New Bigfoot thread continuation of >>17899885 Anyone

>>17917825
It depends, since descriptions of Bigfoot behavior vary wildly based on who's making them up.

large mammal diets vary greatly amongst region, but small rodents, roots of some plants, etc. but projections do show a large ape population could live in the Pacific Northwest

>>17917852
But bigfoot sightings aren't isolated to the Pacific Northwest, are they?
http://www.bfro.net/gdb/

>>17917859
No, but if this is a continuation of the last thread that is what we were referring to. Overall I think it is less likely for those sightings to be credibly as those areas of the country are far less dense.

>>17917848
>U NEED TO PROv BIGFEET IS REL
I had to stop reading the last thread because this was all the big foot skeptic(s) were saying, you're not intelligent conversation. Yes, I know this is a troll post. If you want evidence, there are thousands of pictures, videos, DNA samples, and sightings; only one has to be real for the phenomenon to exist. I realize the burden of proof is in the believer, but there is a large amount of evidence that skeptics completely ignore in order to keep their close minded views (know that I'm not necessarily talking about bigfoot, this is just a common reaction from hard headed or ignorant people.)

There is absolutely no point browsing /x/ and shitposting your views, you're not going to change anyones mind because no one listens to Randy.

File: 20160714_142326.jpg (4MB, 2996x2448px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2996x2448px

Just gonna put this here.

>>17917087
but are you going to lug around a giant ass man to fake something on a horse that will die from exhaustion carrying his big ass.

>>17917825
One of my biggest reasons against bigfoot.

All comparable apes- Gorillas, Orangutans, Gigantopithecus, Giant Lemurs- they subsist on diets of you, extremely fibrous plant material, usually bamboo. And there quite simply isn't a good analogue in Canada and the Pacific Northwest. You can't become a giant off of pine needles.

The other assumption, that it's a descendant of Australopithecus, Homo Erectus or the Denisovans, is far more reasonably, but again, runs into trouble. As far as we know, all of those creatures (and apes in general) are highly social. Otherwise, considering their lack of strength, they wouldn't be particularly effective hunters. I find it hard to see any such creatures evolving into solitary creatures when they can barely down a mammoth all together. This would only be compounded by the fact that bigfoot doesn't seem to have any lithos industry.

Even if we accept that the Sasquatch has figured out solitary hunting, I can't help but fear we should've noticed it. They should be following deer herds as they migrate north and south. We should see unexplained disappearances of deer from herds we're tracking. We should be finding bones with the telltale signs of human dentition. And yet, we find none of these things.

>>17917852
[Citation needed]

>>17918235
Honestly I don't care enough about the citation to search for it for people on /X/ but I have read it in the past

>>17917825
There is a thread up literally debunking Bigfoot.

A guy admitted to dressing up.

>>17918269
Are you talking about the previous thread that I not only posted myself but also linked in the fucking OP of this thread? The one in which the whole point was about no conclusive evidence being presented for either case of Bigfoot being a hoax or not? The one in which multiple people debunk the fact that Heironimus was capable of producing the walk performed in the P-G tape?

File: miocene-apes1.jpg (89KB, 609x415px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 609x415px

>>17918235
Why not an undiscovered tribe of ape somewhere bewteen Gorillini (gorillas) and hominini (humans and chimps)? The Miocene apes were diverse enough to produce Ardipithecus and Sivapithecus, so why not a plus-sized version?

>>17918282
No there is another one where heironimus is debunked

>>17918269
You don't know how many people over the years have claimed to be the guy who wore the suit. More than just Heironimus have, and none have successfully recreated the walk

>>17918235
>(and apes in general) are highly social.

Orangutans break the social mold in that they are essentially solitary creatures, like bears, rather than the social creatures our other kin are, like chimps and gorillas.

Males are largely solitary and devote their time to defending their territory, and sexing up babes.

Females are solitary and only spend time with their offspring, outside of getting sexed up.

Young orangutans that have been weened away from their mothers are usually the only ones that form social groups, but that only lasts until they can acquire territory, for males, or get knocked up, for females.

Perhaps the Sasquatch species is similar in their somewhat solitary existence.

>>17918235
>>17918243

The same area Sasquatch roams was, and still is, capable of sustaining brown bears, black bears, mule dear, and elk. ALL of which are big ass animals.

There's plenty of food to sustain a Sasquatch sized critter out west.

>>17918432
Interesting, interesting hypothesis.

>>17918460

I hold the opinion that not only are they solitary in nature, like Orangs, but that they also share territory, like brown bears, and would only show aggression for mating purposes, or for access to food sources, which is how brown bears live.

File: ramapithecus_origins.jpg (26KB, 287x512px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 287x512px

Could this be a possible ancestor to the Sasquatch? It's a semi-bipedal pongid, so it seems to fit the description.

i live in oregon

how do i go about finding a samsquanch

File: Tribal-Bigfoot-drawings-1.jpg.w560h519.jpg (38KB, 560x519px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 560x519px

>>17918569
I would recomend a stake out. Use camouflage (visual and olfactory), keep a night-vision camera on standby, and get a good night's rest beforehand. Those "Bigfoot hunters" are jokes that they allow on TV for the laughs alone.

>>17918190
Yeah buddy you sure did repeat back the gist of my post in all caps and misspelled words. Got me there, bud.

File: forest monster.jpg (555KB, 2560x1173px) Image search: [Google]

555KB, 2560x1173px

>>17917825
Adult browns average around 800-900lbs, its not unusual for males to top 1,200. Some of the heaviest on record are over 2000lbs. They achieve this size by absolutely decimating fish populations, eating other bear cubs, and picking forests totally clean of every berry around. It is extremely easy to tell where brown bear populations are, because the land readily shows it. The impact they have on their environment is immense, not to mention the carcasses they leave behind.

Any large mammal eating like they do would be competing for the same food sources, and would have similar impact on the immediate area. In denser swamp areas they'd be even more pressed for food, and would be forced into heavy predation. Every amphibian, alligator, croc, squirrel, racoon, deer, coyote, and anything else with a heart beat would be fair game, and bigfood would be killing them in sizeable numbers.
Every alleged video or photo shows bigfoot as at least 6'8, well built, easily 240lbs. If it was an 8 foot tall behemoth we're talking about a beast consuming 5k calories a day.

We'd know if an animal like that existed in our backyard.

>>17918199
You need to fuck off with this stupid shit that a horse can't carry someone taller than average.

You're acting like they had one horse who had to carry Patterson and Gimlin, the equipment AND a 9 foot 500lb man.

Who's to say the tall man didn't walk? It's not like they were galloping full speed through the woods.

But it's more likely they had one horse each, and a horse for equipment.

>>17919108
>Adult browns...

Share territory with other, more successful, predators, like wolves, coyotes, fox, various cats, and raptors, and their environmental impact is nowhere near as detrimental as you claim, as their diet is so varied.

Ungulate herds have a far greater impact on the environment than brown bears, and without predators to keep them in check, namely wolves, their herds can, and do, decimate entire areas turning them into a wasteland where nothing lives. When Yellowstone re-introduced wolves into the park, the packs thinned out the ungulate herds, and made them change their usual feeding grounds. This, in turn, allowed vegetation to bounce back, which decreased erosion rates in streams, and provided homes for a variety of wild life to return, including bears. Pretty interesting, really.

How wolves shaped the environment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q

If a creature the size of sasquatch is omnivorous, like bears, their diets would be extremely varied, like bears, and would NOT have a severe impact on the environment.

>>17918542

I believe in one of the more overlooked theories which is that Bigfoot evolved from Dryopithecus. THe main reasons for this are the arm to body ratio and the fact that Dryo's had gracile Jaws while most other apes had more robust jaws for chewing on mostly plants and bugs. Gracile jaws are found in omnivorous creatures

I live in BC, what are some of the current Bigfoot hotspots here?

>>17919180
this. it was literally an "expedition" allegedly with a base camp and scouting camps at forward scouting areas.
But I'm pretty sure they had ate least one horse trailer full of at least 3 horses and a shit ton of equipment

File: 10099587-close-up-photo-on-lying-brown-bear-feet--Stock-Photo-foot.jpg (405KB, 1300x1300px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 1300x1300px

>>17917825
>>17918454
>>17918475
>>17919108
>>17920177
>brown bears
Speaking of which... I saw this documentary recently, and it made me realize something I never knew before about bear feet...

