Hey I'm here advertising our new Sasquatch homepage Oklahoma Sasquatch. Were locally run in Tulsa County, this group was made for just Oklahoma Sasquatch sightings, encounters, or what have you, no other states. You can report an encounter, read the material we wrote for the skeptics, read up on some interesting information, view some pictures, listen to some Sasquatch sounds, and view a sighting map. We also have our own message board and many other things. Our group is slowly growing, but if you have had any sort of encounter or you heard something you're not quite sure on what it is or you have any questions check out the site and email one of the researchers. The web address is www.oksasquatch.tk thank you!
(http://i13.tinypic.com/3zsw6bm.jpg)
(http://www.villagehatshop.com/media/spam.jpg)
Has altruismsuffers found a new hobby?
Sasquatch scent in Tulsa? And you people thought it was the refineries...
(http://blueskat065.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/oklahomasasquatchsightingsmap.jpg)
I don't ever recall saying there were Sasquatches in the city of Tulsa....hmmm oh well that is funny what you guys did with the emblem I love a good laugh..[:)]
sasquatch must be alright... he's got a sense of humor. [:D]
Hey Oklahomasasquatch, thanks for posting the game cam pic on your site. If anyone wants to check out another low resolution photo of bigfoot then click on: http://www.bigfootphoto.net/gallery/enhancedscan.php This photo is not going to prove that bigfoot exists, but it is proof none the less (35mm/200spd/color film/flash). The evidence is stacking up and it is just a matter of time until someone brings in a DNA sample of this creature. Please keep in mind that science needed a body for proof of the gorilla's existence, and that only came about as late as the year 1902. Don't let the fun that everyone is going to have at your (our) expense discourage you. Your site looks great and the reports/e-mails of BF encounters that are now coming in will make it all worth it...right?, LOL!
quote:
Originally posted by oklahomasasquatch
I don't ever recall saying there were Sasquatches in the city of Tulsa....hmmm oh well that is funny what you guys did with the emblem I love a good laugh..[:)]
I figured Sasquatch would have a bigger d!ck....No wonder he doesn't want anyone to see him....
Hey Breadburner, you thought right. Not that I thought this would be discussed here, but should you decide to read more about sasquatch you will discover what they say about "bigfeet". There has to be a different reason for this creature's shyness. [8)]
quote:
I figured Sasquatch would have a bigger d!ck....No wonder he doesn't want anyone to see him....
Hmmm. Immaturity....one of the many signs of ignorance and stupidity.
quote:
Hmmm. Immaturity....one of the many signs of ignorance and stupidity.
(http://a2.vox.com/6a00b8ea06ece0dece00c2251c31a2549d-200pi)
Oooh, you're a feisty one, baby.Can't take a joke?
(http://preview.jdid.photosite.com/~photos/tn/5523391_348.ts1161748381000.jpg)
Guessing not all bigfoots are "created" equal, eh?
OK, lets try a couple of Bigfoot facts: Does anyone know that there are dermal ridges on the casts of BF's footprints that have been collected since the 1960s? These dermal ridges run the opposite direction than those of human dermal ridges. Primate hair samples have also been collected from Bigfoot encounter sites and research areas that are proven to not have a match with any known (to science) primate hair. This means that there is an unknown Great American Ape. In time science will prove that these creatures exist. It might be possible to collect DNA from Sasquatch stool samples or saliva left on "bait" that can be used to prove this creature's existence without having to harvest a body. It is hoped that this thread will raise awareness about and interest in the existnece of these creatures. Bigfoot sightings have been reported in every state of the US except Hawaii. I think that makes sense.
LOL! Maybe the Bigfoot is a normal 8-10 footer and the dudes on skies are elfs.
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
(http://preview.jdid.photosite.com/~photos/tn/5523391_348.ts1161748381000.jpg)
Guessing not all bigfoots are "created" equal, eh?
My trash comes on Tueday morning....I had thrown away a sheet cake and low and behold there is a Sasquatch in my trash...Damn thing had icing all over it's face.....Anyway I went ahead and shot it....Tell me where to ship the body but you pay the freight.....
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
(http://preview.jdid.photosite.com/~photos/tn/5523391_348.ts1161748381000.jpg)
Guessing not all bigfoots are "created" equal, eh?
Like I said...I thought Sasquatch would have a bigger d!ck....That beast's crank should be as big as those skier's.....
OK, I admit to having the heebies scared out of me by some large, smelly biped some years ago.
Actually, I thought it was just some dude sneaking up on me whom ran off when he was spotted: but the howl a few moments later was what shook my guts.
I became a closet-bigfoot believer for a while afterwards and read everything I could find.
However, reason dawned on me after a while, I joined a 12 step program, and in time returned to non-believer status.
That one can't chuck a rock into the woods without hitting a tree-hugger, a pot farmer, or any number of other wierdo's tells me there's nothing new in the woods.
IMHO, something would have popped up by now, and I'm not just talking a bigfoot boner - but that's not the case.
Would be cool to be wrong on this one though, jdb
I don't know, it looks pretty cold outside in that artwork. Just so I know, what type of round did it take to bring the poor thing down or was it more at being a well placed shot?
Like I said...I thought Sasquatch would have a bigger d!ck....That beast's crank should be as big as those skier's.....
[/quote]
So far I have only read one book on the subject, but I have been talking to a lot of folks on different forums. I did attend a conference with several credible BF researchers and professors who presented the best evidence for BF's existence. I feel that these folks are working in a very professional and scientific manner and there is a mounting stack of evidence each year. I already know that Bigfoot is alive and well with a breeding population right here in many parts of Oklahoma. Seeing is believing and that is what it will take for anyone to realize the truth, so I understand where you are coming from and respect your healthy skepticism. You are wrong on this one, and thus you are very cool in my book.
Would be cool to be wrong on this one though, jdb
[/quote]
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
(http://i13.tinypic.com/3zsw6bm.jpg)
Ahh...apparently I'm not the only Michael Moore hater...
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
So far I have only read one book on the subject, but I have been talking to a lot of folks on different forums. I did attend a conference with several credible BF researchers and professors who presented the best evidence for BF's existence. I feel that these folks are working in a very professional and scientific manner and there is a mounting stack of evidence each year. I already know that Bigfoot is alive and well with a breeding population right here in many parts of Oklahoma. Seeing is believing and that is what it will take for anyone to realize the truth, so I understand where you are coming from and respect your healthy skepticism. You are wrong on this one, and thus you are very cool in my book.
P.S. Believe it or not, I have never tried pot to this day and I am 46 yrs. old. Nor do I have a soft spot in my heart for tree huggers (they have other issues that they can not face and are focused on "their cause" instead). I think the more you get out the more you will discover that we are all weirdos.
Would be cool to be wrong on this one though, jdb
[/quote]
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
I don't know, it looks pretty cold outside in that artwork. Just so I know, what type of round did it take to bring the poor thing down or was it more at being a well placed shot?
Like I said...I thought Sasquatch would have a bigger d!ck....That beast's crank should be as big as those skier's.....
[/quote]
Model 1895 .405 Winchester.....
I think Alt has found a new cause and re-incarnated himself on this thread, with an echo poster to boot.
Yeah, what are the odds of TWO BFers showing up, out of the blue, on the same website, at the same time?
About the same as seeing a BF standing in line at wal-greens, no?
quote:
"I already know that Bigfoot is alive and well with a breeding population right here in many parts of Oklahoma."
