I bet it was just Lootie.

Quoted: And yet WHERE is the FLOOD of bigfoot pictures? did you ever consider that there might only be a very few of them present day, that they might be on the verge of being extinct?

A corpse. Some bones. Come on, if there was a breeding population of such a large creature in North America, you'd think we'd have a bit more than the Patterson movie and some purported 'footprints'.

Quoted: Quoted: Just spent the last 15 mins trying to find (remember) this guy's name by searching a bunch of Bigfoot links: John Mionczynski I saw part of a show yesterday - he's involved with an organization backed with funds from some scientific folks to find Bigfoot. Can't remember the name of his group or who is backing him. And I'm too tired to search further - maybe tomorrow... But his story (BF encounter) sure sounded interesting - plus he's well respected. I think he was on a special on the Travel Channel about bigfoot. Why the Travel Channel was doing a special on bigfoot, I don't know. They followed it up with a special on mothman. Anyway, they had some guys go out into the woods at night and play some loud recordings of gorillas to see if anything answered back. Lo and behold, something that sounded similar answered, once. They kept playing the recordings, but never got another response and never saw anything with IR. They also had what they thought might be a bigfoot handprint on a car window, positioned where it would have placed its hand if it were leaning down to look inside. Most of them said it was probably just two or more of their own handprints smudged together and when their fingerprint expert examined it, they were right. All in all, fairly tame and realistic. They'd gone to a place that was known for bigfoot sightings and not seen any evidence... except for whatever hollered back at them the first time they played their gorilla calls.

The part I saw was probably a different show than you're talking about.  All I saw was: They went into the woods on horses, crossed a river on horseback that had a washed out bridge, set a camera, set some kinda contraption to collect hair at 12 feet above the ground...wish I'd have seen more of it.

EDIT:  Just remember this:  there was another part of the show that had 2 guys digging in caves looking for teeth, then the one guy went to Germany to get permission to do some DNA testing on teeth that some German guy found in the 1930's or so.

Quoted: "The witness said that he could see breasts, and decided that it was a female based on that observation; "Breasts were large and saggy, but everything was for the most part, proportionate. They weren't excessively large. Yes, I saw the nipples, brown in color"."

Janet Reno?

Quoted: bigfoot, schmigfoot. Listen , the "coverage" of the world by video and still picture-taking equipment has increased by a factor of 10,000 to 1,000,000 in the last 25 years.  Do you even know anyone without a digital camera, or a cell phone that takes pictures?  Do you know of ANY teeanagers who don't have camera phones, or even video camera phones?And what percentage of those camera's are in the hands of people who never see more than 3 or 4 trees in one place?Those 3 or 4 planted by landscapers around their apartment complex. And yet WHERE is the FLOOD of bigfoot pictures?Apparently Sasquatch doesn't hang out at the mall or TGI Friday's  Where is the flood of UFO videos, not just cheesy frisbees on strings?  Where is the flood of Loch Ness Monster pictures?These topics are mostly unrelated to BF This was always crap, and the fact that there still is not good footage despite the explosion of casual recording devices indicates its crap now too.I know lots of people who can go to the woods and stumble around without ever seeing so much as a squirrel.They read outdoor magazines shop at REI dress up in their gucci gear and the go to some fucking park with 800 other gucci goobers and wonder why they don't see anything other than semi-domesticated wildlife.Hell they want to fucking touch them and feed them.

I have personally seen with my own 2 eyes wildlife(cougar) which is not "SUPPOSED" to live in this area. This area is very well settled and developed by the oil/gas industry and this wildlife exists with relatively few sightings.Generally those sightings are disputed by "experts". I don't doubt for a minute that there are places on this continent for a species to exist in obscurity.Just because you don't see one everytime you put on your hiking boots and go to Quizno's to pick up dinner doesn't mean that they do not/can not exist

In our part of the country the Fish & Wildlife dept deny the existence of cougars for fear of triggering the endangered species act and all the crap that comes with that.  People see cougars enough to prove a small population that will never get official recognition.
I've known a few people that saw bigfoot in the north woods but not with enough authority to convince me.

 


Infamous Mythical creature [that ALOT of people are trying to prove the existance of] standing in the sights of a trained killer and he fires warning shots.

Ya right!!  

As much as I think it would be cool for such a creature to exist, stories like these have me severly doubting.

Quoted: I bet it was just Lootie.