>>17917999
But the sightings aren't demonstrably different. The mountain gorilla went undiscovered for so long because its range is isolated to a very remote and inaccessible mountain range. The giant panda went undiscovered (by the west) for so long because its range is similarly small and remote. You've got bigfoot sightings literally from Alaska to Florida. You can't just arbitrarily pick a small area and go "These ones are legit and the rest are made up."

>>17918190
Every picture of a bigfoot in this thread is a drawing. Can you either post, or provide a link to some of the pictures taken with the high quality digital cameras that have been available for the last decade or so?

>>17920470
I mean you can't, but the less isolated areas make it more unlikely. But I'm not saying I'm discounting them, just that they are more unlikely than other locations. I'm aware animals with similar situations to Bigfoot have been discovered only recently, but I never said the other sightings were made up, but are more likely to be mistaken identity

>>17920491
So why aren't the sightings in the PNW mistaken identity? There's plenty of large mammals out there.

File: squatch.jpg (1MB, 3000x2250px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2250px

>>17920487
>high quality
>digital
>available for the last decade or so
Picky little cunt, aren't you?

>>17920508
I swear that picture shows a Bigfoot holdings its child.
Where you see that awkward bend in its arm is actually the Bigfoots hand holding onto its childs hand and the Childs back is visible.

File: gelada.jpg (138KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 600x400px

>>17920508
Oh good. This is what I was looking for. Blurry and behind a tree. Getting clear images of rare animals is not an excessively difficult task, Anon.

>>17920506
I give credence to a population more likely to support a creature like that than say Arkansas

>>17920402
But isn't Dryo a quadruped? I think Sivapithecus is a good stand-in for the ancestral Sassy.

File: arkansas mountains.jpg (157KB, 960x639px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 960x639px

>>17920540

>>17920554
Well there have been sightings in Arkansas miles AWAY from those mountains bordering small towns.

>>17920561
Perhaps when pickings are slim in their, they raid towns?

>>17920570
*their territories

File: giant-squid_544_600x450.jpg (51KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x450px

>>17920529
Oh yeah, because we totally got loads of images of giant squids before 2004.

Everything perfectly clear, too.

>>17920561
>http://www.bfro.net/GDB/state_listing.asp?state=wa
And 45 sightings in King County Washington.

>>17920582
You're right. Photography in a temperate rainforest is exactly as difficult as photography at the bottom of the ocean.

>>17920570
It is possible, or more unlikely since these sightings peak, then stop, peak, then stop, etc. with people having a great knowledge of these happenings it is unlikely a creature as intelligent as we are giving it credit would do that

>>17920584
I just vocalized my belief that the closer to a residential area the less likely the sighting is to be real. However that doesn't make me right, there are definitely terrifying stories of some who have seen them wandering into town, like the guy in Texas who called 911 when he saw the one on his lawn and was terrified.

But as for areas like Florida, people have exotic pets all the time they release into the wild, it is likely someone had a large ape and released into the Everglades

>>17920589
It is when you can't get real scientists with proper cameras.

>>17920614
Do you know anything about cameras? No matter how good the quality is something can always go wrong, especially if the one taking the picture is unprepared

File: Infrared-Trail-Camera.jpg (107KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1024x576px

>>17920614
>>17920619
This. You can't just walk into any Bass Pro in the country and buy a motion sensor activated camera specifically built to photograph large mammals. Oh wait.

>>17920626
Yeah, but again those are mapped areas of the woods where people normally travel in, in deep woods where people don't normally hunt are where they are predicted to live. You know the kinds of woods that all those survivor shows drop people but are in America

File: s521972503441136676_p823_i1_w900.jpg (159KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 900x900px

>>17920595
Always treated them like chimps or gorillas in terms of intelligence: smart enough.

>>17920654
So you see my point? They largely stay away from us but we go to them

>>17920651
Idaho isn't exactly the moon. A lot of it is remote, sure, but hardly inaccessible to the dedicated bigfoot enthusiast.

File: pa03g_sivapithecus02.jpg (384KB, 753x600px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 753x600px

>>17920663
I believe we should let them live their lives and not have to worry about intruders in their lands.
I suggest an alternate to capturing/killing one: we look for fossil evidence of their existance. The only problem is finding places to look.

>>17920685
I agree. That takes a lot of the pressure off of actually finding one.

>>17920680
True, but as I've said I personally believe the Pacific Northwest is more reliable than Idaho

>>17920733
Oregon then. Statement still stands. People have gotten cameras up the Himalayas to film snow leopard nests. Nothing in the U.S. is so remote you can be forgiven for not bothering to look there.

File: hominoid_radiation_map.jpg (1MB, 1198x783px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1198x783px

>>17920741
Any ideas for where fossil apes may be located in America? If we go off the diversification and migration of apes in the Miocene, I would think we should look around the northwest portion of North America, perhaps northern Canada or Alaska. The time would probably be around the mid-Pliocene, due to them spreading out and moving across the continent.

>>17920582
>The bottom of the ocean is the same as a forest

>>17920518
I'm not seeing where it's "arm" is bending. Can you highlight what you think is an arm?

>>17920781
http://www.alaskacenters.gov/fossil-collecting.cfm
Here's a website about fossil hunting in Alaska. That is unless the state government is paid off by big 'squatch to keep a lid on things.

>>17920619
Cameras are pretty easy bro. You just point, and shoot.

>>17920508
I get that there might be a dip in the ground behind there, but that bigfoot looks about two feet tall.

File: ramapithecus-_obraz_.jpg (44KB, 253x330px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 253x330px

>>17920789
Well, Alaska would probably not yield viable fossil evidence, due to them spreading out rather quickly after arriving. Northern Canada is still up for grabs.

>>17920741
Oregon I think is completely possible

>>17920819
How are you possibly guessing how fast they spread out? That's the sort of thing you figure out after you've gotten some fossil evidence and analyzed it.

>>17920791
When you're excited, shaking, adrenaline pumping, you can easily not take a clear picture, and unless you're willing to run after something when you don't know what it is or what it could do to you, odds are you won't get a clear shot

>>17920823
Just basing it off of patterns we see today.

>>17920819
http://www.tc.gov.yk.ca/yukon_fossil_collection.html
and here's a site about Pleistocene fossils in the Yukon.

>>17920741
Oh and also some of the areas I've mentioned, they're illegal to go into. The laws are there to keep people safe and from dying in the woods, many don't want to break these laws

>>17920830
Please, tell me what these patterns are, and how they've given you this insight into the prehistory of an as-yet unrecognized species.

>>17920832
Well maybe the next rare animal they find'll be a large North American Sivapithecine/dryopithecine.

>>17920844
I'm entirely open to this as a possibility. You be sure and start another thread when they do. Until then, feel free to continue speculating wildly.

>>17920783
Aside from the obvious pressure and lack of O2 issues, there are indeed many similarities between trying to film in the ocean and a forest.
-Range issues
>Just as the lack of light and sediment limit visibility to a few meters, in some cases, in the ocean, so does the dense vegetation and local climate conditions limit visibility in a forest.
-Lighting issues
>the ocean floor is devoid of light and requires special cameras or lighting to capture a subject. Heavily forested areas require the same considerations when trying to capture a subject that is nocturnal.
-Difficult access
>Both require a significant effort to access, and the use of special equipment, when trying to reach the more remote parts.

At least when you fuck up in the forest, you don't suffocate, or get crushed by ridiculous pressures.

File: ramapithecus_en.jpg (34KB, 350x468px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 350x468px

>>17920841
Primarily invasive species. When they move into a new area, they most likely will not stay in one place for long. That combined the solitary nature of the Orangs, it seems likely that they spread out in a very short time.

File: Federal_lands_in_Oregon.png (479KB, 2469x2081px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 2469x2081px

>>17920840
Which areas are illegal to go into?

>>17920859
Looks like the rez is the only place you can't go, but you might even be able to gain access there if you talk to the tribal council.

>>17920859
So far I've found the bombing range and the over the horizon radar station. Neither of those seem like good places to find a bigfoot anyway.