Dude, making statements like this will only hurt your credibility.
Have you see them humping in the bushes, on numerous occassions in many different parts of the State? Were they plump with pearly whites?
One instance is marginal, at best.
But several sightings and you didn't have a camera on hand? No way is that believible.
You label yourself a kook by saying such things. Isn't the subject met with rolling eyes as it is?
jdb
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
Dude, making statements like this will only hurt your credibility.
BS. I've been to the buffet at Mazzios at about 12:15 on Sunday morning after churches let out and I've seen plenty of Squatches belly up to the bar.
You just don't recognize them because they're freshly shaven.
Free Movie... What really happened to Squatch?
WHAT: FREE MOVIE, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO SQUATCH? QUESTIONS & ANSWERS SESSION TO FOLLOW
WHEN: 7PM, JUNE 26, 2006
WHERE: HARDESTY LIBRARY, 93RD AND MEMORIAL
WHO: SQUATCHTRUTH.ORG
FREE MATERIALS WILL BE AVAILABLE (DVDS, CDS, DECEPTION DOLLARS, LITERATURE AND MORE!)
What are we asking?
We believe that the existence of Squatch deserve serious consideration and that the public at large is unaware of what appears to be a deliberate cover-up. The infamous Squatch report distorted or simply omitted key pieces of information.
SQUATCHCANTWAIT.COM
"In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Bwaaahaaa haaaaa haaaaa!!!!!!!!!![}:)][}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
...quote:
"I already know that Bigfoot is alive and well with a breeding population right here in many parts of Oklahoma."
Dude, making statements like this will only hurt your credibility.
Have you see them humping in the bushes, on numerous occassions in many different parts of the State? Were they plump with pearly whites?
One instance is marginal, at best.
But several sightings and you didn't have a camera on hand? No way is that believible.
You label yourself a kook by saying such things. Isn't the subject met with rolling eyes as it is?
jdb
Hi JDB. Of course the subject is met by many folks with rolling eyes, but this thread has been read 500 times so far and only about three of you are hecklers. I guess you got me pegged right as an echo poster, but I mentioned that in my first post when I thanked OklahomaSasquatch for posting the game cam pic to his web-site, and that is what this thread is all about. OklahomaSasquatch is inviting anyone interested in Bigfoot to view his site and links, and he is also hoping to have people contact him with their own BF encounters.
Now I'm curious, you asked if I have ever seen BF "humping in the bushes". Well, no I haven't, but do you think that each time BF wants to mate that the female has to come into heat as do the rest of the primates or is BF more human like and can mate at any time? There is a juvenile BF in the game cam photo (taken in Oklahoma) and that is why I can make the statement that there is a breeding population of Bigfoot here in the state. I have not had several up close encounters with Bigfoot that would present an ideal photo opportunity, but if it were that easy then we would already have had our proof by now. I'm sure more than a few will label me a kook, but I'm merely a little kook and the big kooks will be the ones to bring in the proof needed for Bigfoot's existence (even though BF exists without any proof or permission from any of us).
FYI, those are not discrete viewers, most views are from people like me refreshing every so often for another good laugh.
Hey Iplaw, where in the world did you dig up that ad?
If Squatches hump in the forest and there is nobody around do they make a sound?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
FYI, those are not discrete viewers, most views are from people like me refreshing every so often for another good laugh.
OK, you speak for most. May I please speak to the few that are not represented by you?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
If Squatches hump in the forest and there is nobody around do they make a sound?
Heck yeah! It's when people are around that they try to be quiet. Your not knowing this is starting to reveal a little about yourself, lol!
"I'm sure more than a few will label me a kook, but I'm merely a little kook and the big kooks will be the ones to bring in the proof needed for Bigfoot's existence (even though BF exists without any proof or permission from any of us)."
Your honesty and self-deprecation is refreshing. In case you haven't been lurking here for long, we have our share of big kooks (Alt) who might be able to help out.
I'm surpised Aox hasn't reported any squatches when he's been out in the woods tending his plants.
Heckling goes with the territory, no?
I support your desire to spread the word but at the same time...well, I am going to take a few shots along the way.
IMO, this thread is much more important than any of the "channel" topics.
And more funner to. jdb
Why did the bigfoot cross the road?
To snatch a few plants from Alt's pot patch.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Hey Iplaw, where in the world did you dig up that ad?
I borrowed it from another defunct member of the TulsaNow family.
"Tulsa Now, just one big dysfunctional family"
-OR-
"Tulsa Now, putting the 'fun' in dysfunction"
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
Why did the bigfoot cross the road?
To snatch a few plants from Alt's pot patch.
Brilliant[:P]
I believe there are quite a bit of ignorant people in this world...let alone this form...before you guys jump to conclusions. Honestly have any of you gone into a forest, not just a patch of trees by Wal-Mart. I mean a National Forest or Hunting Reserve, have any of you actually been in one at about 1-3 o'clock in the morning? I got half a mind to say I bet if I took any of you guys out were I have seen Sasquatches you would want to go back to the truck before we even smelt them. So try to think about things before you say them. You know nothing about it you probably never have gone into the forest to look for it, if you don't agree with what I'm posting about...simply don't post at all.
Oh brother, you're just beggin for it aren't ya...
I saw an episode of Walker: Texas Ranger where Chuck Norris was about to be killed by Sasquatch, when all of a sudden a bear (that had been bothering them most of the episode) randomly appeared and saved him.
Bears shall forever be friend to Chuck Norris, and Sasquatch better watch his back.
Never said I was begging for it...iplaw...what do you do for a living?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Oh brother, you're just beggin for it aren't ya...
Yeah, dog-gone-it OS, I had them all tucked in and you had to kick the door open, lol!
I understand the sightings and soundings in the Tulsa area. Pretty sure I saw and heard families of them at the State Fair and Oktoberfest. Mostly soundings at the Oktoberfest. They could have been breeding or maybe dancing, similar stuff.
I heard there was an episode of the Six Million Dollar Man with Sasquatch in it, but I have never seen it (too busy).
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
I saw an episode of Walker: Texas Ranger where Chuck Norris was about to be killed by Sasquatch, when all of a sudden a bear (that had been bothering them most of the episode) randomly appeared and saved him.
Bears shall forever be friend to Chuck Norris, and Sasquatch better watch his back.
If the Sasquatch existed, civilization with its expansion alone would have squeezed it out enough to have captured one or spotted one with hardcore evidence. They don't live forever so where are the dead corpses or skeletons? The only hardcore evidence seen is some guy with a bear rug strapped to his back like the infamous Soggy Bottom Monster. Either that or people have blurry pictures to deal with.
I have no problem in believing their existence if there was evidence of their existence.
quote:
If the Sasquatch existed, civilization with its expansion alone would have squeezed it out enough to have captured one or spotted one with hardcore evidence. They don't live forever so where are the dead corpses or skeletons? The only hardcore evidence seen is some guy with a bear rug strapped to his back like the infamous Soggy Bottom Monster. Either that or people have blurry pictures to deal with.
