they don't exist. There's never any irrefutable evidence and all witnesses'
accounts can be placed under the two catagories of mistaken-identity and trickery.

Both titles have stock as a shape in the woods can be anything and with a recent account of Randy Lee Tenley dressed
in a Gillie suit being run over by a vehicle in Montana -whist attempting to incite a Bigfoot sighting, hoaxing can make any
interested party decide the whole thing is fake.

Some reports have offered the idea of a professional outfit of military personnel that come in and 'clean up' a dangerous
situation involving angry beasts and terrified hunters or Bigfoot enthusiasts who unwittingly enter an area these creatures
are believed to deem their own.

But again, no ironclad evidence is presented and it doesn't matter how earnest a telephonic-voice is on a podcast, the
general public need more that tones of concern. Then such testimony becomes nothing more than entertainment.

Of course, if there is any credibility to these reports of black-clad military men policing out-of-control Sasquatch situations
and the knowledge is being deliberately repressed, then it's a dangerous tactic in itself if it is ever properly exposed.

Staying with that assumption, the question of why such suppression of a Sasquatch reality must be asked.
Bears and mountain lions are dangerous and even though they tend to avoid encounters with humans, Government-approved
agencies provide information to -not only protect tourists, but assist in maintaining the animals' existence.

In the Bigfoot fellowship, it's often proposed that the scientific and ministerial communities refuse to recognise Sasquatch's
presence due to the world-changing reality that our standard premise of humanity could effect many aspects of global control.

Our paradigm of who we are and where we came from would not only need revision, it could take us into areas of thought
that could seriously damage the journey that mankind is supposed to take.
We covet, we acquire and we conquer, this who we are and what we do. Humans see inertia for a species as perilous and
could lead to the decay of the fabric we call civilisation. This -in the corridors of rationalism and control cannot be allowed.

There are plenty of examples where it's reported that human were attacked, but every time, the definite proof fails to appear.
Take the Ape Canyon account.

July, 1924. A small prospector's pine-log cabin in a gorge southeast of Mount St. Helens in the state of Washington. 
Five men looking for gold in the area, were attacked by a group of Sasquatch during the night after going outside
earlier for water and encountering a seven-foot tall creature.


(An obvious 'Posed-For' photograph from a newspaper of that time.)

Fred Beck -one the men in the cabin at the time, stated: 
"...The only time we shot our guns that night was when the creatures were attacking our cabin.
When they would quiet down for a few minutes, we would quit shooting. I told the rest of the party,
that maybe if they saw we were only shooting when they attacked, they might realise we were only
defending ourselves..."

Why would one think like that...? Why assume an animal -because that's how Sasquatch is generally perceived, would understand
that the actions of the prospectors were merely a defensive behavior? To consider this as a possibility is to accept that the rock
-throwing shaggy brutes outside the cabin had high-thinking mental processes than involved morality and astuteness.


Fred Beck.

Mr. Beck added in an interview that he recalled a fellow-cabin-dweller singing "If you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone, and we'll
all go home in the morning!" and Mr. Beck had the the impression that the "Mountain Devils" as he called them, might understand his
friend's crooning and go away.
Again, there's the hint that these men believed their attackers were perceptive to alternatives of outcome.

When daylight approach, the assault stopped and cautiously emerging from the damaged cabin, Fred Beck alleged he shot at one
of the apelike creatures that was standing about eighty yards away near the edge of Ape Canyon. He states his target toppled over
the cliff and down into the gorge, some four hundred feet below.

Gathering some supplies, the quintet left the area and made for a Ranger's Station at Spirit Lake. However, Bill Welch -the Ranger
could not assist them in identifying what they'd seen. Later -after returning to Kelso in Washington, the media raced in and advertised
that "Mountain Devils" or "America's Abominable Snowmen" were roaming this particular area of Washington State.
This brought big game hunters hurrying to catch themselves a unique trophy and a tourism boom as well.

Mr. Beck accompanied a detective two reporters from Oregon back to the location, but apart from footprints, no bodies were found.
Today, there still a hunt, but now it's for the cabin that seems to have been burnt down and disappeared. Again, possible lost evidence.

This account follows many others where vital proof never surfaces and all we're left with are verbal anecdotes and elusive questions.

Did Mr. Beck and his comrades believe that the mere ability of these creatures being upright, with thumbs and organisational skills to
attack in a group warranted the title of 'human-like'? If their assailants were bears, would he have thought that bears would be capable
of the 'defence' reasoning he suggested?