>>17920859
Not familiar with Oregon, but I do know that places in Canada and California are illegal to enter without special permission, some places are even illegal to go int seasonally

>>17920885
Plus, the reservations are populated areas. We're meant to be looking for inaccessible hinterland.

>>17920551
I don't think Dryo is a quadruped, most of the drawings of them I've seen show them knuckle dragging, I can't really describe why I think they're a good candidate save for habitat and jaw, this guy explains it better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT8BdKA8D8g

>>17920901
California has a lot of military installations. Is that what you're thinking of? Otherwise there are the wildlife preserves, but biologists are still allowed in to do research on the ecology of the area. Biologists who would be pretty stoked to have a new bit of megafauna named after them.

File: dryopithecusGE.jpg (75KB, 640x499px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 640x499px

>>17920910
Found this a while back. Most of the reconstructions I've seen either show a knuckle walker or a palm walker. I find the palm walking more plausible due to the lack of kuckle-walking adaptations in Miocene apes.

>>17920886
>Neither of those seem like good places to find a bigfoot anyway.

Bomb ranges and military impact areas are some of the best places to find wild life populations due to the fact that hardly anybody ever goes into those areas. If there's any sizable impact areas in mountainous terrain on the west coast, I wouldn't be surprised at all if it harbored a Sasquatch or two.

Regardless, I bet the densest population of those big bastards is in British Columbia, due to the fact that the Canucks are cucks and haven't managed to actually populate their land mass the way the U.S. has....

File: Boardman_NWSTF_range.jpg (194KB, 949x714px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 949x714px

>>17920925
This is what the bomb range looks like from ground level.

File: dryopithecus.jpg (36KB, 360x500px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 360x500px

>>17920923
Also found this on wikipedia:
" Dryopithecus was about 4 feet long and more closely resembled a monkey than a modern ape. The structure of its limbs and wrists show that it walked in a way similar to modern chimpanzees but that it used the flat of its hands, like a monkey, rather than knuckle-walking like modern apes. Its face exhibited klinorhynchy, i.e. it was tilted downwards in profile.

It likely spent most of its life in trees, and was probably a brachiator, similar to modern orangutans and gibbons. Its molars had relatively little enamel, suggesting that it ate soft leaves and fruit, an ideal diet for a tree-dwelling animal.

The five-cusp and juvenile fissure pattern of its molar teeth, known as the Y-5 arrangement, is typical of the dryopithecids and of hominoids in general."

>>17920925
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/frpa/iwms/wha.html
Here's Canada's Ministry of Environment's website about British Columbia. What areas do you think are prime bigfootin' ground?

>>17920914
I think logging areas are also blocked off, but these areas are reserved for
Future logging and no one goes in

>>17920942
No one, that is, except for the loggers, eventually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcgHKMbYYNw
this is one of the best Bigfoot videos imo

>>17920949
>blurry
>shaky
>dark
>indistinct
Welp, I'm convinced. Pack it in, boys. This thread's moving over to /an/ now.

File: Too Many Facts.png (646KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

646KB, 1366x768px

>>17920963

File: Chiliwack B.C..jpg (158KB, 801x501px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 801x501px

>>17920940
Any area that's mountainous, and has had some credible sightings, is worthy of looking.

I'd prefer to search in areas that have natural, or man made, boundaries that could be use as territorial limits.

Pic related: There's been reports of sightings near Ford mountain in the Chilliwack area, and it would be an example of a good place to search due to having man made, and natural, territorial boundaries bordering the north, east, and west.

I'd try to find ways to run the ridges and valleys and see if you could find any tracks or trails going up or down into the valleys. I'd expect that they would use the high ground to hide, travel, and sleep on, and move up and down the hills to food and water sources. I bet they also use the saddles in a ridge to cross from one ridge line to the other.

>>17920972
What facts? You've posted a video made on a potato of a shadow moving in the woods in a state where even the people who believe in bigfoot say bigfoot is unlikely to be found. Even the uploader's captions say that if it's a person they're insane.
An insane person.
In Florida.
Never.

>>17920985
http://hikingbc.blogspot.com/2005/05/ford-mountain-by-magalie.html
Ford Mountain is about a 3 hour hike. That's entirely doable. Start packing.

>>17920946
Yeah, but that is where a lot of sightings began taking place

>>17921060
And I'd predict that going around to talk shows and telling people about the amazing discovery you made is probably more fun than being a lumberjack, so there's some incentive for them to either get a really good picture, or just shoot one and bring it back down to show off.

>>17921117
There are incentives, but some people don't care enough about things. I don't care enough to spend large amounts of time in unmapped wilderness to try and find something that has potential to kill me. You are merely projecting your belief onto others

>>17921127
But you concede the point that the first person to come up with a carcass or a really sharp picture is going to be pretty famous?

File: Ford mountain.png (2MB, 1364x741px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1364x741px

>>17921016
Ford mountain would be a good place to start. I'd use the trail to get to the top on the western side, and run the ridge to the east near Williams peak, and maybe follow the contour to the north, if it's not too fucked up. That's a good piece of ground to run to get access to the river to the south, and then to the lakes and creek and high ground to the north.

That whole area looks like a great spot for Sasquatch as it's centrally located to the river to the south, lakes and shit to the north, and the Skagit river valley to the east. If you checked those ridges on the high ground, or the ridges leading to low ground to the feeding spots, you might find some tracks, if not get lucky and actually run into one of the fuckers.

>>17921139
Yeah, no one is doubting that. No one said that guy wouldn't be famous, but if you assume that incentive is enough for people and there is no assurance that it will be fruitful

>>17921146
Sounds good to me. Let's head over to /out/ and see what they have to say about the area.

File: surely enough to afford a cameraphone that he'll carry around everywhere.png (32KB, 881x387px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 881x387px

>>17921162

>>17921171
You provided wedges, but that doesn't mean that they are unhappy

>>17921191
Wages*

>>17921191
filename. Are you telling me that even the most cynical and jaded of mountain men wouldn't take the 5 seconds out of his busy day to take a picture of the mysterious creature that everybody's always on about?

>>17921205
That is assuming that they see them on a basis that allows them to take pictures, everything you suggest is your own belief. It doesn't necessarily mean that they have the opportunity and the means. Also I know people working in blue collar work like that, and you don't take your smart phone out there, you take a work flip phone, which surprisingly would result in the same quality pictures we see

File: totality.jpg (38KB, 258x398px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 258x398px

i've noticed these threads have gotten a lot more interesting, scientific and reasonable minded since moonmoon™© died.

god rest his soul.

File: skinny bear.jpg (245KB, 800x552px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 800x552px

starving bears.

bad lightning.

>>17922796
Bears really freak me out. They look like men in suits. That shit just ain't right.

>>17920177
Brown bears do not share anything. They'll kill just about any animal they can catch, and again, it makes a noticeable impact. A territorial male will aimlessly kill any other mammal it comes across and leave the bodies. They'll kill other male's cubs regularly. There is a reason why they're relegated to just a few remote areas, and it isn't because human civilization has pushed them away. Just like white tail deer, they are capable of eating themselves into starvation by stripping all edible material out of their environment. The biomass they kill and consume is immense, and with the self predation they practice they inherently limit their own numbers.
Coyotes are primarily scavengers by the way.

I am a seasoned hunter, you very clearly know literally nothing about wildlife at all. Stupid as shit liberal faggots need to not open their mouth on topics they're completely ignorant on. Filthy hippy moron.

>>17922807
Nah just your dad's

File: 7a768ae6334e6f15ddeec286cef1a470[1].jpg (40KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x750px

Bigfoot-

No bodies ever found, no real solid evidence.

TONS of sightings.

I have a hard time buying it.

File: Brown bears.jpg (258KB, 750x498px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 750x498px

>>17923234
>Brown bears do not share anything.

Pic related: Brown bears sharing access to a salmon stream

Brown bears do NOT attack every creature in their territory, and the only time they attack other brown bears in their SHARED territory is for mating purposes, or when food resources become scarce.

You're not a seasoned "hunter", you're a seasoned idiot, and probably have the hunting skills of a liberal arts college feminist studies teacher.....in other words, none.

Go be salty and role play somewhere else.

>>17923423
Typical shit eating redditor.

