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 CaptainKirk
I've debated a skeptic on another forum and he has raised some legitimate questions and statements that need to be answered or countered by bigfoot investigators.
Question:
There have been bigfoot sightings reported in every State of the US accept for Hawaii. If the creature has such a wide range why has it been able to elude humanity for so long? Why hasn't one been hit by a car or shot by a hunter? Why hasn't a body been found?
This is a very good question and I'd like to see the investigators response to this.
Statement:
Most evidence for bigfoot comes in the form of eye witness accounts which are the weakest form of evidence in a court of law and science. Also studies have shown that people often remember things differently from how they actually occured. Is it not possible that all bigfoot reports are comprised of hoaxes, susceptibility to folklore/pop culture and the misidentification of known animals as a result?
Another legitimate issue here. What is the investigators response? For myself, I believe that some of the sightings may be misidentifications, but have a hard time believing that park rangers who have given testimony have misidentified animals that they have encountered innumerable times. What is your opinion about the assertion that eye witnesses are poor observers?
I am torn on the subject of bigfoot. The fact that more physical evidence has not been recovered gives me reason not to believe. However the number of credible witnesses and corraborating stories leads me to belief th
at there is something to the phenomenon. What do you think?
As for a body...nature's clean up crews take care of that, scattered bones and hair hidden in the grass and under bushes...mighty hard to spot even when you know what and where to look.
Originally posted by CaptainKirk
Why hasn't one been hit by a car
Originally posted by CaptainKirk
As for a body...nature's clean up crews take care of that, scattered bones and hair hidden in the grass and under bushes...mighty hard to spot even when you know what and where to look.
Yes, but given 400 years of colonization on the American continent wouldn't at least skeleton or body have been found? Thousands of people have been through the wilderness but yet not a single dead specimen exists for study. Why?
Originally posted by CaptainKirk
This is a very good question and I'd like to see the investigators response to this.
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.