There must be an assumption, an easily-reached-for inference that such creatures think on a level similar to man. But even though this
may be true, our first goal is to produce intransigent evidence that Sasquatch exists.

And to do that, we -the general public, may have to sadly perform an act that the Sasquatch are certain we would resort to, and kill one.
................................

@Gordi.

hmmm.... but doesn't the big fella still live IN the forests and deep woods (as opposed to roaming the
open savannah) There'd be no real reason to do a "homo-sapiens" and lose the fur... would there?

Oh, and the naked mole-rats that were mentioned... we REALLY need to look closely at those guys.
They don't "age" like we do and are naturally protected from Cancer by having an elevated amount of
"extremely high-molecular-mass hyaluronan" (HMW-HA)!!

I agree, the theory of hair-loss for our ancestors is a bit flaky at best. It would imply that only our section
of primates had the where-with-all to lose our pelt in favour of certain environments.

Academia seems fine with allowing acceptance that the dumb-assed Chimps, slow-witted Orangutans
and the clown-car Gorillas are following their animal brethren and we are somehow 'special'
I suppose science and religion aren't that far-apart after all!!

One would be tempted to ask if shedding of one's weather-resistance is so logical, then is there evidence
of Himalayan-people or those of the Arctic regions evolving in reverse in regards of hair-growth!
I'd like to call bullsh*t on that theory.

With the mole-rat's remarkable abilities, all I can suggest is that it may well be that Boy In A Dress is
somehow related to them!

[BIAD]

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?)

[Mystic Wanderer]

@"BIAD" , you put a lot of time and research into your replies above, and for that I applaud you. Great work!    

My answer isn't quite as detailed when I say, I simply believe the scientists are withholding the true results from us from their studies on "Bigfoot hair".  They do it with medicinal cures, so why not Bigfoot?

Everything they tell us is a paid-for lie.

[guohua]

@"BIAD"  Damn, that is an extensive and very in depth report. 

[BIAD]

@Mystic & Guohua.

My aim was to take the critical side of the Bigfoot phenomena out into the tall grass
and that way, it can be seen -that at the very least, we have use the 'science' lens for
a rational investigation.

[guohua]

@"BIAD" 
Yes a Rational investigation, Okay.
Told to the Sheeple/Slaves by the Government.
Most people, being Sheeple and not thinking for themselves believe what they are told to believe.

These are the same people who believe the Government Cares About Them and Their Well-Being.
That Big Pharma and Mandatory Vaccines are Good For Your Child and the yearly Flu Shot is for Your Health!

You Just Can Not Help the Brain-Dead!
Just Our Humble Opinion.

[BIAD]

@"BIAD" 
Yes a Rational investigation, Okay.
Told to the Sheeple/Slaves by the Government.
Most people, being Sheeple and not thinking for themselves believe what they are told to believe.

These are the same people who believe the Government Cares About Them and Their Well-Being.
That Big Pharma and Mandatory Vaccines are Good For Your Child and the yearly Flu Shot is for Your Health!

You Just Can Not Help the Brain-Dead!
Just Our Humble Opinion.

Yep! It's catered for anyone who scoffs at the reports from the thousands of people
who've seen these things.

Next, a same rational look at these sightings and what meagre evidence is available.
So get a firm grip on your pantaloons!!

[guohua]

@"BIAD"  "So get a firm grip on your pantaloons!!"

No Pants today, Flowered White Dress,,,, and,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,    I'll Hold My Dress For You,,,,,

[guohua]

This is a pretty good video with some good investigative work done by Ben miller at his site.

[BIAD]

Here's a fascinating retelling of the Man-eating Lions of Tsavo.

Bob -the orator, reminds us at the end of the long video, that we're still in the food chain
for some creatures.

[Wallfire]

I remember reading about this story years ago. Just some of the points that are very strange.
1, He has a secure perimeter, lots of people and guns so why did he not do night patrols around the inside
2, His gun misfired why did he not do as all trained people do, reload and fire
3, The 303 (7.62) has one hell of a hitting power, no lion is going to survive 2 or 3 shots to the body mass
4, He chucked his rifle away wile there was still rounds in it ( sign of panic) as I said a 303 round is very powerful the lion was moving slow and its head was an easy target.
As I said these are only some of the points that are strange in this story.
Was he just an incompetent frighten person who"coloured" the story to cover the true facts?