How many of those bears are competing males? How many cubs are present?
Oh, thats right. You have no fucking idea because you're a limp armed city dwelling leftist faggot making absolute statements about a random googled picture as your only defense because you don't understand anything about the behavior of large territorial mammals. I bet you don't even know the difference between a coastal and an inland.

You could keep talking out of your ass, or you could watch a simple natgeo documentary and actually learn something for once in your life. But you won't. You'll just keep talking out of your ass and crying about Bernie not getting the nomination.

>>17923443
>How many of those bears are competing males?

None of them, dipshit. Because they don't compete for abundant resources the way you describe.

You're clueless.

>>17923473
>leftist faggot cuck still talking out of his ass
City dwelling liberal faggot scum. When will they learn?

http://www.bioexpedition.com/grizzly-bear/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/brown-bear-human-shield-mothers-cubs-breeding/

File: I'll kick yer ass.jpg (54KB, 558x669px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 558x669px

>>17923510
You seem upset, sunshine.

Did mommy take away your katana again?

Here's a link, just for you.

http://ruhlman.com/2012/09/the-magic-of-making-salt/

>>17923521
>get proven wrong
>shitpost like the pathetic liberal faggot you are

Oh what a shock. The leftist retard who was talking out of his ass gets called out, proven wrong, and he proceed to carry on like a child afterwards. This has never ever happened before.

File: Fatassato Mashpotashi.gif (997KB, 245x229px) Image search: [Google]

997KB, 245x229px

>>17923526
Every post you've made is a shitpost, pumpkin.

File: grosseto_oreopiteco_1.jpg (217KB, 900x598px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 900x598px

Anyone think Oreopithecus could be a 'Squatch ancestor? I know it didn't habitually walk on two legs, but still.

Man the last thread was full of people just hating on each other too instead of having an intelligent debate, you don't have to sling insults to make your point.

>>17923423
i read this post in tim treadwell's voice.

now you are too ;-)

>>17923540
T H I C C

File: Patterson.jpg (10KB, 206x220px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 206x220px

People shit on this Patterson dude and call him a con man, and he did bounce a check for the camera he used to make his film. However, the events, and the film, as they unfolded, don't seem to be the work of a con man for a number of reasons.

First, there's the location. Patterson and his crew were from the Yakima, Wa area, which is about 80 miles east of Mt. St. Helens and a place called Ape Canyon. This canyon was where a group of miners claimed they had been attacked by "apes" back in 24', and the area had been associated with Sasquatch ever since. If this dude was a con, with intentions to hoax, he could have saved himself time, and money, by simply perpetrating his hoax in one of the many Sasquatch affiliated areas in his own state. We are expected to believe that a con man drove himself, and his crew, with horses in a trailer, all the way down to California to film some bullshit he could have filmed in his own back yard. That doesn't seem like a reasonable plan for a con man.

Second, there's the film itself. Most of the original film is pretty shitty due to shaking of the camera, and distance. This has created a lot of skepticism among the audience that's viewed it, and skepticism isn't going to make a con man the kind of money that belief will. I don't think it's reasonable to believe that a con man would take such shitty footage, but instead would capture high quality stable footage, from a distance, that showed the creature "eating", or "drinking", or doing something unaware of the camera before "spotting" the camera, and then leaving. I think it's more reasonable that a con man hoaxing a film would try to create something more realistic, and then build a story around that, than use what was shown.

It just seems to me that a con man would have taken an easier path than what was taken, as that's the entire purpose of BEING a con man.

>>17920459
Les Stroud pointed something interesting out when he did survivorman Bigfoot, too:

if a bear steps in its own footprint just right, it comes out looking like a classic Bigfoot track.

File: Print.png (481KB, 646x518px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 646x518px

>>17924669
A "classic" bigfoot print shows evidence of a mid-tarsal break, which helps to separate them from the hoaxes, or misidentified prints.

File: bigfoot_stealing.jpg (20KB, 300x278px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x278px

Error: You must wait 10 seconds before posting an image reply.

>>17923419
>No bodies ever found

decomposition is excessively rapid innawoods. you normally don't see animal corpses save for along roadsides where there's roadkill.

File: bigfoot_a_01b.jpg (39KB, 421x756px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 421x756px

Error: You must wait 5 seconds before posting an image reply.

File: bipedal_hominoid_hominid_alt.jpg (733KB, 2284x787px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 2284x787px

>>17924812
>those hands
What is this? An alien?

>>17924656
>First
Ok, so if he can just go looking for bigfoot in his own backyard (figuratively speaking) why did he drive him and his crew, and horses, all the way to California to do the same?
The question applies whether it's a hoax or not, so I don't think you can really use that to rule out it being a hoax.

>Second
High quality, clear footage would be much easier to spot a fake in. The shaky, blurry footage from a distance would help hide the flaws and make the video seem more authentic.

For example, if he did have the camera set up nicely on a tripod, wouldn't people be wondering how he just happened to get it all set up nicely to get a nice clear shot of bigfoot? It would just seem staged, even if it wasn't a hoax.
And if it is a hoax, like I said, the shaky and difficult to make out details help hide the flaws that would reveal it as a hoax.

>>17924983
>why did he drive him and his crew, and horses, all the way to California

That's what doesn't make sense to me, anon.

If this guy was a con man, I don't think he'd do that, because it takes way too much effort, and con men are all about avoiding effort and doing shit the easy way. I don't even think the interstate system was complete back in 67', so they'd have had to take state roads, which are slow as fuck.

As for the film, I think a stable shot from a greater distance would be a more effective way to gain belief, and yet still mask any given suit.

Regardless, I think the dude went through way more effort than he would have, if he were indeed a con man trying to hoax the film.

>>17924983
I concede that both points can be made in either direction, but his footage is still pretty good, and not that shaky, he stays pretty solid in his filming.

>>17920459
theres your bigfoot prints everybody sqwaking about as "evidence"

>>17924454
came here to post this

>>17925216

See>>>>>17924683

I went toe to toe with a bigfoot and won, ask me anything

Keep in mind it was a probably a youth and I'm 6'10 and over 400 lbs

>>17924656
>no true scotsman fallacy

>>17925423
Nah, it's more about probability, and the probability is always greater that a con man will follow the easiest course to his goal, rather than the more difficult course.

File: dotell.jpg (51KB, 820x461px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 820x461px

>>17924683
>debunked

>>17918302
What I wanna know is:

Why the hell would someone hike into the wilderness with two guys that are on horse back with a large 100-something pound gorilla suit just to put it on and walk in such a weird non-human way just so they could get a minute or so of video of it, head back to civilization and say they got footage of a cryptid.

File: 198418_rekonstruksi-wajah-homo-florensiensis--spesies-orang-pendek-di-flores_663_382.jpg (46KB, 663x382px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 663x382px

>>17925458
>a con man will follow the easiest course to his goal

link to con man's rule book?

>>17925482
>large 100-something pound gorilla suit

citation please?

>>17925482
>with a large 100-something pound gorilla suit

Where did you get that weight figure, anon, I've never read that account before...

Heironimus claimed that it was a gorilla costume with football pads, shoulder pads, helmet, and hip wader boots underneath of it...

>>17925490
Again, it's a probability factor, based on effort.

Con men are con men because they don't have the desire to put in the work effort normal people do, so they choose the path of least resistance....conning people.

Patterson could have created a hoax film anywhere and simply lied about the location, so it doesn't seem reasonable that he would haul his entire entourage 650 miles south to do what he could have done in his own back yard.

>>17920783
Well, in a sense, it is. You have very limited visibility in both.

>>17925502
the reason patterson and gimlin went to bluff creek was because there had been footprints "found" there by other bigfoot hunters. so, in fact, bluff creek is an excellent location to stage such a hoax. this is well known patterson film timeline stuff. you can start extrapolating mathematical probabilities if you aren't even familiar with the relevant data.

>Blue Creek Mountain and Onion Mountain constitute the western wall above Bluff Creek basin. Tracks were found along new construction on these roads in August 1967, two separate events, the later one leading to an early September phone call from Al Hodgson to the Patterson home. From there Roger got Bob involved and made it down to the scene in October.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRfWOnRSA8g

>>17925496
Football pads and waders: 30 pounds
Gorilla suit: ~125 pounds

>>17925642
Makes for a grand total of about 155 pounds of stuff to carry.