Hey Rowdy,
Ask any park ranger if they have ever found any Bear skeletons. They will answer no we haven't, we don't know why they just never find any except for the ones that were killed by humans. Check out my site there is a very compelling photo on the front-page check it out. We believe that sasquatches barry their dead, it sounds crazy but it's the only one that makes sense on for that question. The Patterson-Gimlin film (1967), the Sasquatch in that film, if watched closely you can see the shoulder blades and muscles moving. These guys are masters of camouflage, they could be 10ft from you and you wouldn't even know it. Not to mention there extremely fast and a lot stealthier than you think. This information is all based on my experiences first hand, it all happened. More than 1 to 2 fourths of America have seen these guys maybe more. Look at how people are ridiculing us for having a web site about it do you think because accusations like you guys (not you rowdy) make people are going to want to come out and admit they have seen one?
Once again water boy I never said we saw a squatch in the city of tulsa....When we mark a territory when we get a sighting we don't mark the exact area because we don't want people going out there bothering the land looking for one. Thus we just color the whole county.
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
Why did the bigfoot cross the road?
To snatch a few plants from Alt's pot patch.
Did you know that there are a few reports out of Washington state about the people that are left to "watch over" these types of fields, that are growing/planted in wilderness areas, having Sasquatch encounters. These folks are usually just camped near by these fields and during the day they fish, etc. Once these folks come to realize that they are being watched by a Sasquatch they often decide to give up their cushy jobs.
Also, most reports of Sasquatch crossing the road decribe the creature doing so in two steps.
LOL! Here you go Breadburner, you seem to be more than just a little curious about this: http://www.gcbro.com/OKblaine0002.html
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Hi JDB. Of course the subject is met by many folks with rolling eyes, but this thread has been read 500 times so far and only about three of you are hecklers * * *
Heckle, heckle, heckle! There, that makes at least 4.
Yep.
Back when I had something to prove, I spent a good deal of time in the deep woods of several remote areas.
At 3:00 am: a pack of raccoons raiding the camp, a wild pig rushing out of canyon, a grunting bear on the path in front of one can all make one pee his pants.
It's not about smelling nasty aromas anymore then it is terrible noises that curl your toes.
It's that there have been hoards of well equipped people hunting BF's and still have nothing respectable to show for the efforts.
Back in my day, walking you back to the truck was a 12 day adventure of it's own.
If your "bet" included me, you lost, bud.
jdb
Do you honestly think all of us researchers would release all this evidence over the net.... photos yes, some, castings yes, but hair, vital footage, or tissue samples no....they would have it looked at by scientists, not us though. I'll tell you what, most of almost all sightings happen with out you ever expecting it. Most of all sightings cause people to go into shock yes all that stuff you heard happend but you probably didn't listen and look for other things. A quote I repeat to alot of people is "If you actully go out and look for something your more than likely going to find it." -Loren Coleman-...I'm not saying you have to believe me but 1,000's of sightings and counting can you really doubt all of those people? It's hard to prove the Sasquatch existance, then again it's hard say it doesn't exist.
Hey JDB, sounds like you've been doing a little reading...alright! But,which bet do you speak of...and back in your day?...when you had something to prove? LOL!!
Oh well. I'll just close with this:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
I think that Sasquatch is already in captivity and being held against his will.
The Bush administration is forming a legal opinion on what species can be detained that could satisfy the courts (he ain't no racist, but he might be a specist).
I am starting a fund to find him and prepare a proper legal defense.
Please send money through paypal to my e-mail address.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
The Bush administration is forming a legal opinion on what species can be detained that could satisfy the courts (he ain't no racist, but he might be a specist).
That's an entirely specious theory [:P]
The Patterson-Gimlin film is a hoax.....
What about the Zapruder film?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
What about the Zapruder film?
Holy $hit....That was Sasquatch on the grassy knoll....It really explains alot....
quote:
The Patterson-Gimlin film is a hoax.....
Ok Breadbunner.....tell me why it's a hoax.
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
Back when I had something to prove, I spent a good deal of time in the deep woods of several remote areas.
At 3:00 am: a pack of raccoons raiding the camp, a wild pig rushing out of canyon, a grunting bear on the path in front of one can all make one pee his pants.
It's not about smelling nasty aromas anymore then it is terrible noises that curl your toes.
It's that there have been hoards of well equipped people hunting BF's and still have nothing respectable to show for the efforts.
Back in my day, walking you back to the truck was a 12 day adventure of it's own.
If your "bet" included me, you lost, bud.
jdb
A pack of raccoons can make one excrete liquid waste?
Well when the Film-maker(s) purchase a "Sasquatch Suit" before the film was shot.... It screams hoax to me....
QuoteOriginally posted by Rowdy
A pack of raccoons can make one excrete liquid waste?
When twelve of the guys circle a dying fire, start boldly moving, rear-up on their backlegs and begin grunting...ones attention is caught.
When you think their about to leap in for the kill - and the brain is only registaring one word, "Rabies" - yeah, bladder controll can becoam an issue.
Wow bread your sure know alot of facts to make that judgement on the film.
Here's the real facts
Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin two completely broke rodeo workers pack up to go search for bigfoot in the Pacific North West there hopes on filming it. They make there way to Bluff Creek were they film a Female Sasquatch which was squatting by the creek. It gets up and walks away from the camera. You can't really say it's a guy in a monkey suit....because its not you can see its shoulder blades moving, muscle groups moving, it's breasts, zoomed in you can see facial movement, and plus it's arms are far much longer than a humans. Oh well it doesn't matter weather you believe it or not, I'm just stating the obvious facts.
It's been quite interesting posting to this thread. It's always good to have a few skeptics visit to keep everyong honest, lol. I just wanted to bump the thread so I could again state that Bigfoot is a real, living primate that exists without anyones permission. Hey, if WE don't tell you this(because we have seen them) who the hell is?
Here's someone we all should know. He is catching far more flack over Bigfoot than we few: http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/feeds/ap/2006/11/03/ap3144443.html
Here's a link to a new story in the news: http://www.themilwaukeechannel.com/news/10286534/detail.html
I think a small, shaven Sasquatch was seen riding a bike in yesterday's Veterans Day parade ...
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5350
If Sasquatch and Chewbacca were in the UFC and had a bout....Who do you think would win...?
My money is on Chewbacca for a number of reasons.....
You funny bunny...Chewbacca IS a Sasquatch, lol.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
It's been quite interesting posting to this thread. It's always good to have a few skeptics visit to keep everyong honest, lol. I just wanted to bump the thread so I could again state that Bigfoot is a real, living primate that exists without anyones permission. Hey, if WE don't tell you this(because we have seen them) who the hell is?
I guess the thing that I find most remarkable about the existence of Bigfoot is that, even though they've found almost complete skeletons of many creatures that lived 70 million and more years ago, they haven't ran across so much as a pinkie bone from from a creature that's living right next to us. To me that's just incredible. And by incredible, I mean lacking all credibility.
