It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: DARTheResearcher
Gorillas the same thing hundreds of years of tales and people like yourself told them they are imagining it all and that no such a creature exists. Giant Panda was not discovered until the 1930s and by that time many scientific explorations had traversed the world and yet large animal not known and not well hidden either yet we miss it.
There is physical evidence in fact two skulls now in a vault had the origin of this a cave that the native people had told in their legends of that a race of red haired giants lived in the cave system and would come down and attack at them or steal their woman and children of course people of the sceptic view said native fairy tales and of course cannot be true.
However here we have physical evidence that some kind of giant hominid- bigfoot like skulls in our holdings which does prove one thing that some huge race of giant hairy ape like people or gorilla like creature did actually exist in these cave systems as the natives say. You cannot argue with physical evidence it is real and exists so some unknown human to gorilla like creature in somewhat modern times there is proof for.
Many other forms of evidence exists
and ask your self how could it be that for hundreds of years with white man and thousands for natives telling of the exact same description spread all over North America
how could so many always when making up or dreaming a monster all describe the same thing
And if your going to go on about the Patterson film I Use to converse often with Renee owner of the film and many claims have been made about it but simple truth not even with today’s technology can anyone remotely come close to the supposed suit the fact is that in 1967 Roger and Bob like thousands of others have or at least have claimed to a Sasquatch and he filmed it. Every scientific principle you can find and experts in Movie making special effects have stuck their heads out and stated that in their field they know it is impossible to be a man in a suit.
Even experts like Jayne Goodall and so many credible people of many walks of expertise will stick up for the Patterson film I have watched it since it's near inception thousands of times looking for the zipper the proof to prove it is fake the more I watch the more I know of it's authenticity.
. I also interviewed Bob Gimmlin and he is a real decent honest man so I have no issue with sceptics I always look for logical solutions first but when all have been checked and the evidence climbs over the sceptic view I have no choice but to except that even though it sounds crazy the animal truly does exist.
I have been studying this phenomenon since the sixties so I am much more versed about the pile of evidence out there then typical sceptics are not so when they make statements they are going by not evidence they go by gut.
If they truly had spent decades researching and finding so many peaces of a puzzle that all fits there would sure be less sceptics. Sure have a sceptic viewpoint but when you see that all the evidence points against your view be a man and change it. If some one could prove tomorrow it is all imaginary and they could do that I would have no issue saying well I guess i was wrong. However that is not going to happen do to the evidence is over whelming actually in its favour.
originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
you're right. you have some good points in you post. some people are just too obtuse and there's no sense in trying to convince someone whose mind is already made up. no degree of information will suffice.
ole sasquatch is better off remaining "undiscovered".
originally posted by: dvldwg89
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
I suggest you look deeper . All your disbelief stems from your lack of research.
Granted I'm not going to list the thousands of reports I've read for you. I suggest you read about bigfoot researcher Keith Foster. He has ideas about bigfoot that aren't discussed.
Many sightings are made by bow hunters. Most are never reported.
Tell me this, why would a bow hunter 10 miles deep in dark timber possibly sight or find tracks? Its because they hunt where 99.9 percent of humans will never go. Try reading Keith Foster before you call bigfoot a myth
originally posted by: dvldwg89
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
Again I disagree with you.
By what you post you clearly show you know nothing about real sightings and real 22 inch tracks in snow found deep in the Colorado Rockies.
Do yourself a favor and Google Kieth Foster Bigfoot. Read what he has posted on a bow hunting forum. Its very interesting . He has done lengthy research in Colorado.
Tell me do you spend anytime in the woods? What do you base your claims the bigfoot doesn't exist if you don't even look at the evidence?
I'll give you an example. I've hiked and fished many remote areas here in Colorado. No I've never seen or heard a bigfoot. I've seen only one mountain lion in all those years. Its because they are wary and avoid humans. Yes I have found huge bipedal tracks in glacier snow . Try and explain to me what made those huge barefoot tracks at 11500 ft. I can't explain it. Trust me just read Keith Foster. You ask for evidence , read what he has reported.
originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: LDragonFire
and not one piece of credible evidence
wow, what a contribution...lol
Unless you were threatened, other than that I can see no "sport" in killing a mythical beast!
Humans a imbeciles!