BIGFOOT is REAL New Bigfoot Evidence Screened As Expert Claims Proof Of Existence

jaffo
reply to post by fenson76

 

If you are a dedicated "Bigfoot Hunter" you would think something like that would be essential equipment. Or are their arms full of subpar cameras, preventing them from carrying said tranq guns, lol...

Have you taken into consideration that we probably don't know how much tranq it would take to put one down....or IF it would put one down. I mean there are reports of them being shot and not going down. I wouldn't chance it my self...

In my opinion, I cant honestly say wether its real or not, but why does bigfoot always seem to be filmed in 240p? Its like his body is low def haha. Also the teeth of the chewbacca mask are dead on, this honestly wouldnt be the first time of a hoax. Im going to stay in the middle till we see more evidence.

Also there is a good episode of chasing bigfoot on the show Destination Truth, although I love this show, I cant say if you can honestly trust it. Its really entertaining though.

Cogito, Ergo Sum



As to the idea the US is some vast unexplored continent.....

Still no bigfoot, after 400 years or so...............

edit on 3-10-2013 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it.

I don't know where those maps come from, but you are welcome to come up to Oregon and I'll drop you off out in the middle of the forest and you can tell me how it's lost it's virginity.

One could literally walk out of my backyard in the foothills of the Cascades and walk to Alaska and never see another human. Is it "virgin" and never touched? I don't know, but there are no roads and no people, no cellphone coverage.

I just came back in from deer season and I was only out about 5 miles, never saw another human.

As far as animals hiding? Have you ever busted a deer that was bedded down, accidentally? I just did that a few times. I know where they like to bed so I know where to stalk. You can be literally 5 feet from the bed and they are invisible, until they bust out and give you a nice little adrenal rush. As far as animal stealth, how about a 1200lb elk running full speed uphill through brush and they make basically no noise? I have tracked those animals through brush they were able to walk through and I had to crawl on my belly, in their tracks, totally baffled as to how this monstrous animal was able to move through the area without leaving a trail of smashed and broken vegetation, only prints. Or when you know you are near a bear because you can smell it, but have no idea where it might be, only that it is close. Hunting mountain lion is like hunting a ghost.

Point being, the US is still plenty wild and even known animals have little trouble staying out of human sight.

Great comment... Also take a look at how unscientific medical science can be...starting with the petrochemical control of allopathic medicine (a chemical for every ill) that essentially reduced other forms of medicine to quackery despite thousands of years of successful traditional treatments.

Trust in cabals of so called scientific elites is waning as people wake up to the various agendas that put themselves before truth!

NorEaster

boncho
You get close enough to watch him walk around and sleep in the bushes you can't shoot him with a tranq dart?

Sadly, these folks are trying not to turn this whatever-it-is into another manhandled tragedy, so don't expect the Elephant Man treatment this time around. I don't know if this is true or not, but I do know that it's much more "settled" as science than String Theory, wormholes, Black holes, parallel universes, unseen dimensions, superposition, the Big Bang, and pretty much all of Quantum Mechanics as it's defined at the moment. Over the last 10 months I've learned way too much about how worthless our scientific processes actually are, and it's pretty distressing. Maybe this hardball, no-bullsh*t version of the tech press should take a clear-eyed look at Physics and Cosmology next.

edit on 10/3/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

reply to post by jonnywhite


Have you taken a look at Dr. Ketchums work? The DNA analysis has been made available open source for review. I suggest that instead of taking someones criticism of her work as the final word, that you focus on the science. It is my understanding that Dr. Ketchum has had the work peer reviewed, however none of the reviewers wished to have their names associated with such a "fringe" subject.

I am myself, going through the DNA analysis she has provided and thus far I can find no problems with her methodology....or her conclusions. It would seem that we have a new primate species...one that it a hybrid between human/ something else.

If nothing else this should spur the scientific community to step up and prove or disprove the evidence provided....after all, that is how science is supposed to work...no?

reply to post by PRS395


Forget the photos...as you say they are inconclusive. Instead, I would take a look at the DNA analysis. Pictures can be faked....DNA cannot. Dr. Ketchums work is availabe for free for review. Her work definitively shows that we are dealing with a new species.

reply to post by celtmason26


Perhaps tehn a bit of scientific evidence would help your sceptical mind.....

www.bf-field-journal.blogspot.com...