Hi Papaspot. I agree with you that not having a body for proof (or any part of a Bigfoot body) is very strange indeed, but as it has been said: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Only recently (1903) was a body brought back to prove the existence of the gorilla. Only recently have we had a body to prove that the giant squid exists, even though many speculated that they must because of the large suction cup scars found on many sperm whales. We do have footprint casts of Bigfoot from the 1960s that show dermal ridges (like the dermal ridges that make up fingerprints). These ridges on the footprint casts run in the opposite direction of human footprint ridges. Also, never has the body of a bear that has died of natural causes ever been discovered. The bodies of dead bears that have been discovered were victims of gun shots or truck accidents, etc. It has been suggested that Sasquatch creatures may bury their dead. I understand that you will have to see a Bigfoot creature in order to believe that they exist. I know they exist and I will not pretend that they do not. I don't know why we don't have a body by now...but I know it is very possible to get one, just not very easy.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Hi Papaspot. I agree with you that not having a body for proof (or any part of a Bigfoot body) is very strange indeed, but as it has been said: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Only recently (1903) was a body brought back to prove the existence of the gorilla. Only recently have we had a body to prove that the giant squid exists, even though many speculated that they must because of the large suction cup scars found on many sperm whales. We do have footprint casts of Bigfoot from the 1960s that show dermal ridges (like the dermal ridges that make up fingerprints). These ridges on the footprint casts run in the opposite direction of human footprint ridges. Also, never has the body of a bear that has died of natural causes ever been discovered. The bodies of dead bears that have been discovered were victims of gun shots or truck accidents, etc. It has been suggested that Sasquatch creatures may bury their dead. I understand that you will have to see a Bigfoot creature in order to believe that they exist. I know they exist and I will not pretend that they do not. I don't know why we don't have a body by now...but I know it is very possible to get one, just not very easy.
As far as the giant squid, etc., none of the creatures that you mention live in Arkansas, Oklahoma, etc. It's a little bit less likely that you'd run across the body of a creature that lives hundreds of feet down into the ocean than one that supposedly lives where thousands and thousands of people live, hike, fish and hunt. As far as the body of a naturally dead bear never being found, I find that a little bit hard to believe.
So maybe Bigfoot buries it's dead? Humans bury our dead and we run across bodies of naturally dead humans.
As far as the dermal ridges, I'd like to see the evidence. You got any links? And I'm not talking about any 9/11 conspiracy-type sites. I'm talking about impartial sites that DON'T have an agenda (like proving the existence of Bigfoot). I'll look with an open mind at any legitimate evidence but if I open up a site and it's obviously a 'Bigfoot lives' site, I won't waste one minute with it.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
You funny bunny...Chewbacca IS a Sasquatch, lol.
Yes he is....They are both very tall guys in costumes....Good work coming clean....
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Also, never has the body of a bear that has died of natural causes ever been discovered. The bodies of dead bears that have been discovered were victims of gun shots or truck accidents, etc.
"Two of the cubs were killed by a male bear at the den and one cub
died from starvation."
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1073073
"Pennsylvania Game Commission Wildlife Conservation Officer Robert Buss recently reported finding the remains of the state's oldest known black bear in the wilds of Pike County. Based on the ear-tag number, the bear was identified as a 30-year-old female.
"After receiving word from those who originally found the remains, Buss located the carcass to determine whether this was a case of poaching. It was determined the bear apparently
died of natural causes, since there were no other marks on the animal other than badly broken and infected canine teeth, and it did not appear to be malnourished."
http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/cwp/view.asp?A=11&Q=156453
OK Papaspot, it looks like you're getting closer but not quite yet. The point about the proof in the existence of the Giant Squid is that it existed for all of these thousands of years, evidence of its existence had been discovered in the form of suction cup scars on certain whales but still it was not accepted by science to exist. A Giant Squid body had to wash up on shore for this to happen. If you do not want to compare deep sea creatures to the Bigfoot then lets also agree to keep our "bear body" search to the FORESTS of the U.S., and not stray off to the Artic Circle in Norway where there are no woods or forests, just dead, froxen, starved polar bear cubs lying in the snow. I hope you agree that this is fair. Your other bear body article is about a radio-collared bear, that is the only way they found it, lol! Here is a link about some of the evidence I am referring to. It will be up to you to invest as much of your time and open mind to research (at your own expence) this evidence, as you spent looking for the links you provided. You state that you find these facts hard to believe, but I hope you simply won't condemn them without properly investigating first. I hope this helps, and I look forward to reading more from you: http://www.bfro.net/LMS/LMS.asp
Breadburner...you are at least half right. [^]
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
OK Papaspot, it looks like you're getting closer but not quite yet. The point about the proof in the existence of the Giant Squid is that it existed for all of these thousands of years, evidence of its existence had been discovered in the form of suction cup scars on certain whales but still it was not accepted by science to exist. A Giant Squid body had to wash up on shore for this to happen.
So what would you estimate the population per square mile to be on the ocean floor. I would think it would be pretty sparse.
quote:
If you do not want to compare deep sea creatures to the Bigfoot then lets also agree to keep our "bear body" search to the FORESTS of the U.S., and not stray off to the Artic Circle in Norway where there are no woods or forests, just dead, froxen, starved polar bear cubs lying in the snow.
I'm pretty sure that Pennsylvania is in the U.S. Did they secede without my knowledge or did you just ignore the second link?
quote:
I hope you agree that this is fair.
No, because I already see the little game you're playing. You make the claim that NO BEAR was EVER FOUND that died of natural causes. When I post a link that refutes this, you narrow it to say NO BEAR was EVER FOUND (in a U.S. forest)... When I post a link for that, you'll further narrow it to say that NO BEAR was EVER FOUND (in a U.S. forest that had a white marking on its head and a toothpick in its mouth). It's just a bullcrap way of moving the target.
quote:
Your other bear body article is about a radio-collared bear, that is the only way they found it, lol!
ROFL!! Didn't read the STORY, didja? Did the story say that they found the bear using the radio collar? No, it didn't. In fact, if you'd have bothered to READ the story you would have seen this:
"The
last interaction the agency had with this bear was in
1994."
Let's see...a radio collar with a battery that lasted for TWELVE FREAKIN' YEARS? Even the EverReady BUNNY can't last THAT long. In fact, the sentence right before it said:
"Between 1986 and 1989, agency personnel visited this bear's den in order to record reproductive success and perform maintenance to its radio-collar."
In other words, the battery hadn't been changed since
1989. Lessee...that would be SEVENTEEN YEARS that the battery would have had to last. Face it, not only was your claim debunked but you've demonstrated that you pay little more than cursory attention to anything that doesn't SUPPORT your agenda. That's not real great for the credibility of your team.
quote:
Here is a link about some of the evidence I am referring to. It will be up to you to invest as much of your time and open mind to research (at your own expence) this evidence, as you spent looking for the links you provided. You state that you find these facts hard to believe, but I hope you simply won't condemn them without properly investigating first. I hope this helps, and I look forward to reading more from you: http://www.bfro.net/LMS/LMS.asp
Okay, I must not have been clear on my stance on 'Bigfoot lives!' sites. I told you I won't waste one minute on 'em. If you have a link to an IMPARTIAL site, i.e. one that doesn't have an AGENDA, I'll be happy to look at it. But if you post another bigfoot site, don't expect me to click on any more of your links.
And I'm still waiting to see your evidence on dermal ridges.
Papaspot, I don't want to lose your interest since you are already interested in this topic enough to read it. I will correct myself and from now on realize that only one bear has ever been found in the U.S. that died of natural causes. That bear had been tracked with a radio collar several years in the past and its body was discovered in the area where it should have been.
The link I provided is not for you to explore the BFRO website but to alert you and everyone to a documentary that aired on the Discovery Channel-"Sasquatch:Legend Meets Science". There is also a book by the same title available: http://www.amazon.com/Sasquatch-Legend-Jeff-Meldrum/dp/0765312166/sr=11_1q
It is going to be impossible to find an impartial report don't you think? Either the report or article will be pro-exist or just the opposite. It is up to you to be the impartial judge. "Personal beliefs aside, he(Dr. Meldrum) bases his findings on the data, which he feels supports the idea of a species behind the legend." Jimmy Chillcut is a fingerprint expert that started out as a skeptic on the creatures existence until he examined several Sasquatch footprint casts. This book is also endorsed by world-famous primatologist Jane Goodall.
