So, Why Do People Believe In Bigfoot Anyway?

By Krissy Eliot

Relatively few people, in or out of the field of science, believe in Bigfoot. A purported Bigfoot sighting would likely be met with the same level of credulity as a discovery of Casper, Elvis, Tupac, or Santa Claus. With only 16 percent of Americans Bigfoot believers, you might just write them off as crazy. But contrary to popular assumption, folklore experts say, Bigfoot believers may not be as irrational as you’d think.

“It’s easy to assume … that people who believe in Bigfoot are being irrational in their belief,” says Lynne McNeill, Cal grad, folklore professor, and special guest on the reality TV show Finding Bigfoot. “But that’s really not true. People aren’t jumping to supernatural conclusions very often; people are being quite rational. It doesn’t mean they’re correct; it just means they’re thinking rationally.”

OK. So what are some reasons why people might rationalize a belief in Bigfoot?

Reason 1: They think they saw Sasquatch, and they want to prove to themselves and the world that they’re not “crazy.”

If a lifelong non-believer thinks she saw a furry man-beast with glowing red eyes rooting through her undies on a camping trip, then she’s going to have to grapple with that somehow. If she finds herself unable or unwilling to deny that it happened, then she’ll probably try to reconcile that unexplained experience with her otherwise logical life. This attempt at reconciliation, says Tok Thompson, UC Berkeley grad and professor of anthropology and communication at USC, is a pretty common tendency among humans.

“People want a belief system that is comprehensive and consistent, and if something in our belief system is inconsistent, we get cognitive dissonance—it bugs us,” Thompson says. “Because of this, we try to make sense of the seemingly fantastical by weaving it into our currently held perspective.”

“It’s really easy for us to imagine that belief is an either/or proposition—you either believe in something or you don’t,” says folklore professor Lynne McNeill. “And that’s really not the case.”

A popular way of doing this is looking for scientific proof.

This, McNeill explains, is why many Bigfoot hunters are desperate to find tangible evidence to prove Sasquatch’s existence. It’s why reality shows like Finding Bigfoot have scientists tag along with amateurs on Sasquatch hunting excursions, and why the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) has been collecting information on evidence and sightings since 1995. People hope that they’ll find evidence that will both satisfy the scientific method and validate their beliefs.

Grover Krantz, the Cal grad and first well-respected anthropologist to come out in support of the search for Sasquatch, is a great example. Though he never encountered Bigfoot himself, his review of the evidence led him to believe that the creature was real. He risked his entire career as a professor to accommodate his belief in the creature, including being turned down for promotions and grants, and nearly getting fired.

Though his dedication to the search may seem absurd, the practice of using science to reconcile a paranormal belief is surprisingly common.

If you’ve owned a television over the last couple of decades you might have seen at least one episode of Ghost Hunters, a show in which people use doodads like digital EMF meters, ambient thermometers, and lures soaked with primate pheromones to collect “scientific” evidence of spirits. The show has been going strong since 2004, and with almost half of Americans admitting to a belief in ghosts, this isn’t surprising. Then there’s Graham Hancock, a controversial journalist, who leads the charge of people looking for proof that advanced ancient civilizations existed 12,000 years ago, an idea that 55 percent of Americans believe to be true despite scientific protestations against it.

According to these statistics, at least every other person walking among us believes in ghosts or ancient civilizations. And knowing how people react to survey questions, McNeill says, there are likely more believers in all of these (so-called) myths, including Bigfoot, than the data lets on.

“It’s really easy for us to imagine that belief is an either/or proposition—you either believe in something or you don’t. And that’s really not the case. Polls are always asking people whether or not they believe in aliens or ghosts. But the thing is, if their only options for an answer are yes or no, then they know what the right answer is—the right answer is no,” McNeill says. “But if you give people more room and ask them to talk about their beliefs, what you find is a grey area that most people are existing in, where they say, ‘Well, you know, I haven’t seen hard proof myself … but I have a really good friend or family member or someone I trust who has seen Bigfoot.’ Or they’ll say, ‘Well, I don’t believe in this stuff, but—I did see Bigfoot one time.’”

Because so few Americans publicly claim to believe in Bigfoot, these kind of answers allow people to express the variations in their beliefs while protecting themselves from potential ostracization.