Quoted: Quoted: And yet WHERE is the FLOOD of bigfoot pictures? did you ever consider that there might only be a very few of them present day, that they might be on the verge of being extinct? Come on, if there was a breeding population of such a large creature in North America, you'd think we'd have a bit more than the Patterson movie and some purported 'footprints'.

who said they have a breeding population? That's the point, there might be so few of them they're almost extinct.

A corpse. Some bones.

question anyone in wildlife biology and they'll tell you, even finding remains of common big species such as bear in the wilderness hardly ever happens.

standing in the sights of a trained killer and he fires warning shots.

the story only said he had had some sniper training.

As much as I think it would be cool for such a creature to exist, stories like these have me severly doubting.

My guess is there's a lot of made up stories, no different than there's posers and keyboard comandos on a gun site, but that shouldn't discount the more believable stories.

Quoted: who said they have a breeding population? That's the point, there might be so few of them they're almost extinct.

There is no good evidence to support the existence of so much as one Yeti/Almas/Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Whatever, much less a breeding population (or population formerly at breeding levels). Just a lot of 'You won't believe what I saw!...'

(And the abundance of native stories doesn't mean a thing; all sorts of primitive people have sky gods and fire gods and whatnot, but that doesn't mean that said beings exist.)

question anyone in wildlife biology and they'll tell you, even finding remains of common big species such as bear in the wilderness hardly ever happens.

I won't disagree with 'hardly ever'. But we are talking about never-ever. In the hundreds of years of 'modern' Bigfoot stories (not counting various native peoples stories), not one scrap of incontrovertible physical evidence exists to be examined? Come now.

Quoted: Quoted: who said they have a breeding population? That's the point, there might be so few of them they're almost extinct. There is no good evidence to support the existence of so much as one Yeti/Almas/Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Whatever, much less a breeding population (or population formerly at breeding levels). Just a lot of 'You won't believe what I saw!...' (And the abundance of native stories doesn't mean a thing; all sorts of primitive people have sky gods and fire gods and whatnot, but that doesn't mean that said beings exist.) question anyone in wildlife biology and they'll tell you, even finding remains of common big species such as bear in the wilderness hardly ever happens. I won't disagree with 'hardly ever'. But we are talking about never-ever. In the hundreds of years of 'modern' Bigfoot stories (not counting various native peoples stories), not one scrap of incontrovertible physical evidence exists to be examined? Come now.

Living in MI,I would think you would have a better understanding than others about the actual amount of untravled,unexplored land here in the US(let alone canada)I know for a fact that where I grew up,I was quite possibly the first person in Hundreds of years to set foot in alot of the places I went.In fact since I moved,No-one else has probably been there since.These sightings usually happen either in areas such as that or on the outskirts of areas such as that.I know for a FACT that if I chose to go into the pacific northwest and never be seen again by human eyes,I most certainly could do it.And I have no reason to doubt bigfoot and kin most certainly could too.

just because there's no evidence for something doesn't suggest things we don't know about aren't there. People are all the time learning that what they thought about something in nature was wrong or what they thought impossible in nature is possible.
A giant squid was only a legend to many people until 1 washed up in recent years. Some things thought to be extince show up, ect.,
The biggest thing is that the human race has a hard time believing that they don't know everything about everything.
As mentioned, there'a lot of unexplored places on this continent. There's places along the northern u.s. border and in the candian rockies and such, up to and throughout alaska, where people could live all their lives without being known to civilization.

"I won't disagree with 'hardly ever'. But we are talking about never-ever."

But what's the bear population, and what's the % of deseased bears located in the wild? A low # of something extinct and living in the most remote regions simply isn't going to be located before it's scavenged. And quite possibly sometime they will locate a skeleton, who knows.
I do know a lot of the "impossible" or it's ridiculous attitudes seem to be a lot like the attitudes people of the last century would have had, laughing at the ideas of many things we know presently.

Quoted: just because there's no evidence for something doesn't suggest things we don't know about aren't there.

Uhmmm....

People are all the time learning that what they thought about something in nature was wrong or what they thought impossible in nature is possible.

Yes they do! They do it by gathering facts, not idle speculation.

The biggest thing is that the human race has a hard time believing that they don't know everything about everything.

Of course we don't know everything; the problem is that some people have a problem with saying, 'I don't know', and instead resort to poor science and wild speculation.

As mentioned, there'a lot of unexplored places on this continent. There's places along the northern u.s. border and in the candian rockies and such, up to and throughout alaska, where people could live all their lives without being known to civilization.