OklahomaSasquatch.tk started this thread to let folks know that there is a local group that will take a sighting report seriously and sometimes that all a person wants when they have an encounter with one of these creatures. Most encounters are never reported for fear of redicule. It is my hope that this thread will generate more interest in helping the general public learn the truth about these creatures. There is a enough evidence to support a large scale, serious effort to bring forth the solid proof that is needed to prove that this creature does exist: Reports since days of the Spanish explorers, hair samples, footprint casts, Patterson film(which shows muscles working under the creature's hair...it's no suit), and even the photo from one of my game cameras(what you see is what you get, sorry it's not as clear as I wish it were): http://www.bigfootphoto.net/gallery/enhancedscan.php
The last thing a Bigfoot Researcher wants to do is to fall for a hoax, so we do appreciate the skeptics for keeping us sharp, lol.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Papaspot, I don't want to lose your interest since you are already interested in this topic enough to read it. I will correct myself and from now on realize that only one bear has ever been found in the U.S. that died of natural causes. That bear had been tracked with a radio collar several years in the past and its body was discovered in the area where it should have been.
First of all, it was one (of TWO) examples that I posted. That doesn't mean there aren't many more. The absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence, remember? In the second place, he was tracked with a radio collar
well over a decade ago. And, yes, it was found where it should have beeen--in the woods with the rest of the bears. And we aren't talking about an area the size of a city block here...we're talking about hundreds of square miles.
quote:
The link I provided is not for you to explore the BFRO website but to alert you and everyone to a documentary that aired on the Discovery Channel-"Sasquatch:Legend Meets Science". There is also a book by the same title available: http://www.amazon.com/Sasquatch-Legend-Jeff-Meldrum/dp/0765312166/sr=11_1q
It is going to be impossible to find an impartial report don't you think? Either the report or article will be pro-exist or just the opposite. It is up to you to be the impartial judge.
We're talking about reports versus web sites. No offense, but I give Bigfoot sites the same credibility that I give Area 51 or 9/11 "truth" sites. They're out to convince you of something and they play pretty fast and loose with the facts. A credible
report will stick with hard, verifiable
facts and not ask you to draw conclusions based based on
assumptions.
quote:
"Personal beliefs aside, he(Dr. Meldrum) bases his findings on the data, which he feels supports the idea of a species behind the legend." Jimmy Chillcut is a fingerprint expert that started out as a skeptic on the creatures existence until he examined several Sasquatch footprint casts. This book is also endorsed by world-famous primatologist Jane Goodall.
That's nice but you gave us a link of where to BUY the book. I'm really not interested on spending twenty bucks on the book. If it contains
credible evidence, I would think that you would be able to find some of it on the Internet from an
unbiased source.
quote:
OklahomaSasquatch.tk started this thread to let folks know that there is a local group that will take a sighting report seriously and sometimes that all a person wants when they have an encounter with one of these creatures. Most encounters are never reported for fear of redicule. It is my hope that this thread will generate more interest in helping the general public learn the truth about these creatures. There is a enough evidence to support a large scale, serious effort to bring forth the solid proof that is needed to prove that this creature does exist: Reports since days of the Spanish explorers, hair samples, footprint casts, Patterson film(which shows muscles working under the creature's hair...it's no suit), and even the photo from one of my game cameras(what you see is what you get, sorry it's not as clear as I wish it were): http://www.bigfootphoto.net/gallery/enhancedscan.php
The last thing a Bigfoot Researcher wants to do is to fall for a hoax, so we do appreciate the skeptics for keeping us sharp, lol.
Well, if you wanna spend your time in the woods looking for Bigfoot or evidence of Bigfoot, that's fine with me. In fact, I actually support your effort--not because I think you're gonna find anything but because I think it's good for everyone to spend time in the woods. While you're out there, you're likely to learn some things about...let's say...more
traditional nature. And that's a GOOD thing.
I saw Sasquatch in my French Toast.
quote:
Originally posted by Rowdy
I saw Sasquatch in my French Toast.
[}:)]
I'm pretty sure I saw E-L-V-I-S in my Alphabets a few weeks ago. [}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by Rowdy
I saw Sasquatch in my French Toast.
Put that on ebay..
Oh well, "thems the grits".
Papaspot, I think this might be close to an impartial article, but not perfectly. There is a lot of info. here. I got the idea to do this search from the Wikipedia link at your "My Oklahoma Life" site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfoot
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Papaspot, I think this might be close to an impartial article, but not perfectly. There is a lot of info. here. I got the idea to do this search from the Wikipedia link at your "My Oklahoma Life" site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfoot
This one looks reasonable at first glance, xjay but it'll probably be some time this evening before I get a chance to look at it in detail.
I think it's all quite fascinating. From the wiki, I went to the Texas Bigfoot site and read a few reports of sightings. Maybe it's real, maybe not, but it's entertaining in a "Coast to Coast AM" kind of way.
I understand why anyone would doubt this creature's existence. I laughed at someone else myself about 10 years ago for telling me to keep an eye out for Bigfoot at a campground in MO. I giggled and assured him we would be O.K. and almost completely forgot about the whole episode. You will either have to see a report on the news that solid evidence of Bigfoot's existence has been presented -or- see one of the creatures yourself (that's what it took for me). It will not matter how many dead bears we find or how many skeptics proclaim the possibility impossible, these creatures are out there without anyone's permission. If one will not read the scientific evidence available in a book how can one have an informed opinion. The dermal ridges are real and on some of the casts from the 1960s. There is no need to buy the book, have your local library get it for you. I know these creatures are real and yet life goes on. The kids go to school and we earn our money, etc. I have always enjoyed the woods, camping, and natural history. It didn't take a chance encounter with Bigfoot to get me outdoors, it was the other way around. It's just that now the woods look a little different to me than before and if anything, I have a greater appreciation for the ways of nature.
Remember to check out www.OkSasquatch.tk for more information. Check out the information page and it should answer most of your questions, if you have anymore please contact one of our researchers.
Just got back from two days of riding the Talihmena Drive area - big foot country - and can tell you, there are no bigfoots there at present.
I took the best known bait for catching BF's, an individually wrapped carmel candy, and placed it by the side of the road, drove off a bit and waited behind a bush.
Nothing!
Not one BF came up and even sniffed the bait.
From town to town, I couldn't find one person who said they believed in such a beast.
So much for this thread.
jdb
Maybe the big foot was on a diet.
You should go back and try putting a salad or some rice cakes by the side of the road.
Hey, jdb, at least you are getting out there and doing a little investigating yourself. You may luck out and have a road crossing encounter, but most likely your chances of an encounter will increase the farther from the road you get. I have visited with folks who "claim" to have had an encounter with Bigfoot. These folks are from Heavener, Talihina, Poteau, Honobia and the town at the end of the drive...Mena, Arkansas. Just goes to show you. Don't give up so easy, it's only your first try. A little half hearted, but a try none the less.
Set your VCRs:
Fri. 11/17 @ 7 pm & 10 pm
Sat. 11/18 @ 9 am
The Travel Channel "On The Trail Of Bigfoot"
Here's a new documentary that may make light of the Bigfoot subject. National Geographic has had two shows on this subject and one made light while the other did not. So, we'll find out together:
11/20/06 @ 7 pm on the National Geographic Channel- "Russian Bigfoot".