>>17925577
Got it.

But truth has absolutely nothing to do with a con, or a hoax.

He could have said he found his Sasquatch near Ape canyon in Washington, or, he could have just lied and said he made the trip to Bluff creek.

The bottom line is that there was absolutely zero reason to make that long ass trip, dragging all that shit with him, to hoax something he could have hoaxed at home.

>>17925655
I would like to point out that the creature in the Patterson Gimlin video has breasts.

I mean actual woman breasts.

Why would you go so far as to make your gorilla suit look female?

It doesn't make sense.

>>17925679
I agree.

That's one of the reasons why I don't think the dude hoaxed it.

File: Gorilla titties.jpg (36KB, 400x601px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 400x601px

>>17925679
Another point on the boobies thing is that, unlike humans, our other great ape cousins only have boobs like that when they are lactating, which means when they have a kid they need to feed.

If a Sasquatch is similar to other great apes, than it's possible that what was captured on film was a lactating female, meaning that she had baby around there somewhere, and could have been leading them away from it, the way birds do.

Pic related: Gorilla tities

>>17925685
Also there are not any gorilla suits with large feminine breasts like that on the market which means he would have had to make his own which is a lot of time and effort compared to just going to the store and buying one.

File: 0000.jpg (177KB, 289x450px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 289x450px

>>17925679

>>17917825

All the Americans carrying weapons and nobody has tried to shot the fuck out of a Big Foot?

>>17925715
Why do you think Bigfoot stays away from humans?

He knows our thunder sticks can drop a deer from several yards away.

>>17920508
Fake if you zoomed in that much the bigfoot would be way blurrier

>>17925733
Well deers dont know better so why should bugfoots

>>17925694
Good points. I read a theory somewhere that stated that bigfoot are mostly only seen/photographed when they're distracted by their kids.

People really, honestly believe in Bigfoot? We're not finding new species of large land animals, people. We're finding birds, we're finding bugs, we're finding rodents, but we're not finding Sasquatch.

>>17925763
Bigfoot: "junior come back here! There could be humans with thunder sticks prowling the woods!"

*sounds of a camera taking a picture*

Bigfoot: "Aw crap."

(Or something to that effect)

>>17925739
Because deer are dumb as rocks.

Sasquatch would probably share the intelligence of the great apes, however, they could indeed be even smarter.....or dumber, but I'd guess smarter, since they're so fucking elusive.

>>17925546
The size of the ocean is much great than that of a forest. Not only that, but you also have depth to account for. Not to mention the difficulty of getting down that deep, staying down that deep, and having enough visibility to see anything (much less visibility in the ocean than a forest).
So while they have some slight similarities, the difference between the two is vast.

Imagine trying to find a squid, when it can be anywhere above, below, behind, in front, and any combination of the 4.

>>17925679
>Why would you go so far as to make your gorilla suit look female?
Because he was obsessed with female bigfoot. He had been drawing pictures of them, and writing about them before he even made his film.

People are again underestimating how hard it would be to walk in this suit, suits do weight up to 20 pounds or so with everything on, if The claims were true and there was additional football pads, for the figure to walk that fluidly with little practice is unbelievable

>>17926625
>with little practice
And how do you know they had little practice?

>>17926699
Because as someone who used to wear a suit, it moves too naturally for someone who can't even recreate the walk with no suit on. It makes me think he never practiced

>>17926699
Also Heironimus has never said he practiced, he only ever said Patterson just provided a modified suit where he constantly changes what the modifications were in each version of his story

>>17926888
>>17926894
So you're basing it on the fact that one person who claimed to be the guy in the suit couldn't do it?

There is no proof that he was in the suit, and him not being able to recreate the walk doesn't disprove that it was a hoax.

>>17926914
No, my basis of the hoax is that in my experience, as someone who wore a suit for 4 years as a job, by adding more padding in a suit or modifying it to make it bigger, makes incredibly unlikely to be that fluid as seen in the film

>>17926359

Including an account of an encounter with a female bigfoot in his book isn't what I would call "obsessed".

>>17926914
>There is no proof that he was in the suit,

Agree.

If it was a dude in a suit, it would have to have been tailor made for said dude, as it's form fitted, and Patterson didn't have the experience to tailor such a suit.

So who's the guy that wore it, and who made it?

>>17926969
At this point I doubt we will ever know.

I personally think it's a hoax. The whole story and situation was just way to convenient.

I think they wanted to create a great mystery that would be talked about centuries from now. Even people like Heironimus coming out and saying he was in the suit could be part of the hoax.
>Says it was him
>Can't recreate the walk or anything
>Can't get his story straight
>Fuels the legend even more
Or he could just be some guy who wanted to cash in a little on the story, and realised he was the right size, and could do a passable imitation of the walk which would get him on at least a few tv shows.

>>17923526
dawg. u were proven wrong he got u stop fuckin talking lmfao just turn ur computer off and go lie about being good at pointless shit elsewhere

>>17927157
I agree that it could definitely fuel the legend, but I do think he was just some guy trying to cash in on the craze.

I don't think it was a hoax, just because Patterson went to his grave saying it was real, there was no monetary pay off for them, the creature moves too fluidly for a man in a suit to move, and the quality of the figure is much too great for Patterson to ever afford even if it was a suit.

>>17927243
>there was no monetary pay off for them
Not everything is about money.

That video is his legacy. And some people just want to see if they can fool the world.

File: Blurred leg comparisons.jpg (180KB, 1006x574px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1006x574px

>>17927243
>the quality of the figure is much too great for Patterson to ever afford even if it was a suit...

There's a lot of people that claim you can't see enough detail in the original, but that's simply not true, and the detail it does show, is far more consistent with a creature than any suit.

Pic related: Even when the image is intentionally blurred, you can still make out the curves that form the muscles in the calves, in both the human leg, and in the Sasquatch.

If you can't recognize a calf muscle flexing during walking in the Patterson film, than you probably shouldn't be commenting, because you can see that calf muscle even when you deliberately blur the Patterson photos, as seen in pic related.

File: Calf flex.gif (305KB, 663x544px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 663x544px

Pic related: the calf muscle can clearly be seen moving in conjunction with the extension of the foot.

These visible muscle movements are the strongest evidence that supports an actual creature, rather than a man in a costume.

>>17927186
Kill yourself, faggot.
I provided links, valid reputable sources, to back up the entirely factual statements I made. Leftwing libcucks who spend their entire lives in cities have no business pretending to know anything about nature.

But Patterson's film was already reavealed as a fake isn't it?

>>17927673
How about leftwing lubcucks like me who didn't grow up in the city?

>>17927473
I know? I'm the one saying it isn't a suit, and I conceded even if it was it was an amazing suit that Patterson could never afford

>>17927684
No, it hasn't.

>>17917825
Bigfoot is just bears sighted walking on their hind legs.

>>17927684
Patterson is gay.

>>17925694
Shit I want to suck on those titties.

>>17928409
Oh boy...

>>17928346
Agree.

Just trying to contribute some reasonable support for this position that people can actually see for themselves.

File: If there's bounce in the tit, you must aquit.jpg (68KB, 1060x588px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1060x588px

>>17928409
How bout' them Sasquatch titays!

>>17928444
THICCCCC

File: bigfoot_proportions_comparison.jpg (74KB, 925x601px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 925x601px

>>17925655
>Got it.
>thanks for supplying that data, but i'll just double-down on what i said before based on nothing except my intuition n' stuff.

File: 1966patterson4gp.jpg (33KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x374px

>>17925679
>>17925685
patterson had been drawing pics of bigfoot with tits for a couple of years before he shot the film.
.

>>17927490
>photoshopped

File: Roe-Patterson-composite-600-px-tiny-Sept-2014-Darren-Naish-Tetrapod-Zoology.jpg (130KB, 600x463px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 600x463px

>>17928914
more...

>>17926359
Citation please?

>>17928979
lol

>>17928914
>>17928927

File: patterson_book.jpg (81KB, 303x475px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 303x475px

>>17928914
>>17928927

Those drawings were used in his book. the book was written a published a year before th film was shot at bluff creek.

File: Bigfoot-Patterson-Homo-Erectus.gif (304KB, 220x232px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 220x232px

>>17929044
Found this on some weird religious website.