There are the result of Dr. Ketchums DNA analysis. Let the science lead you to a conclusion based on hard evidence....not grainy pictures easily faked.

reply to post by Warstiner


Ask and ye shall receive.....

www.bf-field-journal.blogspot.com...

The results of DNA analysis of this new species. It would seem these beings exist after all.

deadcalm
reply to post by Warstiner

 

Ask and ye shall receive.....

www.bf-field-journal.blogspot.com...

The results of DNA analysis of this new species. It would seem these beings exist after all.

Direct link:
sasquatchgenomeproject.org...

The Feds know this is true. Acceptance and acknowledgement would require a total rethink on federally "owned" lands.

reply to post by Spider879


I have no doubt it is real. Thousands of sightings, native peoples from all over the world has seen some version of big foot going under various names going back who knows how many years. Bigfoot is very much like dragons (old world for dinosaurs), native people all over the world apparently have seen them, stories of them, drawings of them. All this long before the internet was invented of course.

What exactly bigfoot is though is the question. Is it a generic hybrid (nephilim) type man/animal from the fallen angels AKA (aliens) experiments, or just an higher level rare ape?

I don't think the secular community will every admit to this because it may cause problems with the "Darwinian Evolution" myth.

45Flags and top headline on the site?! Are you serious?!

A CLEAR hoax. Thats a MASK damnit! Chewie!

Abovetopsecret should change its slogan to "deny the gullible"

This news is a day or two old, and I was wondering when I would see it on the ATS homepage. The truth is that sasquatch are very much real animals. However, one must always be careful whom they associate with in the bigfoot community, because not everyone is out to prove the truth, and instead are out for their own benefit. And then there are those who simply fake evidence because they think it is funny. It definitely is not funny, and in fact, these people are responsible for setting science back years. This is because of the stigma that has been attached to the idea of bigfoot because of these people's actions.

However, there is quite a lot of authentic evidence out there, many photographs and video as well. Since by their nature these animals use their intelligence to actively avoid contact with humans, and coupled with the depth and cover of their environment, it is no surprise that they haven't been scientifically categorized as of yet. As far as the DNA study that Ketchum and her team has been conducting, there are mixed opinions.

Many were saying, some even scientists, that the study was absolute nonsense. Yet this study had results that were submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication, and the responses from the scientists at these journals were leaked to the public. And judging from what these scientists were stating, it is not that the study is nonsense, as there might definitely be something there, but there were other problems with certain parts of the study. The main one, imo, being that there is no physical link to unknown DNA and bigfoot. Another point that these scientists brought up was the fact of proving that the DNA belonged to a bipedal animal.

So from these statements, by scientists who are experts in their field and who actually fully read the study, there appears to be something to this DNA. People tend to think that analyzing DNA is easy and that it automatically gives results. This may be true when there are samples to compare the DNA with, but for an unknown animal, it is a catch 22 of sorts.

I myself, being of sound judgement, will give my opinion on the study: I think that some of the samples analyzed were in fact from a bigfoot. And from these samples the researchers isolated mitochondrial DNA that proved some sort of relation with humans going back at least 10,000 years, and that they isolated nuclear DNA that proves this species has never been categorized. Now I know that bigfoot is the animal represented by the DNA, but it is difficult to make that argument scientifically.

Another big problem with the study was the fact that part of it relied on eyewitness testimony, some of which from two of the team members themselves, to make a point. This was not acceptable to those peer-reviewing the study. I personally think this is ridiculous, considering there are thousands and thousands of reports that have actually been reported over the years, not to mention the sheer number that people have kept to themselves, which will be greater than those who file a report. And there was no one to report to until quite recently anyway.

The testimony of a single witness is enough to convict somebody to life in prison, or worse, yet thousands of reports are not enough to make scientists take bigfoot seriously. I was leaning towards belief before I had my sighting, but I was not thoroughly convinced of the existence of sasquatch. So I can understand skepticism. However, I believe that any true skeptic can admit that bigfoot very well could be a real animal. If a person cannot admit that, then they are NOT a skeptic. They are a disbeliever, plain and simple. And that is NOT a logical position to take. Because that means that this person believes they know so much that they are certain no such animal could exist. I mean how conceited must a person be to think that? This is because of the sheer volume of evidence available, in the form of eyewitness reports, hair samples, an intact molar, casts and pictures of footprints left in some of the hardest to reach wildernesses in North America, audio recordings, pictures, videos, and now, DNA.