Time will show that liquid water on Mars will not be the only thing that the scientists were wrong about. "When you succeed you are a genius, until then you are labeled a kook."
That's funny.
I went South for the week to travel some roads and to just be exploring in general.
Had nothing to do with hunting BF's.
Like a dumb tourista, I popped off with the BF stuff every chance I got - as a tired joke - with all the locals that were either smaller than myself or that I felt couldn't run as fast.
That was the extent of my investigation.
There was one station owner who was leaning against his pump, while chewing on what looked like a curious shaped pinky bone, but I kept on riding after hearing some twangy, Banjos out back.
Until then, your a Kook.
Sincerely, jdb
I see your "Sincerely", and raise you a "Cordially yours". Keep investigating, this was only your second try at it. With some luck you may still get a road crossing encounter.
Twangy banjo music, huh?
I watched a show on Discovery the other day called "Sasquatch Legend Meets Science" or something like that and it was really interesting. The memorial day footage was very compelling.
My dad grew up in Leflore county in the 30s/40s and I figured if there was a bigfoot in Oklahoma in that area he might have heard talk about it. He said he never heard anything like that. Of course, that doesn't mean anything really except you would think if Bigfoot existed, he has been around for many many years and there would have been talk even back then. I dunno.
I still don't know if it's for real or not, but like I said before, it's fascinating in that Coast to Coast AM/Art Bell kind of way -- like alien abductions and paranormal investigations. [:)]
Hi TulsaMINI. There are several stories out of LeFlore Co. from many years back, even as far back as when the Spanish Explorers were in the region. Before the terms Bigfoot/Sasquatch were coined, anyone who encountered one of these creatures would have referred to it as a wildman or wildwoman. Instead of risking ridicule from others, most folks kept these encounters to themselves, and that might explain why your dad never heard any talk about these creatures. I know that these creatures exist and do not simply believe they exist. Seeing one for yourself is what it will take to convince you that they are real. I understand this and I am never offended when someone has a healthy dose of skepticism. When the scientific proof does come in, some of the information on the program you watched, "Sasquatch: Lengend Meets Science" will be taught in Middle School biology classes.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Hi TulsaMINI. There are several stories out of LeFlore Co. from many years back, even as far back as when the Spanish Explorers were in the region. Before the terms Bigfoot/Sasquatch were coined, anyone who encountered one of these creatures would have referred to it as a wildman or wildwoman. Instead of risking ridicule from others, most folks kept these encounters to themselves, and that might explain why your dad never heard any talk about these creatures. I know that these creatures exist and do not simply believe they exist. Seeing one for yourself is what it will take to convince you that they are real. I understand this and I am never offended when someone has a healthy dose of skepticism. When the scientific proof does come in, some of the information on the program you watched, "Sasquatch: Lengend Meets Science" will be taught in Middle School biology classes.
There are way too many people in North America covering more geographical distance than ever before to have not seen a hairy creature and capture it legitimately on some sort of evidentiary device. Yet here we are, years and years later and society is still stuck with grainy footage of nothing concrete. I am more apt to find DNA evidence of the Lewinsky scandal in the woods than I am to find Bigfoot taking a leak against a tree or the Soggy Bottom Monster hoofing it over a fallen branch.
Howdy Rowdy! Autumn Williams recently stated that after one sees a Bigfoot it is no longer a question of does one believe in them, but more at, what are they? Technology is catching up with the evidence at hand and it is just a matter of time before we get that Bigfoot DNA sample. It's going to get a little harder to ignore the evidence, even grainy footage is being enhanced by the same software used by NASA. We have hair samples of an "unknown primate" but without a Sasquatch to match them to they have to remain unknown. So...if these hair samples do not match any of the known primates of the world, what do you suppose they belong to. Keep in mind that scientists have stated that they are primate, but not any primate that is known to science. All the evidence needed to launch a serious scientific and well funded research project has already been presented, but not accepted. There are footprint casts dating back to the 1960s that have dermal ridges that run the opposite direction of human footprint dermal ridges, hair samples of an unknown primate, eyewitness encounters by law enforcement personal and people of all walks of life, and "grainy" video and photos. Soon there will be a way to get a DNA sample and still science will require a body. I already know that Bigfoot exists and I am just as curious as anyone to learn how it is that we don't know anything about them...scientificly, that is.
I still remain most highly skeptical but am open to anything.
That's pretty much all that we ask. I don't know of anyone who claims to believe 100% that Bigfoot does exist unless they have seen one...so the research continues pretty much by those of us who have seen one. I do not care who brings in the hard evidence to prove that these creatures exist, but I do care about how it is done. I am not pro-kill. I am hoping that someone will get the perfectly clear video/photo along with some DNA and from there a serious effort for more video can be launched by CNN, Fox, ABC, etc. instead of having to kill one. National Geographic will have to take its tongue out of its cheek and get serious about it too. Skeptics keep the researchers honest.
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
That's pretty much all that we ask. I don't know of anyone who claims to believe 100% that Bigfoot does exist unless they have seen one...so the research continues pretty much by those of us who have seen one. I do not care who brings in the hard evidence to prove that these creatures exist, but I do care about how it is done. I am not pro-kill. I am hoping that someone will get the perfectly clear video/photo along with some DNA and from there a serious effort for more video can be launched by CNN, Fox, ABC, etc. instead of having to kill one. National Geographic will have to take its tongue out of its cheek and get serious about it too. Skeptics keep the researchers honest.
Here's a great new article: http://earthfiles.com/news/news.cfm?ID=1184&category=Environment
Sasquatch sized people show up the Golden Corral on Breakfast Days. Also at the Wal-Mart in Sapulpa you see him on the 1st and 15th every month. All kidding aside you find all kinds of strange folks out in the woods. We drove to the South of Eufaula Lake and made our own road. No trail just crashing thru trees and brush. We figured that nobody would be out where we were at. The Game Warden followed our tracks and asked us "What you boys up to?". Have seen other things when working on 2000 Census. There are some strange folks out in the sticks.
I've seen plenty of strange folks in several metropolitan areas too...even beyond strange. I don't quite know how to take a grown man wearing rubber boots with shorts, a blonde wig, lots and lots of red lipstick and riding a bicycle. City strange -vs.- country strange will even have some over lapping grey areas, I'm sure. There are even a few reports of Bigfoot sightings in neighborhood yards, but no sightings have occured at a Starbucks...as of yet.
New show on Discovery Channel this month: Best Evidence. The first of 13 shows will deal with Sasquatch. Best Evidence first airs Jan 25th. Check local listings for times.
Check local listings for times....
Suspension of dis-belief not included
May contain some reinactments
Partial mental disassembly required
Ask you doctor if BF's are right for you
In the event of priapism report immediately to the nearest BF Stats and research centre.
Have a nice day, jdb
Hi JDB! I need to ask you a question about some of the Sasquatch evidence that is at hand.