Ironically, another reason people might believe in Bigfoot is that it would put them at odds with their community if they didn’t believe.

Reason 2: Their tribe believes in Sasquatch, so it would be weird if they didn’t.

Studies show that a person is more likely to believe in fringe or paranormal ideas if they’re a West Coast resident—with California largely being known as Bigfoot country. And according to the BFRO, over 430 sightings have been reported in the state since the 1940s.

“Bigfoot represents the Pacific Northwest in a huge way. It’s been taken up as emblematic of the area,” Thompson says. “You’ve got Sasquatch festivals. You’ve got Bigfoot statues. It’s almost like you should believe in Bigfoot at least a little bit if you live that area … like cultural pride or patriotism.”

The controversial 1967 Patterson-Gimlin film, which is still held up by believers as the only “legit” evidence of the creature despite most scientists’ declaring it a hoax, was actually shot in Northern California. Filmmakers Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin recorded what they swear was a real Bigfoot taking a stroll in Humboldt County alongside Bluff Creek, a tributary of the Klamath River. In the footage, Patty the Bigfoot (assumed to be female because she has enormous boobs) looks over her shoulder at the camera before striding away. Between the late 1950s and early 2000s, some 40 more reports of Bigfoot encounters were reported in the Humboldt County area, an apparent hotspot for the fuzzy giant.

Social networks and culture, more than any other influences, Thompson says, are what propel stories and give them staying power. For example, most people who believe in the Loch Ness Monster are from Scotland, and more than half of Icelanders believe in the Icelandic hidden elf people called Huldufólk (to the extent that building projects are often changed or waylaid so as not to disturb the rocks where they’re assumed to live).

“Humans tend to gather our beliefs socially. Not from reading the newspaper, not from reading scientific journals, not even from religious leaders. Most people, I would say, gather their belief systems from their social group,” Thompson says. “Probably the strongest component of most people’s belief is folk belief.”

A considerable amount of native tribes from the west coast of British Columbia to the Pacific Northwest—where Bigfoot tales originated—believe the creature exists. The word Sasquatch is actually assumed to be an Anglican-butchering of the Salish tribe’s word sasq’ets, meaning “hairy man” or “wild man.” In the late 1950s, when an influx of sightings occurred at Bluff Creek, a Humboldt Times reporter asked a local, elderly Hoopa Indian if he knew about Bigfoot. The man, seemingly incredulous, responded, “Good Lord, have the white men finally got around to that?”

According to Thompson, a widespread acceptance of the existence of Sasquatch is a rare example of Native Americans transferring a belief to Anglo-Americans.

“They’re two very radically different cultures. Even though we borrowed a lot of words and terminology from Native American culture, not much of the supernatural world of Native Americans has found its way into the Anglo-American world. And Bigfoot seems to be the exception,” Thompson says. “Bigfoot kind of reminds us of Native Americans, living out in the forest, trying to escape detection.”

And escaping modern society appeals to a lot of people.

Reason 3: Believing in Bigfoot keeps hope alive that people can be self-sustaining—and that humans haven’t totally destroyed the environment beyond repair.

Robert Pyle—a journalist who immersed himself in the lives of scientists, hunters, and others who were obsessed with the search for Bigfoot—said that to hunt for Sasquatch, you have to live like one. It requires spending countless days in the wilderness either alone or with a mere few, he explained, disconnected from modern technology and instead, connected to nature.

It’s both exciting and comforting for people to think that a somewhat intelligent, bipedal hominid could live undetected and free in the wilderness, says McNeill, and people like to entertain the idea of doing that themselves.

“These guys don’t want to find Bigfoot―they want to be Bigfoot!” Pyle wrote in his book Where Bigfoot Walks.

“It’s a better world if Bigfoot can be real… It says something positive about the fact that we maybe aren’t utterly destroying the planet we live on if a species can remain hidden and
undiscovered.”

Others have imagined Bigfoot as a highly evolved and wise species, unchained by trivial human emotions—a Mr. Spock of the wilderness.

