In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
But that is only because it is the same ol' BS you have been seeing for 30 years. Otherwise it is pretty convincing. Just like it was in '67. Wonder why in 45 years we have gotten no closer to actually finding one? Hoax.
Next you'll be trying to tell me there ain't no Loch Ness Monster or egg laying bunny.
quote:Originally posted by Mk 19
The biggest thing that bothers me is that there have been stories of a creature such as this from many cultures around the would dating back thousands of years, however serious science has completely dismissed any and all sightings as myth or hoax depending on the age of the sighting. This has left the exploration to non-reputable sources and each of there findings are then completetly dismissed without a single thought. It would be nice for a serious study to be taken place to finally prove what is or is not out there.
The problem with that is you can never prove what ain't out there. If the cryptozoologists want to be taken seriously, the first thing they need to do is change their name. The name itself is an oxymoron. How do you study an animal which hasn't been proven to exist.
When somebody finds tangible evidence which is still in existence they will be taken seriously. If you've ever watched the History Channel programs on such things, you will have noticed it's an hour of some cryptozoologist wandering around in the woods saying things like "there's a squatch in these woods", or "I smell a big foot". Hardly hard evidence.
quote:Originally posted by Mk 19
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
Fair enough. As a biologist, I guess I am a little exasperated at all the BS surrounding 'cryptobiology.' An unknown small antelope may indeed well turn up in Viet Nam, and did, but the chance a man-sized or larger creature is lurking in the Pacific Northwest unknown until 1967 is vanishingly small. The Western wilderness is just not that wild or uncharted.
The biggest thing that bothers me is that there have been stories of a creature such as this from many cultures around the would dating back thousands of years, however serious science has completely dismissed any and all sightings as myth or hoax depending on the age of the sighting. This has left the exploration to non-reputable sources and each of there findings are then completetly dismissed without a single thought. It would be nice for a serious study to be taken place to finally prove what is or is not out there.
Maybe you could get a Government grant?
Randy,
There is a place over on the Lewis River called ape canyon, and a forest service tourist area and camp ground called Ape Caves.
The story about a group of hunters running into into some Big Foot is well documented.
We'll have to get together and have a beverage, I can tell you some pretty good first hand stories about that neck of the woods.
W.D.
When he turns his head and looks at the camera , I can clearly see the cutout in the mask for his eyes, you can even see some white skin around his eyes.
quote:Originally posted by CapnMidnight
Randy,
There is a place over on the Lewis River called ape canyon, and a forest service tourist area and camp ground called Ape Caves.
The story about a group of hunters running into into some Big Foot is well documented.
We'll have to get together and have a beverage, I can tell you some pretty good first hand stories about that neck of the woods.
W.D.
I need to get down that way anyway![:)]
There are another couple of factors mentioned when doubting the existence of a large ape creature. One, our own American Indians never bagged one even with their extensive hunting and foraging operations in the wilderness. Two, no remains have ever been found. You can find the bones and pelts of every other creature out there in the woods, i.e. cougar, antelope, bear, moose, cornmonkey, etc, but no bigfoot remains have ever been retrieved. Somehow I doubt ol' BF has been cremating and scattering the ashes all these decades. [:D]
quote:Originally posted by andrewsw16
There are another couple of factors mentioned when doubting the existence of a large ape creature. One, our own American Indians never bagged one even with their extensive hunting and foraging operations in the wilderness. Two, no remains have ever been found. You can find the bones and pelts of every other creature out there in the woods, i.e. cougar, antelope, bear, moose, cornmonkey, etc, but no bigfoot remains have ever been retrieved. Somehow I doubt ol' BF has been cremating and scattering the ashes all these decades. [:D]
Indian legend of Bigfoot was kinda like the "Boogeyman" in modern times me thinks. Probably way of keeping the kids from straying too far from the village where they would be attacked by enemy tribes or mountain lions.
There have been myths, sotries or rumors about witches, vampires, and assortrd other creaturs. Voodoo is still practiced today. No one is going to fund rsearch on those either.
For serious research to be done, there would have to be some tangible physical evidence. Eye witness testimony is considered the least credible evidence of all. The same is pretty much true in science. To get funding for serious resrarch you need serious indications. Old campfire stories anf easilu faked media just won't cut it.
I was once asked to be part of an 'expedition to the Congo to search for Mokele Membe, supposedly a remnant dino. I considered it simply for the experience and a chance to see the Congo. In the end some research into the 'expedition leader' led me to conclude it was a poor idea.