There are hair samples that are classified as "unknown primate". These hairs have been studied by Bigfoot skeptic and non-skeptic alike, persons of science and experts in their field of study. It has been scientificly determined that these hairs are indeed hairs (not something resembling hair) and that these hairs are primate hairs. When matched against every known primate, there proves to be no match, thus having the "unknown primate" status. My question for you is this, what creature do you think these hairs are from? This is very powerful evidence that something unknown is alive in North America, a yet to be discovered primate. It's not unlike a research ship having a 20 ft. long squid tentacle on on a very large fishing hook and realizing that the Giant Squid does exist. For what ever reason, this very good piece of scientific Sasquatch hair evidence is ignored or not accepted.
Hell man, I wouldn't have a clue as to why the hairs are ignored, nor by whom - why ask me?
Taking a guess...maybe a Gov. cover-up or that BF's - in league with Aliens from some distant planet, of course - are keeping the news surpressed for personal reason's?
Thing is, if the creatures are indeed out there, then why would anyone want to expose/ prove their exsistance? They would just be hunted down and kilt, paraded around in side shows, or be forced into some minimun wage job to make ends meet.
I say and let them be, if they be: and everyone should just mind their own beeswax, jdb
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
[Ask you doctor if BF's (bigfoots) are right for you.
Would that be a podiatrist?
You sure these "hairs" aren't some sort of Ronco invention found in the trash?
Ronco is the first thing they ruled out, lol.
JDB, you may be absolutly correct about letting them be. I don't think they want to be "discovered". It must be the challenge that drives some researchers forward. Others might be seeking a place in the history books. I think it is important for the truth of these creature's existence to be common knowledge. The truth is that they do exist. Why not be ready to accept it once the evidence is presented to prove it.
Why ask you? Because you want to act like you know something.
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/biology/hair.htm
"New hairs must be compared to that of a known sample. No known sample, thus new hairs mean little to nothing - at present." - jdb
http://www.bfro.net/REF/THEORIES/MJM/whatrtha.asp
"The most commonly heard argument against the Bigfoot-Giganto hypothesis is that 'we should have found their bones in North America by now...' but we haven't so explain that, Buster!" - jdb
Here's my personal theory, set forth over several cups of coffee this morning:
The BF Ganga Hypothesis
By now, some teenage BF would have stumbled onto the Green Bush of Giggles and turned his buds on to the stuff.
That under the influence of Ganga, hormones, and peer pressure - while suffering from the muchies and cotton mouth - someone's fridge would have been raided, someone's car boosted, someone's daughter knocked up....
Thus, that there has never existed anywhere, at any time, a teenger, of any species, that has not been caught, and even more so while in the act, of doing something wrong, proves there are no teenage BF's, thus no BF's of any age, thus BF's are nothing more than fodder for folk stories and never, for any reason, should they be forced to work at Wendy's and made to wear paper hats.
Author: jdb
Published: TN 1.10.07
Notes
See G.A. Mantell, The Fossils of the South Downs; Or Illustrations of the Geology of Sussex (London, 1822).
Waiter Hantzschel et at., "Coprolites: An Annotated Bibliography", Geological Society of America Memoir no. 108 (Boulder, Col.: G.J.A, 1968) pp. 1-132.
See J.W. Harshberger, "The Purpose of Ethnobotany," American Antiquarian 17, 2 (1896): 73-81.
See Volney H. Jones, "The Vegetal Remains of Newt Kash Hollow Shelter," University of Kentucky Reports in Archeology and Anthropology 3, no. 4 (1936): 147-65.
W.S. Webb and R.S. Baby, The Adena People. No. 2 (Columbus: Ohio State Press, 1957).
Richard S. MacNeish, "Preliminary Archeological Investigations in the Sierra de Tamaulipas, Mexico," American Philosoghical Society Transactions 44, no. 5 (1958).
See Eric O. Callen and T.W.M. Cameron, "A Prehistoric Diet Revealed in Coprolites" New Scientist 8, no. 190(1960): 35-40.
See Paul S. Martin and F.W. Sharrock, "Pollen Analysis of Prehistoric Human A New Approach to Ethnobotany," American Antiquity 30, no. 2 (1964): 168-80.
Callen's reputation stems from a series of articles: "Diet as Revealed by Coprolites," Science and Archeology (London: [?], 1963), pp. 186-94, "Food Habits of Some Pre-Columbian Indians," Economic Botany 19, no. 4 (1965): 335-43, "Analysis of Tehuacan Coprolites," in The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Yalley: Yol. 1. Environment and Subsistence (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1967), pp. 261-89, and "Les Coprolithes de la Cabane Acheuleene du Lazaret: Analyse and Diagnostic," Memoires la Societe Prehistorique Francaise 7 (1969): 123-24.
Results of this research are published in Vaughn M. Bryant, Jr., "Prehistoric Diet Southwest Texas: The Coprolite Evidence," American Antiquity 39, no. 3 (1974): 2J 74, "Pollen Analysis of Prehistoric Feces from Mammoth Cave, Kentucky," in Archeology of the Mammoth Cave Area (New York: Academic Press, 1974), pp. 203-9, "Pollen as an Indicator of Prehistoric Diets in Coahuila, Mexico," Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 45 (1975): 87-106; Vaughn M. Bryant, Jr., and Glenna Williams-Dean "The Coprolites of Man," Scientific American 232, no. 1 (1975): 100-109; and Burleigh Trevor-Deutsch and V.M. Bryant, Jr., "Analysis of Suspected Human Coprolites Terra Amata, Nice, France," Journal of Archeological Science 5 (1 978): 387-90.
See "Tehuacan Coprolites."
Ibid.
Such as John Green, The Sasquatch File (Agassiz, B.C.: Cheam Publishing, 1973) and John Napier, Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1973).
John Green, Year of the Sasquatch (Agassiz, B.C.: Cheam Publishing, 1970).
On the Track of the Sasquatch (Agassiz, B.C.: Cheam Publishing, 1969).
Green, ibid., and Sasquatch: The Apes among Us (Saanichton, B.C.: Hancock House, 1978); Napier, Bigfoot.
See Martin F. Brown, "The Microscopy of Mammalian Hair for Anthropologists," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 85, no. 3 (1942) : 250-74.
See Charles L. Douglas, "Biological Techniques in Archeology," American Antiquity 31, no. 2. part 2(1965): 193-201.
From: Manlike Monsters On Trial: Early Records and Modern Evidence, Marjorie Halpin & Michael M. Ames, eds. (British Columbia: UVBC Press, 1980)
Impressive footnotes on Big Foot.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Impressive footnotes on Big Foot.
Thank you.
It's because I want to act like I know something, jdb
Did you PM or call your friend to set your joke up for you? LOL! And who got forced to work at Wendy's, bummer!
You almost understood part of the info. The whole reason the hairs are considered "Unknown Primate" is because they are Primate hairs and there will have to be a Sasquatch (dead or alive) to collect hairs from before the sample hairs can be matched. That much is understood. That doesn't mean you get to say "ha-ha" and run out of the room. It means that further research to obtain the needed body will continue.
As Dr. Meldrum has stated, a Sasquatch is a rare creature. If they are similar to the known great apes, only four births during one of the females life span may take place. Life spans for great apes in the wild are around 35-40 years. The death of one of these creatures is also going to be a rare thing, and remains quickly disappear. This is a very good question and one we all hope to learn the answer to in time, but not having a body of a dead Sasquatch does not mean these creatures do not exist. Just give us a little more time man...just a little more time! We'll get one for you. It's a shame it has to come to this though.[xx(]
Nope, the line just dropped in my lap.
I was asked why the hairs were being ignored.
Answer is the hairs mean nothing until there is a known sample to compare with.