“Could an animal be enough like us to escape our endless snooping, yet enough unlike us to escape our endless competitiveness?” author David Rains Wallace writes of Bigfoot in his book The Klamoth Knot: Explorations of Myth and Evolution. “What if another hominid species had emotionally outgrown Homo Sapiens, had not evolved the cruelty, greed, vanity and other ‘childishness’ that seems to arise with our neotenic nature? What if that animal had come to understand the world well enough that it didn’t need to construct a civilization, a cultural sieve through which to strain perception? Such a creature could understand forests in a way we could not.”

McNeill guesses that most Bigfoot sightings happen in remote wilderness areas because people are heartened to know that there’s more out there to discover, that humans haven’t planted their flag in every bump in the soil. Also, if Bigfoot were to exist, that might be an indication that the Earth hasn’t been devastated beyond repair by Homo sapiens.

“[For some believers], it’s a better world if Bigfoot can be real,” McNeill explains. “It says something positive about our ecosystems and our environment. It says something positive about our retention of wilderness spaces. It says something positive about the fact that we maybe aren’t utterly destroying the planet we live on if a species can remain hidden and undiscovered.”

Reason 4: Lack of proof doesn’t disprove that Bigfoot exists, so it’s hard to declare—with certainty—that Bigfoot is fake.

Though Bigfoot believers obviously don’t represent a huge section of the American population, and scientific proof of the creature’s existence has eluded them, they don’t seem discouraged.

What keeps legends alive is actually the lack of proof, McNeill says, because mysteries appeal to the natural curiosity inherent in human beings. The act of entertaining legends allows people to expand their minds and challenge traditional perceptions. If there were absolutely no chance of Bigfoot being real, then the legend would disappear, McNeill says. And if science came out in full support of Bigfoot’s existence, then that would also make the legend disappear.

“It’s a beautifully messy, confused batch of information [surrounding Bigfoot], and because of that, the legend sticks,” McNeill says. “What keeps legends going is the possibility, the ambiguity. Legends are ways that we discuss and articulate what may or may not be possible in reality.”

If you liked what you read here, check out our story about academics who say evidence of Sasquatch might deserve to be studied.

Also check out our two-part profile on UC Berkeley grad and anthropologist Grover Krantz, known to many as the original “Bigfoot scientist.” (You can find the first part of the profile here and the second part here.)

Krissy Eliot is senior associate editor at CALIFORNIA. You can find more examples of her work and her contact info at www.krissyeliot.com.