Right on. But we are talking about Bigfoot, right? With sightings in populated areas (however sparsely so). In the past 100 years, we have taken detailed photos of Mars, life at the bottom of the oceans, and all sorts of things inbetween. We found incredibly rare tiny birds out in the middle of the boonies, bacteria that grow only around deep-sea vents, and even a sort of 'Lost World' in Indonesia, but nary a good piece of Bigfoot evidence? Come on.

The recent find in Indonesia was by a tiny team of scientists in an amazingly mountainous and jungle-covered land; with all these hundreds? thousands? of people actively looking for a big furry thing in the woods, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of other people out in the woods, we would have something more than stories and discredited footprints to go on.

And quite possibly sometime they will locate a skeleton, who knows.

Maybe they'll find them on a magic ley line while a ET flies overhead, and the chupacabra, in a rare good mood, will take a picture of you sitting there with a pile of Bigfoot bones. But I wouldn't count on that, either.

I love the 'cryptozoology' stories as much as the next fellow (especially Loren Coleman books), but I also recognize that the vast majority of it is just junk science. Fun junk science, but not something that folks should pin any hopes on.

People are all the time learning that what they thought about something in nature was wrong or what they thought impossible in nature is possible.

Yes they do! They do it by gathering facts, not idle speculation.[/b]

Actually there's a lot of work done in a scientific way, particularly with footprints and dermal ridges.
gethering facts and idle speculation, there's a middle ground, you work towards the facts, there's a lot of guesswork and trial and error about unknowns.



The biggest thing is that the human race has a hard time believing that they don't know everything about everything.

Of course we don't know everything; the problem is that some people have a problem with saying, 'I don't know', and instead resort to poor science and wild speculation.

lots of people don't know, I don't know, but I believe it's possible and have a more open mind to it than you do obviously. I tend to think it's real based on the patterson film myself, and because to me it's hard to believe that every story, every track, every legend is either wrong, a fake or a lie.
I could care less whether science doesn't offer any proof anyhow, to me science isn't the know all authority on life.





Right on. But we are talking about Bigfoot, right? With sightings in populated areas (however sparsely so). In the past 100 years, we have taken detailed photos of Mars, life at the bottom of the oceans, and all sorts of things inbetween. We found incredibly rare tiny birds out in the middle of the boonies, bacteria that grow only around deep-sea vents, and even a sort of 'Lost World' in Indonesia, but nary a good piece of Bigfoot evidence? Come on.

That's a matter of opinion. to me the patterson film is really good evidence. that's a 1960s quality old fashioned film camera used and there's nothing about it that looks remotley like a costume or a fake to me. To me that film says "real animal".
There's lots of modern attempts at bigfoot type of creatures in movies with much more advanced film and special effects used and you can always tell those are fake no matter how much detail there is.
There's also this imprint from the skookum area in washington known as skookum cast, basically an imprint of a large ape like animal in mud where it had sat and ate or something. Tracks with dermal ridges and strides that couldn't be faked.
So it's a matter of what someone considers evidence.

with all these hundreds? thousands? of people actively looking for a big furry thing in the woods, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of other people out in the woods, we would have something more than stories and discredited footprints to go on.

There's any thousands of people looking for it, in fact really only a handful of people who research deep enough in the woods with any real background in crypto.



And quite possibly sometime they will locate a skeleton, who knows.

Maybe they'll find them on a magic ley line while a ET flies overhead, and the chupacabra, in a rare good mood, will take a picture of you sitting there with a pile of Bigfoot bones. But I wouldn't count on that, either.

problem with your sarcasim is your dismissing the idea of there being simply a flesh and blood but uncatorigized mammal and considering it with the likes of unbelievable things such as et. We're not talking vampires or even monsters, but the simple suggestion of a rare type of ape like creature, something that's maybe just slightly more advanced than mountain gorillas. Samon could sustain a creature of that size easily just as they do brown bears and grizzlies.
With thousands of miles of deep forests were people don't or hardly ever go in north america, it's hardly impossible that that they don't exist.
Your best reason for arguing against all the sightings legends and tracks is that some soccer mom from boulder or boise hasn't run out of the woods from their camping trip with a photo of 1 on her camera phone.
But there was this guy on horseback in '67.

Fun junk science, but not something that folks should pin any hopes on.

people's opinions are people's opinions. My hopes aren't on junk science or anything other science, in fact I'll likely die not knowing for certain, so I don't have any hopes about it, but I do believe they are real or were real and are recently extinct.

more stories!

