Bigfoot, real or not?

Post Reply New Topic

Lol random topic for sure, but I mean what do you think? Do you figure ole Bigfoot is just a myth or do you think they could be out there? I mean for sure it is the one kind of conspiracy esque thing I entertain. Idk if they are real, but I also don't know if they aren't real lol.

I mean I suppose at best I figure they'd be like a primate we just haven't actually discovered yet, but also in the year 2020 does seem a little hard to believe that there is an undiscovered race of humanoid/gorilla looking people with very few in numbers hanging out in the various woods with yet no 100% proof of existence. So for sure I have to mostly conclude that bigfoots are not real but IDK I guess sometimes it is fun to wonder if such a race of beings could be hiding out in the woods evading enough evidence to prove they exist. I guess it is one of those things I would like to believe but there is by far not enough evidence that they even exist in the first place. But regardless it still seems like a fun kind of mythology thing.

In addition to the hair found, the ownership of which is still a controversial issue, there is no other documented evidence.

Well I was watching a documentary thing on it, and supposedly there were some foot prints, but that said thsoe could have been fairly easy to create by the guy in the documentary. Like before he took others out to his site where he supposedly saw some bigfoots...it is certainly possible the guy could have recreated things to look like their foot imprints like for all I know he carved out those supposed foot prints or at least did something to create them. Also he'd put apples and fruits on branches and claim due to no bear marks it must have been teh big foots who grabbed it, granted for that part they claimed there was no fruit waste underneath like if a just random animal went for them. But for surue there are smaller animals that would take fruit left on tree, like squirrles and such which may not leave their food droppings right where they ate the food. So there were certainly a lot of holes in their claim like they claim bigfoot must have taken the fruit, well they also have no proof that squirrels and racoons didn't take it. From what I have seen sometimes squirrels and raccoons take their bounty elsewhere before consuming it. so that could explain why not a lot of debri was left, like if a band of raccoons saw the fruit they would have grabbed it for sure, and they would not leave marks on the wood like a bear and probably would have taken it to whatever they deem their safe spots before they started chowing on it.

Also some may not know but raccoons can growl quite loud and unpleasantly if they want. So I am not so convinced that scary noises people here in the woods arent just a racoon, a mountain lion or lynx or bobcat or a bear. I mean sometimes those animals can make pretty horrific sounds and amplified in the woods it can sound even scarier. But for sure that isn't enough to prove a bigfoot existing. Anymore than hearing a lynx/bobcat scream like a dying woman proves there is actually a dying woman nearby.

Also gaaah if this guy is so sure, why don't he leave a tree cam or something in the area to actually get some video evidence of these bigfoot grabbing the fruit. I mean if they really are real and they really come for the fruit why wont he set up a hidden cam to get actual footage of them grabbing it. But nah it only ends up being him talking about how they took the fruit but I have yet to see a clear video depicting any bigfoot coming for the fruit. So as usual he is probably just frauding, like he may get a lot of youtube and other attention but he could for sure just be faking everything.

I just gotta stick to actually get me a video of bigfoot in his or her natural habitat and then maybe I will believe but just telling me without good video evidence will not be proof to me. Seems even what so called videos there are have been proven to be probably fake. So for now it just seems like a fun mythological creature to think about/tell people you are looking for so they stop bothering you, like you could go venturing into the woods and if anyone questions it just tell them you're looking for bigfoot and they'll probably just leave you alone...lol.

Source: https://xkcd.com/1235/

Also, "Yeti" hair kept by Tibetans turned out to be mostly bear. https://www.livescience.com/61048-yeti- ... lyzed.html

Well I kinda figure a lot of these sightings probably were just bears, I mean some bears will walk upright on hind legs at times so it is not impossible like a drunk or maybe high person might see that and thing 'it must be bigfoot' or hell a person does not have to be impaired even being out in the woods can make you a bit hypervigilant so a bit of suggestion of a bigfoot in the woods could get you thinking of it so then any roar of an animal might seem like it must be a bigfoot. That is what I mean the one guy in the documentary I watched could be he just knows some about psychology so he does just enough to get them sorta believing and then of course being out in the woods in the middle of nowhere could very well do the rest. So it's clever...but yeah it is not proof such things actually exist, he could just very well be using psychology tricks like a magicians do.

Like I am sure me, my boyfriend and my brother if we really wanted could bring some gullible people out to the mountains to camp and convince them there is a clan of bigfoot messing with our camp, but well it would not be real it would be use playing pranks to just make it seem like maybe. So could be very well that is just what that guy was doing but on a large enough scale he actually made the documentary 'Discovering Bigfoot' out of it. It does not convince me at all but it was interesting to watch, it did show some good scenes of some actual real animals that we all know exist like bears. Still though I suspect a lot of bigfoot sightings, were actually just bears.

I would believe in Bigfoot more if there were sightings of little Bigfeet every once in a while.

How can only a solitary Bigfoot be seen over a few hundred years or so? And how about female Bigfeet?

Bigfoot has to reproduce. Or it will go extinct.

It is a bit like the Loch Ness monster where they probably do exist but they have learned through experience that humans are bad news, so the chances of them being around when people are there are very slim.

Do they exist or don't they? In the case of Nessie, one of the hardcore sceptics in the past changed his mind completely with a rather frightening experience when he ended up being one of the few people to have seen the creature face to face.

But do those creatures still exist now? Or have they become extinct?

There are many cases in the world where myth has turned moth and they have actually been found, but it is a bit like those days when one does something specacular or invents something that usually works and says "Look Mum" but do you think you can do it or make it work when she looks?