And James, nessie was a hoax, the perpetrators admitted it was wooden. I am pretty darn sure the bunny is the real McCoy.
The 'planform' of Nessie, from most reports, most closely resembles that of a plesiosaur. These were reported in the 1800's by whalers, usually in the North Atlantic. Small ones were sometimes found inside Sperm whales. Not much was made of it, people apparently accepting that marine or aquatic critters from 100 million years ago survived in numbers anywhere from great to very small, sharks and crocodiles being among them. It is true that survivors from the time of whatever overtook the dinosaurs, were water-critters, and they are replete in the fossil record. Which makes Bigfoot an enigma, and he must be fairly recent. The only land critter in the fossil record from way back, which has had a fairly recent appearance, is T-Rex #MOR 1125, which was discovered as an incompletely deteriorated skeleton, not a fossil, in 2005.
Comments
But that is only because it is the same ol' BS you have been seeing for 30 years. Otherwise it is pretty convincing. Just like it was in '67. Wonder why in 45 years we have gotten no closer to actually finding one? Hoax.
Next you'll be trying to tell me there ain't no Loch Ness Monster or egg laying bunny.
The biggest thing that bothers me is that there have been stories of a creature such as this from many cultures around the would dating back thousands of years, however serious science has completely dismissed any and all sightings as myth or hoax depending on the age of the sighting. This has left the exploration to non-reputable sources and each of there findings are then completetly dismissed without a single thought. It would be nice for a serious study to be taken place to finally prove what is or is not out there.
The problem with that is you can never prove what ain't out there. If the cryptozoologists want to be taken seriously, the first thing they need to do is change their name. The name itself is an oxymoron. How do you study an animal which hasn't been proven to exist.
When somebody finds tangible evidence which is still in existence they will be taken seriously. If you've ever watched the History Channel programs on such things, you will have noticed it's an hour of some cryptozoologist wandering around in the woods saying things like "there's a squatch in these woods", or "I smell a big foot". Hardly hard evidence.
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
Fair enough. As a biologist, I guess I am a little exasperated at all the BS surrounding 'cryptobiology.' An unknown small antelope may indeed well turn up in Viet Nam, and did, but the chance a man-sized or larger creature is lurking in the Pacific Northwest unknown until 1967 is vanishingly small. The Western wilderness is just not that wild or uncharted.
The biggest thing that bothers me is that there have been stories of a creature such as this from many cultures around the would dating back thousands of years, however serious science has completely dismissed any and all sightings as myth or hoax depending on the age of the sighting. This has left the exploration to non-reputable sources and each of there findings are then completetly dismissed without a single thought. It would be nice for a serious study to be taken place to finally prove what is or is not out there.
Maybe you could get a Government grant?
There is a place over on the Lewis River called ape canyon, and a forest service tourist area and camp ground called Ape Caves.
The story about a group of hunters running into into some Big Foot is well documented.
We'll have to get together and have a beverage, I can tell you some pretty good first hand stories about that neck of the woods.
W.D.
Randy,
There is a place over on the Lewis River called ape canyon, and a forest service tourist area and camp ground called Ape Caves.
The story about a group of hunters running into into some Big Foot is well documented.
We'll have to get together and have a beverage, I can tell you some pretty good first hand stories about that neck of the woods.
W.D.
I need to get down that way anyway![:)]
There are another couple of factors mentioned when doubting the existence of a large ape creature. One, our own American Indians never bagged one even with their extensive hunting and foraging operations in the wilderness. Two, no remains have ever been found. You can find the bones and pelts of every other creature out there in the woods, i.e. cougar, antelope, bear, moose, cornmonkey, etc, but no bigfoot remains have ever been retrieved. Somehow I doubt ol' BF has been cremating and scattering the ashes all these decades. [:D]
What about elaphant grave yards.[:o)]
For serious research to be done, there would have to be some tangible physical evidence. Eye witness testimony is considered the least credible evidence of all. The same is pretty much true in science. To get funding for serious resrarch you need serious indications. Old campfire stories anf easilu faked media just won't cut it.
I was once asked to be part of an 'expedition to the Congo to search for Mokele Membe, supposedly a remnant dino. I considered it simply for the experience and a chance to see the Congo. In the end some research into the 'expedition leader' led me to conclude it was a poor idea.
And James, nessie was a hoax, the perpetrators admitted it was wooden. I am pretty darn sure the bunny is the real McCoy.