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.
Then you have to consider that in all these years, no one has found a skeleton, fossil, corpse, nothing but footprints and some hair.
Wasn't there a recent documentary on Sasquatch that showed muscles flexing as the creature walked?
It would be hard to duplicate that with a costume
I believe that most hunters would have taken down a sasquatch. Even though there are laws against it now, how could anyone prove that this creature didn't try to attack them? You also figure that with such a huge discovery, whatever jail time the person would do would be more than recouped when they got out.
Originally posted by Rasputin13
There's a law saying you can't kill a Bigfoot? I've never heard of such a thing. But assuming that there is a law, shouldn't that alone lend credibility to the idea that Bigfoots exist?
...
Personally I've never heard of such a Bigfoot law and I find it highly unlikely. If anyone knows of such a law, I would love to see it...
Originally posted by RavenX
Why can't one of the research groups get a few helicopters and thermal cameras and section off part of the wilderness in north canada and do flybys looking for bigfoot?
It has been done in Washington State.
Rick Noll of Edmonds, Wash., told the audience of an expedition in September 2000 to try to collect Bigfoot evidence. Armed with audio recordings meant to simulate calls, fruit to serve as bait, a thermal imaging camera and "very, very gross-smelling" pheremone chips developed from gorilla and human bacteria, Noll's team tried to lure a Bigfoot out toward them. They didn't see one, but they succeeded in making a cast of an impression that Noll believes to be of the torso of a prone Sasquatch.Noll said some counties have passed ordinances prohibiting the hunting of Bigfoot and, in one case, attempting to declare it an endangered species.
www.rfthomas.clara.net...
As for Northern Canada? Well, lets just take British Columbia is 364,764 sq. miles in size. California is 163,707 square miles, Oregon is 98,386 square miles, and then add a Wyoming 97,818 square miles and you still have room. Texas is 268,601 square miles leaving room for Michigan (96,810 square miles) or just about any other state to fit.
For you non-Americans, United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland is 94,525 sq miles which means that ONE province is more than three times the size.
Population is 3,907,738 for British Columbia (2001). Los Angeles is close to 10 million. London is just over 7 million.
Now, you think the hunt would be that easy? Consider that the almost 4 million people are almost all at the southern edge (American border) and that everything else is quite remote. Now add Alaska (586,412 square miles) which is 1/5th the size of the entire United States. Add the Yukon Territories (186,660 sq. mi.), Northwest Territories (519,734 sq mi), and Territories of Nunavut (350,000 sq mi).
Also there are the northern Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Quebec areas to consider. Searching all of the land area is highly improbable. Now consider that in recent years, new animals have been discovered in much smaller countries, that were completely unknown until the last 4-5 years. Doesn't make things so impossible that a creature with a slightly higher intellect, could not be found easily.
Why is it so hard to find bigfoot?
Originally posted by Dulcimer
While the very existence of Bigfoot is debatable I would just like to point one thing out.
Then you have to consider that in all these years, no one has found a skeleton, fossil, corpse, nothing but footprints and some hair.
The problem I have when this is brought up is that the same fact goes for other animals. You can try and try but its not that often you will find say, a bear skeleton in the forest.