Here is a bigfoot forum. The guy in the incident is being questioned there. Seems pretty good.

www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=16489

I live in the midst of reasonably dense Bigfoot populations (Oregon) and, as such, always carry my Glock when more than 10feet from my house. I long for the day I see one of those big smelly buggers: NO warning shots from me! .40 hydrashocks at center of mass. It'll be a pain to pack it out, but my plan is to load it in the back of my pick-up, bring it home for photos, and then sell it on eBay. Seriously My only dilemma is whether to sell the corpse complete or to part it out. I'm sure a sasquatch head or foot will go for more than an arm, etc.,.  

Opinions/suggestions?

Quoted: I live in the midst of reasonably dense Bigfoot populations (Oregon) and, as such, always carry my Glock when more than 10feet from my house. I long for the day I see one of those big smelly buggers: NO warning shots from me! .40 hydrashocks at center of mass. It'll be a pain to pack it out, but my plan is to load it in the back of my pick-up, bring it home for photos, and then sell it on eBay. Seriously My only dilemma is whether to sell the corpse complete or to part it out. I'm sure a sasquatch head or foot will go for more than an arm, etc.,.   Opinions/suggestions?

I think I would carry ball in that situation. Maybe a little better penetration?

Yeah, ball ammo. Hollow points are designed for human sizes and only penetrate about 12". wildboar beat me!

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: I live in the midst of reasonably dense Bigfoot populations (Oregon) and, as such, always carry my Glock when more than 10feet from my house. I long for the day I see one of those big smelly buggers: NO warning shots from me! .40 hydrashocks at center of mass. It'll be a pain to pack it out, but my plan is to load it in the back of my pick-up, bring it home for photos, and then sell it on eBay. Seriously My only dilemma is whether to sell the corpse complete or to part it out. I'm sure a sasquatch head or foot will go for more than an arm, etc.,.   Opinions/suggestions? I think I would carry ball in that situation. Maybe a little better penetration?

Excellent suggestion- thanks! More penetration and less tissue damage. That of course should equate to a higher potential selling price on eBay, correct?

Quoted: Your best reason for arguing against all the sightings legends and tracks is that some soccer mom from boulder or boise hasn't run out of the woods from their camping trip with a photo of 1 on her camera phone...

Incorrect. My 'best reason for arguing against all the sightings legends and tracks' is that no broadly substantiated evidence exists showing that said legends and tracks are anything but campfire stories and pranks.

There do seem to be a handful of 'researchers' who try their best to do a thorough job examining the findings; unfortunately, most of what is out there is 'ZOMG! This dude on some web board posted that HE SAW BIGFOOT'. Stuff like that is nothing but fan-fiction. Perhaps entertaining, but that's about it.

Zoiks! He's getting jealous at all this Bigfoot talk!:

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I live in the midst of reasonably dense Bigfoot populations (Oregon) and, as such, always carry my Glock when more than 10feet from my house. I long for the day I see one of those big smelly buggers: NO warning shots from me! .40 hydrashocks at center of mass. It'll be a pain to pack it out, but my plan is to load it in the back of my pick-up, bring it home for photos, and then sell it on eBay. Seriously My only dilemma is whether to sell the corpse complete or to part it out. I'm sure a sasquatch head or foot will go for more than an arm, etc.,.   Opinions/suggestions? I think I would carry ball in that situation. Maybe a little better penetration? Excellent suggestion- thanks! More penetration and less tissue damage. That of course should equate to a higher potential selling price on eBay, correct?

Well thats choice one will have to make If you don't want negative feedback after the sale. If you want a marketable body, you will have to rely on dumping a few extra rounds into his chest. I figure HP or ball, his big azz 66" chest will deform just about all pistol rounds anyway. Why risk causing unneeded damage?  Sell the corpse with all limbs. Use the meat for burgers, steaks and sausage. Eat some, sell the rest.

the 5.56mm round will rotate 90 degrees and explode because of the g-forces it has traveling at nearly 1/2 mile per second while rotating. This causes massive internal damage. With a 30-round clip.


from a person in the thread.
here

Quoted: the 5.56mm round will rotate 90 degrees and explode because of the g-forces it has traveling at nearly 1/2 mile per second while rotating. This causes massive internal damage. With a 30-round clip. from a person in the thread. here

change explode to frag, and clip to mag, and that's about right.

TAG for interest...

Quoted: Here is a bigfoot forum. The guy in the incident is being questioned there. Seems pretty good. www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=16489

Thanks for th elink, WB....some great stuff there.

I always love it when my seperate interests cross paths. While I am not 100% convinced of the existance of such creatures, I think that it is entirely possible given the amount of evidence and accounts.