But mark my words...DNA will not be enough to prove bigfoots' existence. It WILL take a cadaver, and that is all their is to it. We are going to have to go out and kill one because of the stupidity of so many people. A 4 year old could analyze the available evidence and realize that there is actually something to this animal, something much more than myth. Heck, the Native Americans, EVERY SINGLE TRIBE IN North America, have told us that these animals exist, and that is on top of all the other evidence. Yet there are still ignorant people who claim there is no possibility of such an animal existing. Ridiculous to say the least.

reply to post by jaffo


Consider this then. You have no idea what dose would work without killing it. What if it's not enough? Either way, it takes minutes to work, not like they show on tv. That is enough time for a pis--d off Bigfoot to rip your arms off. It's just a bad idea. Lets say it's a sentient creature. Do we have the right to shoot it with drugs that we have no idea what will do to it just to get a good picture? no.

DZAG Wright
Would you chance waking a creature which when angry with humans kills them by twisting their head off like a coke bottle? Or would you be as still and quite as you can so you can make it home to your family? Careful with your answer because until you're in that situation you can't accurately answer this.

Nonsense. You're already taking a risk getting that close with a camera. You could at least back off and throw a rock at it from a safe distance. This isn't the beef jerky Sasquatch who is going to attack you after you play a joke on him. There's no indication that these things are violent, and if it was real it would probably run than attack.

I might not ever be in that position, but I haven't supposedly spent years preparing for the encounter, either. If I did, do you think I might take the risk? You bet I would.

But even so, where's the footage of sneaking up on the thing? Why only bad close-ups and blurry distance shots?

I don't understand the vehement opposition towards this research? What possesses people to slander this work other than propagating the status quo?

Albeit the DNA evidence is inconclusive to any known species, it is unique and warrants further research.

I would say strong DNA evidence such as this, coupled with stabilized Patterson footage should force even the hardened skeptic to really open their views. I mean TRUE scientists are open to the wonderment of nature and the advancement of knowledge. They do NOT disclude any information due to personal bias.

I do not intend to derail this thread, but thought since the accompanied video evidence was lacking, and I should include some decent video evidence. While the skeptics will say that the Patterson-Gimlin footage was admitted to be faked, Maybe...just maybe, anyone associated with the video was just tired of enduring endless vicious slander.

Common sense dictates that these people in the 60's did not anticipate digital enhancement techniques 40 years into the future. Let alone, adding breasts, (which were not identified until at least the 90's) herniated strides, and realistic fur.

This video evidence, coupled with DNA evidence, should at the least warrant more research. This scientific "bigfoot' stigma needs to be alleviated, and have some very bright minds to further this research.

Kaboose
I don't think the secular community will every admit to this because it may cause problems with the "Darwinian Evolution" myth.

Seems like the opposite to me: the 'missing link' that deluded creationists keep asking for.

reply to post by inquisitive1977


There wasn't actually DNA evidence. It was human hair but they guys went off on some crazy # saying that "bigfoot" has the exact DNA as a human because it's a human hybrid....

reply to post by Spider879


Look I believe in "bigfoot" but people like this are ruining any credible search for the animal that could be done. I mean the video is obviously fake. They produce fake footprints and bedding. They are claiming that human hair presented for analysis was actually bigfoot but it has 100% human DNA because bigfoot is a "human hybrid". Lets just stop with the bull# people!! These people piss me off so much!! Seriously,their expeditions for bigfoot consist of 3 nights of camping or setting up motion sensing cameras then going to chill in a hotel or at home for a week. This is not how elusive animals are going to be found. You need to get out in the # for months on end

it's much more "settled" as science than String Theory, wormholes, Black holes, parallel universes, unseen dimensions, superposition, the Big Bang, and pretty much all of Quantum Mechanics as it's defined at the moment. Over the last 10 months I've learned way too much about how worthless our scientific processes actually are

reply to post by NorEaster


Oh are they? In what way are the processes worthless? And how is this so much better?