>>17928914

I don't see what the point of contention is with the drawings. They're based on descriptions from witnesses that claim they encountered a Sasquatch, and when Patterson encountered a Sasquatch, amazingly enough, it looked similar to the witness descriptions.

Pic related is an early rendition of a gorilla, and most renditions of that time period share similar traits.

I just don't see the issue, anon.

File: Gorilla pic.jpg (63KB, 300x280px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 300x280px

>>17929137
Forgot the pic...

File: Comparison of apes and Man.jpg (568KB, 1600x928px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 1600x928px

>>17929137
He's saying that he got info from eyewitnesses and then used them as a template to make a creature.

File: sahelanthropus_diorama.jpg (221KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 400x400px

>>17929150
I meant that he used the descriptions as a template.

>>17928914
That Sasquatch doesn't have boobs.

>>17928927
That photo said that Patterson didn't make either one of those depictions. The female on the left is "based on an illustration produced by his daughter", and the one on the right was "copied from an illustration by Morton Kuntsler".

>>17929118
damn that's good.

>>17929159
Actually it does have breasts, it's just that they're closer to the body than ours. Perhaps the individual on the right was lactating, and the one on the left wasn't.

>>17929150

Right, but the issue is that the creature on film shows characteristics more consistent with an actual creature than it does a man in a suit.

Nobody made suits like that, and Patterson sure as hell couldn't have pulled that off.

>>17929159
Actually the drawings are made by Patterson but he copied earlier artwork from magazines and accounts he had read. that's what those quotes are referring to.

>>17929163
Looks more like a depiction of a male to me, anon.

>>17929174
Right.

That's different than claiming "Patterson had been drawing pics of bigfoot with tits for a couple of years before he shot the film", as if he was just inventing them out of thin air.

File: c8f67ada4b3bfc0763fcd30b92327682.jpg (138KB, 733x882px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 733x882px

>>17929177
Nah, they're just really saggy. You can see the outlines if you look close enough. Believe me, I know my breasts.

File: Art Miles.jpg (41KB, 511x640px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 511x640px

>>17929170
this gorilla suit was made in 1930 by famous costume maker Art Miles. 1930. factor in the timeline that patterson made several trips to hollywood trying to solicit interest in his "docu-drama" bigfoot film. there were suit and molds for masks that were available at the time for him to construct his vision of a homo erectus type creature suit. You can tell from his drawings that was wasn't a hack artist. he did have talent and he wasn't stupid. it all fits.

File: big-suit.jpg (257KB, 593x785px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 593x785px

>>17929192
>mfw there is an alternate universe where Bigfoot is one of the most iconic Hollywood monsters ever.

>>17929192

And that gorilla suit is not form fitting, and doesn't show any muscle movement, which is consistent with a suit.

The attributes and characteristics of the creature on film is completely inconsistent with any suit ever produced in the 60's, or even today.

File: 1355875907341.jpg (46KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 400x300px

So if bigfoot ever was found, how big would the news really be? In a way I feel like it would be the biggest story in the last hundred years.

File: 01_09.jpg (39KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 450x450px

>>17929384
If it was fossil, it would be bigger than Lucy. If it was a body, probably like the original footage. If it was a live specimen, it would outrank any discovery before it, even the discovery of the great apes.

>>17929159
>not knowing what actual breasts look like

>>17929163
I just don't understand why patty's boobs appear to be covered in fur with no nipple. Seems like something a hoaxer would do for censorship purposes?

While I wouldn't say there's some people that are ignorant. would say that there are people who have becomes so attached to current ideas that look at bigfoot in an almost condescending way, everything they say sounds like it's worded to take the difficulty out of finding a body or even bones

>>17920985
Where can I read more about possible behavior patterns for these guys? I live in washington and want to look for one intelligently.

>>17920685
They're not real buddy. But if I were to ever see one, I will shoot it right between the eyes :)

>>17920949
It looks digitally altered. Fake.

>>17927490
are you saying the man in the costume doesnt have calves?

Bigfoot isn't real. We're talking a massive great ape with intelligence enough to avoid detection by countless expeditions and hunters. It would also point to low numbers, are they enough to sustain a population? It's also not some inaccessible mountain peaks, but a wide, American forest, where just about anyone can get in and take a look.

>>17929821
>just about anyone can get in and take a look.
if the forest is big enough, the bigfeets could avoid you easily.

my question would be how they have avoided game cameras thus far. maybe the cameras aren't being put up in remote enough places. but that would clash with any sightings made near civilization.

>>17929255
your reading comprehension isn't very good.

File: hnnnnng.jpg (14KB, 378x301px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 378x301px

>>17923540
THAT FILE NAME

>>17929864
Again, people think all forests in North America are accessible and explored, when in reality that isn't true, there are huge chunks of forest you can't go into because it has no trails, it is unmapped, and no one goes to hunt in.

>>17930189
I figured the opposite, that there's no place left we haven't raped for resources. it'd be a small comfort to know there's actually some space left for the big guy. in Canada at least there surely is.

File: Two-orangutans-012.jpg (230KB, 722x480px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 722x480px

>>17930360
Remember, these things lived with the American Indians and the Pre-clovis people before them. I think we've inflicted a wound so deep into their psyche that they'd try to avoid human contact as much as possible, save for raiding towns for food.
Think like what orangs are doing with those plantations out in Indonesia.

>>17929591
Observation reports are the only reliable source of information, however, you're going to have to filter them based on reliability. Everything else is based on assumption that stems, in large part, from reported behaviors, and the behaviors of other primates.

If I lived out west, I'd focus on areas that have had credible sightings, and look for areas that have potential territorial boundaries, like rivers, valleys, or highway systems. Sightings have been made along high ground, and in the valleys, so I'd be willing to bet that they stay up in the high ground to sleep and travel, and come down primarily for food sources, or to travel from ridge to ridge. I think if you look for tracks on the top of ridges and along the river and creek shores between them, you'd stand a good chance of eventually finding some tracks.

If it were an actual animal, it would've bolted off as soon as it turned it's head to see them
Look how calm that fucker is for an animal that thrives in isolation
If you watch the complete footage, the camera is panned up towards nothing
Then they instantly pan down as it's completely in the middle of the field as if it caught them by surprise
They would've noticed that thing right away, not just as a good shot presented itself
There is no bigfoot diet because no bigfoot

>>17929781

No, what I'm saying, is that costume designs of the 60's weren't capable of providing the kind of detail visible in the P-G film.

>>17930398
thanks famalam

>>17929821
>a massive great ape with intelligence enough to avoid detection by countless expeditions and hunters.

There's been countless observations made by hikers, and hunters alike.

>It's also not some inaccessible mountain peaks, but a wide, American forest, where just about anyone can get in and take a look.

It's a visibility and elevation issue. They live in areas where you can't see more than a meter or two away, due to vegetation, and they easily travel up and down 500 + meter hills that would kick our ass.

>>17930360
Well the areas we can't go in are kept for future logging, those areas are pretty much off limits for that and for the dangers it poses

>>17930401
>If it were an actual animal, it would've bolted off as soon as it turned it's head to see them

That's not necessarily true in any given species. Bears usually won't run, and even deer will sometimes simply continue walking along while keeping an eye on you.

Some birds even fake injuries to lure you away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UCKnC1L_Rc

>>17920859
>>17920905
>>17920914
>>17920925
>>17920930
>>17920940
>>17920942
>>17920963
>>17920985
>>17920988
>>17921060
>>17921127
>>17921139
>>17921146
>>17921205
>>17921509
Non /x/ person here, but I came to this thread hoping to convince myself that there is at least a posibility that Bigfoot exists in the US.

After reading this thread, the points against Bigfoot are much stronger. I used to think Bigfoot could be along the lines of the Giant Squid, but everybody has an HD camera in their pocket and a lot more people are in these woods than the bottom of the ocean.

Plus the Bigfoot enthusiasts keep talking about these credible videos, pics, and DNA samples that they never seem to link. Thanks guys, doing a good job trying to convince people who are on the fence.

I think ghosts and skinwalkers are more likely than Bigfoot at this point just because it is 2016 and it can pretty much be said that anything of that size in US forests would have been proven by now.

That's just a post from an open minded person, if not somebody who wants to believe.