The same as having a fork but no piece of pie.
NOW, I am running out of the room....
"Leave the creatures alone!" - jdb
JDB, you've got me by the short hairs...and you're really starting to be a bit of a buzzkill! I think Bigfoot likes me, but one of these days if you notice I havn't posted in quite sometime that could mean I was wrong about that.[?]
Boy, not a peep from xjay concering, "The BF Ganga Hypothesis" by yours truely...but the rest of the scientific community sure take's notice:
"Ambassadors, government officials, public health officials and business leaders gathered yesterday to honor jdb, the 2007 bright, hopeful for the George Brown Award, CRDF's highest honor, for his ground breaking work in the field of Big Foot research." More >
Suppose that's the way it goes though; no one is ever recognized for their merits on the local level.
Now I must go rent a tux, jdb
I must have missed it. [8][:(][8]
Here's something not to miss. This is recent enhancement of some of the Patterson Footage from the late 60s. New technology is even catching up to old evidence:
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/patty_thorax.htm
quote:
Originally posted by xjay
Here's something not to miss. This is recent enhancement of some of the Patterson Footage from the late 60s. New technology is even catching up to old evidence:
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/patty_thorax.htm
Not too shabby except the drycleaning tag hanging out the back ruins it...
Besides, it says on that website to note the mid-thorax area devoid of hair and the swinging breasts...
That could be any number of Tulsans.
(http://jdid.photosite.com/~photos/tn/7881068_348.ts1169219261000.jpg)
It's not dry cleaning...look closer:
"Patterson Frame # 79 machine wash cold only"
Wah...waah. She must have laid on that tag at some picnic area or something, don't you think?
Patty never looked better! Bless the ol' girl's heart. Please don't pick on her now, she's come so far.
Hey, the proof's there. I agree technology has not been kind however to ol' Patty...
(http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/9844/sasquatch6pw.jpg)
Ahh, youse guys, lol!
Hey Rowdy, where were you when I needed you. There were some folks who claimed that they could not "see" the Bigfoot in my game cam photo. I thought as a visual aid, instead of the some ol' red lines over the pic, it would be more helpful to do some of the following to the pic:
-sunglasses
--bow tie
--Santa Stocking Cap
--lipstick on lips & long eyelashes on eyes.
--propeller cap on the juvenile Sasquatch.
Are you up to it?
"Are you up to it?" - xjay
Dude, it's already been done - take a look at Tay's website. Shoot, I'll bet he's even got BF with a boner.
Warning, all photo's will resemble Tay - as of course we all know, BF does not exist.
I'm sorry to have to ask, but who is Tay, and can you give a link to the site? I'm all atingle with anticipation. [xx(]
" I'm all atingle..." - xjay
Tay has that effect on most everyone but it's not a good kind of tingling.
Don't go looking, you will be disappointed, jdb
Hey, I can't judge if I don't have a look...so post the link, please!
There will be a new documentary to be aired on the Discovery Channel / Thurs, Feb 1st @ 8 pm / "Best Evidence-Sasquatch".
I don't understand why "Best Evidence" did not mention dermal ridges, (after all, finger prints are evidence) but the program seemed to leave the debate over Sasquatch's existence at 50/50...which is a far cry from claiming there is no such thing. I have to try to watch these documentaries as though I don't already know that these creatures exist, it's less painful that way, lol.
Why there was a waste of time with duck-duck-duck tests and why some anthropologist insist on assigning gorilla like qualities (like a divergent great toe, and a vegetarian diet) to Sasquatch is a greater mystery than Sasquatch itself.
None of the discovered Sasquatch tracks show a divergent great toe, so why scratch one's head and claim that it simply must have one? Also, a Sasquatch-Sasquatch-Sasquatch-BEAR! test would have made more sense than duck-rabbit.
Since Bigfoot does walk upright, and not on all fours, it comes as no surprise that an actor could spend a couple of hours being coached to mimic the gait of the Sasquatch subject from the Patterson Footage. Instead of 30 ft on a smooth floor, however, the actor should have been taken to the site of the footage and observed as to whether or not he could keep up the gait through sand for 50 ft. That would have seemed a little more scientific, IMO.
The bottoms of the feet of the Patterson Footage subject do look lighter in color, but a video expert should have been consulted about this, not a make-up artist. The sand the subject was walking on also looked to be about the same shade of grey. It looks like glare. If you were to shave the hair off of a gorilla, the newly exposed skin is white as milk...so hmmm.
All in all, I enjoyed the show and I am glad that documentaries like this one are being aired and informing the general public about the serious scientific research that is being conducted on this subject.
[:O] Wait! Am I financing this "scientific research"?
Nope. And now you are about to explain why it's a good thing that it is not, because...
Here's a new story out of CA in the news. I wonder if Dr. Meldrum is the scientist studying the footprint casts?
http://cbs13.com/seenon/local_story_057234544.html
Is this truly about to happen...I'm afraid to get my hopes up, but they're up anyway:
http://www.newswiretoday.com/news/14839/
Fake Bigfoot Tracks Do Not Fool Scientists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJqCsPccRpk
We just finished watching a show on The Travel Channel called "Bigfootville". It was filmed in Eastern Oklahoma. Very interesting! I love this kind of stuff...bigfoot, aliens, crop circles...all that crap.
It airs again at 10:00 tonight.
Why oh why did you bring back this post into play?
We all know the Soggy Bottom Monster is the only real creature to exist.
oh and also that Santa riding a bicycle...
Bigfootville(the "Okiementary" about sasquatch sightings in southeast Oklahoma) will be airing again on the travel channel tonight.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071028/ap_on_fe_st/odd_bigfoot_in_pa
Sorry but thats a Black Bear....Try again....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,402882,00.html
Bet it tastes gamey.
Well, what I read/heard was 'squatch was migrating east from the dense north western forests of the Seattle, Washington area. There have been sightings from passengers on the northern west>east route of AMTRAK.
Experts(?) believe 'squatch is using railway right-of-ways to travel more swiftly. They believe this recent find in northern Georgia could be a 'squatch from the Seattle, Washington area. These experts(?) have discerned distintive markings, only known to exist on a northwest 'squatch.
The experts(?) have compared sightings that have been mapped and believe the route of migration may be circling back west. But, along a more southerly route through the midwest. Utilizing these AMTRAK right-of-ways and moving into central Oklahoma.
Other, more defining photo evidence has recently be gathered in Oklahoma to support this theory of 'squatch migrating from the northwest forests of Washington state.
Here is a recent [approx. 2mos. old] picture of 'squatch! (//%22http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3110/2760626771_5f4db2dc89_o.jpg%22)
http://www.bfro.net/hoax.asp
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaMINI
We just finished watching a show on The Travel Channel called "Bigfootville". It was filmed in Eastern Oklahoma. Very interesting! I love this kind of stuff...bigfoot, aliens, crop circles...all that crap.
It airs again at 10:00 tonight.
I saw that documentary awhile back, and was surprised to see Cindy Bear in it. I had not seen her for ages.
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,402882,00.html
Hoax.....don't believe anything from Fox and take everything from the internets as a potential lie.
Obviously, the government snuck in and stole the real Bigfoot and replaced it with the rubber dummy. What an embarrassment to the sincere, but naïve, gentlemen. The US government will not allow proof of Bigfoot to come to light while they are performing secret recombinant DNA experiments creating super-human hybrids.