Filed under: Human Behavior
Share this article:
Google+ Reddit

Comments

As a psychiatrist and member of the skookum expedition I find this one of the best written articles to date
As a psychiatrist and member of the skookum expedition I find this one of the best written articles to date
I think people feel threatened by the fact that there is something that might be a threat to them but they instead don’t understand they denied that its real .
Sorry but have you ever seen a Panda in person or any other rare animal……. no but you have seen pictures or video. Well you hav seen the same for Sasquatch yet because you have not seen them YOU feel they do not exist. While you tackle a good perspective once again an article that spends way to much energy ridiculing those that believe and know and also the most important discovery of our lifetime that our government has acknowledged in 1975
I seene me a bigfoot one time! It was big and scary and it had big teeth and it tried to git me! It growled at me and it made me run! It was mean!
Brilliant response. You’re here why?
Leave the hairy man alone
The reason people believe in Bigfoot is simple. People keep having sightings. They are not stupid. They know what they seeing. Those who have sightings are not to be treated with derision, as this article does.
Terrible article, because it’s slanted. You disbelieve in Bigfoot, so you mock the people that do believe, and then give reasons why they believe, instead of just saying what YOU truly feel, which is that they must be crazy. You need to look up the Coelacanth, and educate yourself, before you write another dumb article.
As someone that has researched bigfoot for almost 50 years (not constantly in that time of course), I find the assumption that bigfoot must not exist to be idiotic and typical. Tribal belief is consistent with evidence that Native Americans have reported identical creatures for hundred of years and longer. There is a telling remark from a Native American that Ivan Sanderson once interviewed in the 1950s. Luckily I found the reference, the old man stated “Oh don’t tell me the White Man has finally gotten around to that?”
You guys have to read THE DAY I MET BIGFOOT.. its a new book about an encounter, I just read it its incredible in detail, Iv been doing research for years and never heard anything like this before, its on amazon.. AMAZING STORY!! Might just change these peoples views
Maybe the author can explain why these “believers” or others like them don’t go out looking for other “legendary” beings like elves, fairies, leprechauns, merfolk, unicorns, etc. if it’s all explained by some pop psychology desire to satisfy a sense of wonder or the unknown or whatever the author was talking about.
Generally good article, but your first response is not an answer to “Why do people believe in Bigfoot?” It’s an answer to “Why do people feel the need to convince others that Bigfoot exists?” There are plenty of us who know it exists because we’ve seen it, up close, but don’t really care whether you believe us or not. “Believing” in Bigfoot is like early accounts of Europeans encountering gorillas. It was reasonable for those who had seen gorillas to know they existed. It was also reasonabe for those who hadn’t seen gorillas to disbelieve. Don Frew
Man is enlightened. We know everything there is to know about the world. There is no mystery left to uncover. History has been written. The book is closed. Mic drop.
I am a Bigfoot skeptic for two reasons… First, because no one has ever found any skeletal remains. And second, because all of the alleged camera footage and photos show different variations of the mythic creature, which is implausible.
Everyday something new is being discovered. Whether its on land or in the sky or in the ocean, things are being discovered. So why would a bigfoot cause so much controversy? Just because most people havent seen one does not mean it doesnt exist.
What is the evidence for ‘Dark Matter’ or ‘Dark Energy’ exactly?
Albert Einstein once said in words to this effect…“If it really was we knew what we were doing, they wouldn’t call it science, would they?” Science is our greatest tool for reminding us that there is always more to discover, and for that we need open minds..
Well, the same could be said for bears, there are too many variations. Some are brown, some are black, some are white , some are black and white etc;
I am not looking to prove anything to anybody and don’t need third party verification. I have seen and experienced close encounters with these giants of the forest multiple times and enjoy sharing with interested folks. Skeptics will believe what they choose to believe no mater what is presented and that’s okay, but it is not a free pass card to be rude and abusive. I have attached a preview link to my new book published on Amazon listing my early experiences. Yes they do live and walk among us. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1719996768?ref_=pe_870760_150889320
thank you for running my letter in the Fall issue
I have read the article and the comments and I am not hear to say whether Bigfoot is real or not I can say though I have am an outdoorsman and I spend most of my time in the woods hunting and fishing it’s a great passion of myne that I enjoy, and for over forty years I have been around the globe hunting for small game big game and fishing and trapping. Never once have I came across anything that I could not explain or seen any evidence that would conclusively tell me that there was a 7 to 10 foot 600pound creature roaming the area. I have came across hundreds if not thousands of researchers looking for these things and they have all cane up empty handed st least the ones I have came in contact with. I spent my entire life in the woods, and have never seen any sign of these mythical creatures. I assume most of these people are not real outdoor people and do not understand breeding populations and food sources for these things so I won’t bother to go into that area. But for all these things to exist some scientific proof must be found or all it is is hopes and dreams.