>>17918195
Book?

File: cover (2).jpg (384KB, 1000x1017px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 1000x1017px

>>17931738
Cryptozoologicon

>>17929159
Look closer at the picture dummy, or were you talking about the drawing?

>>17929548
Why would the nipple be visible from that distance and that quality of footage?

>>17929685
I hope a big foot hits you between the eyes with a boulder

>>17929781
No he is saying that you would not see them if it was a costume

>>17925310
When did your fedora fall off, and did you use a katana?

>>17923526
lmao dude shut up you sound so ignorant making assumptions and trying to belittle someone based off of their political associations that you guessed from a post on 4chan.

>>17927673
You just sound ridiculous bringing your hatred towards a particular political group to a thread about Bigfoot

File: 1468121183532.gif (4MB, 1070x216px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1070x216px

It is tremendously unlikely but what gets me is how no one has seemingly been able to pull this off again. Another great hoax or even just a costume. What appears to be muscles flexing and the breast jiggle is what confounds me.

The existence of a huge ape-man is highly doubtful. Perhaps very few existed and "Patty" was the last. Might explain why this debacle never played out again.

When I was a little kid I was really into paranormal stuff because I thought it could be very plausible, like ayys visiting earth or ghosts. Now I think those things are probably impossible. What's interesting to me is even when I actually thought paranormal stuff was legit I didn't think this could be a real event, that it was simply a man in a costume. Now I'm not so sure.

I seen a few anons on /x/ talk about inter-dimensional beings/ayys before, as far out as it is maybe that's why nobody never filmed a "Patty" again.

>>17931827
based naish

>>17931676
Ehh, honestly I think there is no particular argument that is stronger, but many against the notion of Bigfoot only cite their beliefs about the geography of the areas they live.

A lot of people think the Pacific Northwest is completely explored and people live like every spot has people in it. The fact remains there are still large areas where animals can be prosperous without any human interaction still in America and especially Canada

Still haven't seen any good argument for the P-G film being a suit that actually stands up to any reasonable scrutiny. People seem to think that saying "it looks like a suit" without justification is good enough, or they attack the credibility of Patterson, which doesn't address why they think the suit looks fake.

>>17934426
Still haven't seen any good argument for the P-G film being an actual animal that actually stands up to any reasonable scrutiny. People seem to think that saying "it looks like an animal" without justification is good enough, or they attack the credibility of skeptics, which doesn't address why they think the animal looks real.

>>17934622
>People seem to think that saying "it looks like an animal" without justification is good enough
Except multiple analyses have proved it is impossible for it to be a man in a suit. So what is it if not an animal? A hologram? An alien?

>>17934622
I have also stated that in my experience as someone who has worn suits for an actual living, the figure moves too fluidly for someone wearing a simple modified gorilla suit. A man in a suit could move that fluidly with weeks of practice, but based on expert testimony that no man could fit those dimensions naturally, if the suit was modified I doubt any person could move the way the figure does in the film

>>17934622
These past two bigfoot threads have actually done the opposite.

The enhanced and stabilized film has been examined and compared with contemporary suits, suits built long after the incident, and actual biology, and in every case, the P-G film has shown to conform with actual biology, and has none of the attributes of a full fur suit.

>>17934641

a spirit

>>17920972
Isn't that that fuckin' guy that thinks the moon is hollow or an egg or some shit?

>>17923521
>ran out of good boy points

File: bear yoga.jpg (21KB, 600x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 600x300px

>>17922796
>>17923101
Yep.

>>17934641
An inter-dimensional mindspeaking entity

>>17934641
And multiple analyses have said that it is a man in a suit. Weird how that works, huh.

bigfoot is actually not that big, more like a dwarf for his genus. In addition his appendages are oversized.

>>17936601
Yeah, but there have actually been peer-reviewed papers published showing that the figure's proportions do not match any human

>>17936601
To my knowledge, the only people that have "analyzed" the film and claimed it was a suit did so viewing the original film, and not the stabilized and enhanced version.

The claims never address the form fitting nature of the suit, or how it was possible to create moving muscles, despite not being able to do that today. They claim that zippers are visible in areas that are consistent with natural fur patterns, and can be shown to exist on the backs of gorillas, or can be shown to have been created by the creature itself.

The bottom line is that those that have claimed it is a suit, did so out of ignorance, lack of evidence, or for personal gain.

>>17936601
Also recently every single individual who has claimed to be in the suit have been found to falsified their stories

>>17937099
to have falsified*

>>17936350
And that we're the offspring of the aggresive Martians and the peaceful Atlantean/Lemurians.

File: David-W.-Patten.gif (39KB, 270x337px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 270x337px

>>17934641
Cain.

>>17936359
>>17922796

this is the most logical explanation.

>>17923423
Salmon season is a exception you dumbfuck.

and even then they fight

>>17937191
But the PG film shows an entirely different figure

>>17937054
>peer-reviewed papers published showing that the figure's proportions do not match any human
[citation needed]

>>17937312
Analysis Integrity of The Patterson-Gimlin Film Image (2013)

File: Bobfoot.jpg (14KB, 345x504px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 345x504px

>>17937322
Haven't seen that before, thanks for the source.

If anybody hasn't seen it before, it's a paper written by Bill Munns and Dr. Jeff Meldrum that conducts an assessment of the original Patterson-Gimlin film and proves that it is authentic, has not been tampered with, and provides both the resolution and focus needed to be considered a legitimate piece of photographic evidence.

Link: http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/ANALYSIS%20INTEGRITY%20OF%20THE%20PATTERSON-GIMLIN%20FILM%20IMAGE_final.pdf

It does not, however, discuss the issue of whether or not it's an actual creature, or a man in a suit.

>>17937322
>peer-reviewed papers published showing that the figure's proportions do not match any human
Once again, [citation needed]

>>17937423
>>17937442
Sorry I cited the wrong article

Surface Anatomy and Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue Features in the Analysis of the Patterson-Gimlin Film Hominid (2013)

Basically in recent years Dr. Meldrum's cases for bigfoot have been taken more and more credible and are being peer reviewed and published

>>17937490
Are you just citing the first thing you find on google?

>peer-reviewed papers published showing that the figure's proportions do not match any human
Once again, [citation needed]

File: bobs bullshit.gif (188KB, 612x374px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 612x374px

>>17937490

That's another good one.

Link: http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf

Interesting to see how the critter shares so many physical characteristics with a fatty / older human.

>>17937537
No, but the name of the PhD who gave the exact proportions escapes me, and web of science isn't giving me much other than Meldrum. However his analysis of the film, though they do not focus on proportions are still great analyses of the PG film

>>17937498
>Basically in recent years Dr. Meldrum's cases for bigfoot have been taken more and more credible and are being peer reviewed and published

The scientific community is filled with cowards and fascists that refuse to apply the scientific method and peer review system to anything outside of what is politically acceptable.

Science supporting racial differences, the biological aspects associated with homosexuality, and subjects considered "cooky", like Sasquatch, are repressed and scorned by the community at large, regardless of how credible the data may be.

Like our political process, our scientific process is corrupt and broken.

>>17937542
The film just shows so much that a hoax in a modified suit wouldn't be able to do. With all these versions of people claiming to be the one who wore a suit all being found as liars. With the most "credible" case still being flimsy

>>17937554
meldrum along with melba ketchup and david paulides has zero point zero credibility.

>>17937554
As someone who is working to be published right now I can tell you how full of dhit you are right now. I'm a social scientist and I'm telling you the papers that are accepted are mainly based on the quality of the writing, despite what the data says. If you can't write even if you have great data you don't get published, but if your data is shut and you can write you still don't get published

>>17937556
>With the most "credible" case still being flimsy

There is no credible claim, to my knowledge. Heironimus is an obvious liar, as can be observed by simply examining the many interviews he's given, and comparing his suit description with what is shown in the film. They clearly don't match up.