I used to assume these things were myths,,or that what people saw was something else, but these days after reading accounts of what people saw now we have the internet and can do research, and after assessing the probabilities and patterns for the likelihood for the creatures to exist, I will say that there are things out there that are yet to be discovered. Just because only one or two people have seen them does not mean that they don't exist.


Three interesting sightings locally where such creatures are not supposed to exist here where I live are in a very small ancient town with a castle near here, more then one person has witnessed a large creature taking down ducks in one mouthfull. This is usually very early in the morning when things are quiet, and the river is tidal as the place is near the sea. Now I once saw something and whatever it was, it was so quick that I was puzzled what had happened. I saw a duck. Took no notice. And then I heard a noise, and I looked and it was gone. Then a lady told me she had seen what she can only say was the mouth of an alligator come up out of the water and swollow a duck whole. She knows alligators as she has held one and seen them during her travels, and she is convinced that that is what she saw.

Another much earlier sighting going back some 40 years ago was a strange sea bear that was seen and really frightened the one who saw it. It is only one or two people ever saw it and it was a terrifying sight as this huge thing had snarling teeth and looked evil. The account went in the local newspapers and people went to try and find this creature but no one did.

And coming back to recent times several people saw a huge snake which was said to be very long and about a foot in diameter in a secluded area not far from our local town (Our large town). Several people saw it and dogs had gone missing, but though the police and others went out on a hunt to find it, no one has found anything to this day.

Then another sighting from rural West Wales. Many farmers saw a very large black cat thought to be a panther taking down their sheep about a decade ago.


And living in the area we have seen many UFO like events over the years, but I am 100% convinced that these are man made experiments.

Nessie would have to be at least 500 years old to exist.

No one has ever produced any valid material evidence to support claims that favor the existence of "Bigfoot", "Mapinguari", "Sasquatch", or the "Yeti" (a.k.a., "Meh-Teh" or "Abominable Snowman").

The alleged "evidence" for Bigfoot’s existence consists mainly of testimony from Bigfoot enthusiasts (the plural of "testimony" is not "proof", by the way...), footprints of questionable origin, and pictures that could easily have been of apes or humans in ape suits.  There are no bones, no scat, no artifacts, no dead bodies, no mothers with babies, no adolescents, no fur ... nothing.

There are alleged "sightings" galore.  However, there is no evidence that any individual or community of such creatures dwells anywhere near any of the alleged "sightings".  In short, all of the alleged "evidence" points more towards hoaxing and delusion than real discovery.

In addition to the alleged "eyewitness" testimonials of enthusiastic fans, the bulk of the alleged "evidence" provided by proponents of Bigfoot consists of footprints and video recordings on photographic film.

• Of the few footprints available for examination in plaster casts, there is such great disparity in shape and configuration that the alleged "evidence" strongly suggests many independent pranksters.

• Since the advent of the digital camera, no new footage has been produced that is not also as blurry and indistinct and those old, shaky home movies.

I dont think that any of these things exist.

I do think that there are numerous animals that have yet to be discovered though but suspect that they are quite small and live in inaccessible places.

The best chance for discovering an impressive (as in large) and unusual previously unknown creature is probably in the deep depths of the oceans. The Coelacanth is good example of this.

It doesnt work that way.

Its not that there is* A* single individual bigfoot creature wandering around the entire american west that folks see.

Like *THE* Loch Ness Monster.

Its supposed to be a species, with a breeding population.

And they DO see baby bigfoots clinging to their moms, or being carried on the shoulders of big ones. There are witnesses to, and photographs supposedly recording that (whether you buy it or not).

And the most famous film footage of Bigfoot is of a supposed female with large breasts. That being the Patterson Film taken in the woods of northern california in 1967.

Coelacanth were discovered off our east coast in the mid 20th century but I've forgotten the full and very fascinating story for the time being.

I'm open to the existence of cryptocreatures such as Sweetleaf describes. Fnord likes spoiling folks' fun!! I'm waiting for the day he sees them with his own eyes. Which, although possible, is unlikely!

Ah, thanks Naturalplastic for pointing that out. It certainly isn't the original or same individuals folk have been seeing, but their grandkids and other beastly descendants!

Non-Sequitur, hence irrelevant.  This discussion is about a creature that has never been proven to exist, not about a creature once thought extinct.I am more of a "designated driver" than a "party-pooper", and I also believe in the remote possibility of some crypto-creatures' existence; but unless a actual specimens -- or valid physical evidence -- is presented in favor of those crypto-creatures' alleged existence, I will not take the same flying leap from "possibility" to "certainty" that so many wishful thinkers seem to have taken.You left out the word "allegedly" before "have been seeing".  The mere fact that people claim to have witnessed something -- no matter how many people may claim it -- does not by itself prove that thing's existence.

Its something ive been interested in since it became a thing in pop culture in the late Sixties when I was in junior high.

Became a student of anthropology in college- which relates to the subject. And provides evidence on both sides.

Have gone back and forth about buying into it.

I once bought into Erich von Däniken's mythologies regarding space aliens until I visited the Nazca plateau in person and saw for myself how much he had exaggerated and fabricated his alleged "evidence".

I have since looked into all kinds of mythologies, from "Abracadabra" to "Zombies", and found similar falsehoods in every one -- certainly enough to completely discredit all of them to anyone with the ability to think for themselves and not blindly buy into mythologies just because they are attractive and popular.