Thank you for your articles on this subject - if you are really interested in the evidence for this creature and the scientific process and the scientific resistance to rigorously scrutinizing the evidence, then Dr. John Bindernagel’s “The Discovery of Sasquatch” is a must read
Since I first visited the Pacific Northwest in 2011 and saw the vastness of the dense forests there for myself, I have absolutely no trouble believing that a small population of shy, intelligent primates could live there largely undetected. There are huge areas of dense forests where humans seldom if ever tread.
and to follow up on your letter - Andy’s papers went to Humboldt State University Library Special Collections and there is a substantial segment on Bigfoot.
US government has 20 - 30 specimens.First one recovered in 1962.Want to keep public from knowing truth
Great comment. I grew up in the cascades. I’ve had two encounters that changed my thought’s on this subject. Look at Todd Standings video’s. (plural) The odd thing about these North American Primates is that you get a physical feeling of their presence. Uncanny. Poo on the writer here. Writing is easy, go in the field, learn. Be one with the environment, turn off the camera’s, just listen, look and learn. Standing got his evidence because he fooled them. They new he was there, “they” didn’t see him……
Great article. I grew up fascinated with the stories and possibilities of BF but as I grow older and the subject has been overrun with hoaxers, hacks, and simply put “idiots” I want to keep believing but refuse to rely on the current BF “researchers” and their biased pseudo science. I’ll keep my belief system simple and just say if the Native Americans (all tribes) made reference to such a creature then surely something had to bring that legend to life.
Irrational people are those that deny things based on social norms versus investigation and verification. Some call themselves scientists and have many accolades, are college grads with many accomplishments. However, they are in a cocoon of self sustaining belief based on what has already been done or accepted. Therefore they are quite unable to make a rational application on something outside of the mainstream or area of study. It is about keeping faith with your colleagues. If you want to get information on things that are not understood you must look with a critical well balanced investigation. One that is rational being supported by investigative fact.
Excellent exchanges. It is a major first step for most academics.
It’s poor journalism to offer opinion before looking deeper into a topic, which you so obviously didn’t do. Look at Jeff Meldrum’s work at Idaho State. Ask yourself why native tribes across the country have over 500 names for this creature. Go hang out with Thomas Sewid on the north end of Vancouver Island. Research the tree structures they leave, many of which are too large and heavy to be made by humans without tractors and equipment you couldn’t get to where they exist miles into the forests. Do some actual research. Then tell us what you think.
Wait a minute! Let me get this straight. You went to Berkeley, and simply regirgitate public opinion before doing any investigation or research of your own?????
Fifty plus years and all they have to show for it is a video and some plaster casts that were faked. All the evidence that was collected and sent for DNA analysis turned up to be from common animals. The “cripple foot” casts that Dr. Krantz placed so much validity on were most likely created by a known hoaxer who lived in the area at the time. Bigfoot does not exist!
Because big brother says “No!”
They have a hell of a lot more than 20-30 specimens. Throughout the lower 48 quite often does a rogue Male become too aggressive.
The indisputable fact is that Bigfoot does not fit the food chain. When you think of its size and the requirements it would need to satisfy its daily food intake, there would have to be evidence of the creature in terms of its effect on the environment. And if it’s so hard for us to find them, wouldn’t they have trouble finding one another for breeding purposes? And with today’s technology with regard to photographs and electronic detection, not to mention today’s DNA technology, would all of those things be rendered worthless if Bigfoot really is out there, a whole breeding population yet, and we still have not been able to find one shred of reliable proof of its existence, via skeletal remains or solid DNA evidence like what is used in crime-solving? No large hominid bipedal creature could possibly escape all of those methods we have, of modern detection. Well, I don’t want to throw cold waters on anyone’s beliefs, especially if they feel comfortable and content in believing what makes them feel good. But gee, let’s be realistic folks. I have an open mind but let’s not get into chasing ‘ghosts’ that exist only in our minds. Let’s just utilize a little common sense.
The indisputable fact is that Bigfoot does not fit the food chain. When you think of its size and the requirements it would need to satisfy its daily food intake, there would have to be evidence of the creature in terms of its effect on the environment. And if it’s so hard for us to find them, wouldn’t they have trouble finding one another for breeding purposes? And with today’s technology with regard to photographs and electronic detection, not to mention today’s DNA technology, would all of those things be rendered worthless if Bigfoot really is out there, a whole breeding population yet, and we still have not been able to find one shred of reliable proof of its existence, via skeletal remains or solid DNA evidence like what is used in crime-solving? No large hominid bipedal creature could possibly escape all of those methods we have, of modern detection. Well, I don’t want to throw cold waters on anyone’s beliefs, especially if they feel comfortable and content in believing what makes them feel good. But gee, let’s be realistic folks. I have an open mind but let’s not get into chasing ‘ghosts’ that exist only in our minds. Let’s just utilize a little common sense.