File: bigfoot_calf_flex.gif (2MB, 476x709px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 476x709px

>>17937556
hieromymus bosch was found to be a liar even though he passed two polygraphs?? [citation needed]

>>17930401
>see a bigfeets
>hold the camera up and turns it on
>point it at the footer

>>17937570
Therefore their data and writing must be of high quality to be published in peer reviewed journals

>>17937571
so you're shit out of luck then, eh? sorry to hear that, anon.
r.i.p you

>>17937580
Polygraphs aren't even used in court anymore because they are unreliable. Especially much older ones, in fact if you set up a false baseline at the beginning of the test the entirety of it will be off point

>>17937586
Not exactly trying to put scholarly work here on /x/ while on my tablet

File: Dr M.jpg (10KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x225px

>>17937570
I don't know about the other two, but there is absolutely zero reason to shit on Meldrum, as his methods, and intent, are consistent with his profession as a professor of anatomy and anthropology.

Who else would you want to investigate the evidence of an undiscovered member of the hominid family, if not an anthropologist?

That's like shitting on a physicist for exploring dark energy, and completely unreasonable.

File: ..jpg (14KB, 446x299px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 446x299px

>>17937571
>I'm a social scientist....

Let me guess....gender studies.

>>17937604
Yeah, honestly he shouldn't be discredited because of his search for something related to his field

>>17937607
No, criminology, I actually spent a year working on who actually is killed by the police in California

File: melba_ketchum.png (53KB, 978x296px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 978x296px

>>17937604
do you know why meldrum wanted to become an anthropologist?
specifically because of his childhood fascination with bigfoot.
he lacks objectivity on this subject and his reasonable critics agree about that.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bigfoot-anatomy/

also, melba ketchum is an attention seeking nutcase.

>>17937635
There are many scientists motivated by their own beliefs when they begin, and I'd agree in some other professions, but he's worked with people not supporting him for years to still be published. It means others believed his own beliefs didn't affect the quality of his work

File: 1970 National Wildlife article.jpg (174KB, 516x673px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 516x673px

>>17937580

Roger Patterson was administered a polygraph test as well, in 1970, and passed. This was a result of having an article published in National Wildlife magazine, and the editors didn't want to publish bullshit, so they told him they'd publish his story if he passed a lie detector.

From the article:

>Before printing the story and photographs, a National Wildlife editor flew to the west coast to interview Patterson......he agreed to take a lie detector test. The results convinced the operator that he was not lying.

Link to article:

http://www.hancockhouse.com/media/natwildlifefinaluse.pdf

I wonder why nobody ever mentions that Patterson passed a poly as well?

>>17937663
Still think polys are bullshit

>>17937580
>[citation needed]

Here you go, knock yourself out:

http://www.pdf-archive.com/2014/11/03/heironimus-interviews/

Those are transcripts of interviews done by Heironimus over the years. See for yourself how he changes his story, and how the suit he describes would be incapable of producing the results seen in the film. All of which means he's lying his ass off...

>>17937589
Those fuckers are still used for employment in police and government jobs though...

>>17937611
>who actually is killed by the police in California

Let me guess....people who fail to comply with police instructions and pose a deadly threat to the arresting officers.

How close am I?

>>17937683
And as a criminologist I can tell you how fucked up people who work in the police force are. I would say that if something can't be used in a court of law it shouldn't be used in science

>>17937635
>do you know why meldrum wanted to become an anthropologist?

Do you know why Einstein wanted to become a physicist? Because he had a fascination with light.

Do you know why some people want to become doctors? Because they are fascinated with the potential of being able to cure a disease.

You're just projecting an excuse to shit on the dude because you don't want to believe anything that challenges your idea of Sasquatch being a hoax.

That's pretty lame, anon.

>>17937689
You'd be surprised how many are actually shot in the back and are unarmed when killed by the police. There is no statistical significance with race, but poverty level. Most are actually killed due to traffic stops. Yes you are right, but my hypothesis was that race was not what caused an officer to engage in lethal force, but socioeconomic status.

File: MIDTARSAL_REPLICATION.jpg (317KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 600x400px

>>17937635
also his pivotal piece of "science" on bigfoot; the "mid-tarsal break" theory regarding the bluff creek prints was easily debunked by a guy who actually put on some fake feet and walked on a damp sandbank. guess what? on pushing off, what looks like a "mid-tarsal break" is created.
please read these other interesting articles:

http://orgoneresearch.com/category/hoaxes/page/2/

>>17937672
>polys are bullshit

They certainly can be.

A poly tester can often times manipulate the results by saying shit to intentionally excite the testee, like ,"Are you sure you're telling the truth on this question? I'll ask you again..." in a tone that implies disbelief, and this can get the testee worried or agitated about being thought of as a liar, despite telling the truth, resulting in the pulse / perspiration / respiratory changes that the machine is designed to pick up on.

Likewise the testee can manipulate the results by being a fucking sociopath and not giving a fuck about lying or consequences, and even amateurs can skew the test by understanding how to manipulate the control questions.

However, a good examiner with integrity that's willing and able to follow the appropriate protocols, can provide a reasonable probability percentage whether an average person is being deceitful or not, which is why they are still used in job screening.

>>17937712
>You'd be surprised how many are actually shot in the back

I wouldn't be surprised at all.

>race was not what caused an officer to engage in lethal force, but socioeconomic status.

Having money, or not, doesn't mean shit. BEHAVIOR is why those fuckers get shot. Period.

When blacks learn to behave and respect the law and quit trying to fight the police while trying to do the job that WE hire them to do, then they won't get shot.

>>17937764
Well you know what, I have the data, and amongst the races no one race dies at a significant rate than any other, and in fact all those of a lower socioeconomic status regardless of race, die at significantly higher rates than their same raced counterparts in higher socioeconomic communities

>>17937548
So why are you posting unrelated things? You made a claim, I asked for a citation and you failed to provide once, twice.

>>17937764
You showed your own racist tendencies here, I'm just saying that those who have less money are killed at higher rates by police, most are unarmed, and an officer should never shoot an unarmed individual. Those who are armed are usually over the age of 28, and are usually White, Asian, etc. Not black or Latino

But this is really off topic

>>17937764
I think it's quite interesting that you know better than someone who studies this shit. Even if he's studying it 'wrong', he still knows more stuff than you do.

>>17937580
That calf flex doesn't really prove it's not a suit.

If you are wearing a suit that attaches from the waist to the foot, then it will be loose while the leg is raised, but tighten slightly as the foot comes down. This would create the same effect as the "calf flex" in that gif.

>>17937782
Because I assumed peer reviewed papers on the PG film would suffice as examples of accepted science. Also I could not remember if Meldrum was an author or not on those papers

>>17937716

So a professor of anatomy and anthropology isn't credible, but "some guy" is?

When they took the casts of the prints at the PGF site, they estimated the weight based on the depth of the impressions left in the soil compared to their own, and their horses.

This "guy" simply walked on the beech, and found that "some" of his prints left what appeared to be a mid-tarsal break. Well what happens when he does this experiment again under conditions that actually replicate the PGF film?


Come on, anon, use your brain.

>>17937789
No need to stand up for me buddy, I knew going into this project that no matter what my results were there would be people who disagreed with science.

He's probably the same kind of guy who believes vaccines cause autism

>>17937770
That's because ghetto people, white trash, and every other low life dirtbag, have a shitty culture that embraces acting like assholes and resorting to violence.

That doesn't work so well when interacting with cops.

>>17937799
You assumed wrong.

>Also I could not remember if Meldrum was an author or not on those papers
Then you should have checked, seen the paper had nothing to do with your claim and not posted.

>>17937802
argument from authority fallacy, anon. the fact is, had meldrum done his due diligence, he would have seen that those prints could have been created by a man walking with a rigid prosthetic strapped to his foot. we don't for a guy to have a phd to understand high school level basics of the scientific method and actually test a hypothesis. come on, bro.

File: strangeness.jpg (75KB, 590x751px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 590x751px

>>17925502
>Con men are con men because they don't have the desire to put in the work effort normal people do
As a conman, paid shill and all around bad guy I can tell you that this is total horseshit. You think you have people figured out, you think your ability to catalog and label them will somehow make you safe from their depredations.

If you think a con is easier than a "real" job, you lack life experience. I bet, based on your ignorance, that you believe drug dealers sell drugs because it is easier than a "real" job as well.

Instead of correcting you, or providing you with the resources to learn for yourself, I will insult you.

You are a worthless millennial with the life experience of a gnat. You are functionality illiterate and this will haunt you until the end of your days, as it will allow your betters to abuse and use you at their whim.