The outraged comments are so typical you could write them before reading the article, for *every* article, dealing with some ridiculous fairy tale modern humans insist on continuing to believe. And of course each “tribe” of “true believers” feels the *other* tribes are “crazy”, but not them! Aliens? Crazy! Demons? Please. Bigfoot? Hey now, THATS real. Ah yep. Sorry but dissertation length diabtribes filled with ad hominem insults about “small minds” or, worse still “big brother”, combined with the usual faux science aren’t compelling. And yeah… let’s compare the theory that *colonies* of gigantic intelligent bipeds *fill* the forests of North America with *dark matter* (which, by the way, remains just one theory currently being evaluated to explain inconsistencies in quantum physics) These things are *not* equal outside the mind of a lunatic.
When you are standing 25 feet from a creature with a direct line of sight, there is no missing what it is. I estimated 7’ silver/white hair all over the body, hands and arms to the knees. What I really thought was it had a hairy butt and I saw it, Sasquatch October 21 1966, on a camping trip in the middle of the night, getting up to go to the bathroom, with flashlight in hand, BEFORE the Patterson film and I did not know what I was looking at. News came late to our small town. It was March 1968 before our small newspaper printed the story. So what did I see? I did not know at the time, but I found out when the story reached our town. It was not a dream, not a bear. I was traumatized to the point where I know I was in shock for the next few days, based on what people who was on the trip remember as my behavior the rest of the trip. I am not a liar, nor mistaken, nor an attention seeker. I did not tell my story for 52 years, because my life would have been a living hell in a small town where your reputation is everything. So give folks a break!
We already know that the Patterson film is an admitted hoax, a total fake photo of a man in a hair suit. And if it’s a fake (as the perpetrator has already admitted) how many other photos and sightings are, in all probability, fake? The mind boggles at the gullibility of some people. The big problem with it is that some folks in certain areas, like the redwood forests, have made Bigfoot into a kind of a cottage industry, where they operate tourist sites and actually make a living from this. So, I guess we shouldn’t spoil these folks’ livelihoods.
NOPE! Don’t care about Patterson film, cottage industry and all the other stuff with respect to validation of is or is not. Until we stop using the planet as a resource instead of the source of life, we will have differences of opinion about what and who lives here. So….I do not wish to argue what I know, because in fact that person is calling me a liar. Your comment was interesting, not enlightening.
Excellent comment. Tok the words right out of my mouth. There’s constant attempts to explain this through cognitive dissonance on a mass scale, and we are expected to accept that and other folkloristic explanations that have no physical manifestation rather than the testimony of hundreds of not thousands of people over the last two hundred years or so who all report basically the same thing. Are we really supposed to believe that Native Americans and Europeans have for the past who-knows-how-many years consistently been hoodwinked by some group of large mean who like to emerge from the forest now and then in ape suits? Where’s the physical proof of that? I can accept that there is no physical proof so far for Bigfoot, but I can’t automatically accept that the whole thing is the result of some kind of mass cultural/psychological manifestation. That for me does not address the question of why the same basic thing is reported by so many over so long a period of time over such a large geographic area.
Excellent comment. Took the words right out of my mouth. There’s constant attempts to explain this through cognitive dissonance on a mass scale, and we are expected to accept that and other folkloristic explanations that have no physical manifestation rather than the testimony of hundreds of not thousands of people over the last two hundred years or so who all report basically the same thing. Are we really supposed to believe that Native Americans and Europeans have for the past who-knows-how-many years consistently been hoodwinked by some group of large men who like to emerge from the forest now and then in ape suits? Where’s the physical proof of that? I can accept that there is no physical proof so far for Bigfoot, but I can’t automatically accept that the whole thing is the result of some kind of mass cultural/psychological manifestation. That for me does not address the question of why the same basic thing is reported by so many over so long a period of time over such a large geographic area.
Can you point to where either of those two admitted it was faked? I’ve never seen that.
Thank you Harry. For some people who have never experienced, nor seen Sasquatch just read evidence going back what maybe a couple of 1000 years from indigenous groups and hundreds of years of modern man’s documentation. Those that have never seen the creature go based on that information and on faith. Belief that they creature does exist. Like most people in the world have a God that they have never seen nor touched but have felt and is aware that he is there. They believe but can’t prove God exists and I’m certain know one will ever prove he does. Yet we have Scientists all over the world that believe in a higher power. They believe in their God without physical proof but with faith alone. That is why you have people who believe in Sasquatch with the evidence that we have so far todate. They have faith or experience that this creature does exist and I pray it will be proven in my lifetime.
bigfoot is not real
I can tell by your 4 big words that you are an intelligent person with nothing to offer of significant value to the BigFoot subject matter. Thank you for that thoughtful reply.
Terribly written article that is hard to read as a result.
You have got to be kidding me. This must be wrote by someone from the city. I am a life long hunter from Texas. Born and raised in a very small town. In rural areas where game food and heavy cover is available there are animals roaming that would shock most people, except the local farmers and ranchers. That 16% of people number is off, i promise you that. In circles of big game hunters alone, id push that to well over 40%. Sit down with hunting guides and hunters from Canada, the Pacific Northwest, the Appalachian Mtns down the Ozarks and into Texas. There is enough sightings to do 10 tv shows more credible than Finding Bigfoot. The people who ACTUALLY spend lots of time in deep woods know the truth and will invite anyone out to see for yourself. Men and women who spend their whole lives around animals in the woods know the difference between a bear, a man, and any other native animal and damn sure dont get any of them confused. Once you have a run in that you DID NOT ask for, your life is different forever. If you wanna write credible things, get out of the concrete jungle and get in the deep woods and see for yourself
Troy, You said it best! Thank you! I am tired of folks asking ‘are you sure it was not a bear?’ it really ticks me off.
You must know it as fact that there aren’t those e witness I don’t have to tell you, but I will. who invest their time and energy looking for them, right? As an eye witness (I don’t have to) I can tell you that the sight of a Bigfoot is not only the scariest, it’s sheer size is amazing, but humbling as well. Our world still keeps secrets, Bigfoot is one of them.
Thank you Jose you are so true as an eye witness myself it is not a belief, it is what you know and it is the scariest most incredible thing that you may ever see in your life. If you ask me I don’t wanna see another in their native habitat.
Looking one in the eye while on vacation in Alberta changes one’s opinion rather quickly. They exist. Get over it.
So, Why Do People Believe In Bigfoot Anyway? Because we saw one face to face, which validates to us as fact. OR, because for those with no encounter, the evidence currently presented is enough for belief. What if I told you I saw a porcupine like animal, with spines, a bird beak and it lays egg and have 4 heads on their penis. Does it really exist because I saw it or do I know because of evidence?
Is true about Bigfoot I’m in Waynesboro Mississippi and I spotted him 3 years ago and another woman spotted him in Pleasant Grove not too far from me he is real trust me and I would not lie I seen it for my eyes
Belief is a strange word. Would it be a bit insulting if I called you a climate change believer? Imagine a small group of sentient giant apes with a spoken language lived a nomadic life moving from mountain to mountain. They’re smart enough to know humans are trouble, stories may have spread of the great monkey mountain massacre. And they’re apparently nocturnal! Not a far leap to assume that some incredibly rare animal that actually doesn’t want to be seen could evade capture. You also might want to look into the whole army rumor about their blood having chlorophyll in it. Chlorophyll in close proximity to the human retina produces night vision, not a far leap to assume this might enable a great ape to become nocturnal.
Its real. Its here. GET USED TO IT! The more humans encroach on their forest habitats the more sightings there will be.
…But Bigfoot isn’t real, so this comment makes absolutely no sense.
Even Abraham Lincoln makes reference to giant skeletons in one of his speeches. Teddy Roosevelt Has a story in a book he wrote before his presidency. I’m not sure of the percentage but the Amount of real outdoorsmen with s long history of spending time alone, deep n the forests of North America, that refuse to return to the place they love the most, after an encounter with a Sasquatch, is alarming! The same explanation keeps coming up when asked why they won’t go back. Because they just can’t Reconcile what they’ve seen with what they’ve been taught their whole lives. That they are so large, the struggle with the sudden realization that we, as humans, are very frail and weak, relatively speaking. So all of you non believing scientists have never questioned wether our government has ever lied to us or not about anything and there is no reason to question them now? Or how the proof of such a creature would affect the logging industry, the impact it would have in small communities all across America if there are 9’ tall, 750 lb giants roaming North America. Even if 99% of them are gentle and kind, would you still go into the forest if you were positive that 1% of them were very aggressive? I know it frightens me to think about it. The only thing to give me any piece of mind is that they are so large, they can do absolutely anything they want and can’t be stoped by a man without a LARGE caliber rifle. Some accounts of needing up to and exceeding 7-15 rounds striking in vital and vulnerable areas multiple times. If they want us they can get us for awhile anyway. we couldn’t stop their initial attack because scientists say they don’t exist. there isn’t any reason to even consider it. Random, individual attacks by a creature that large and strong, that doesn’t exist… You can’t defend against something that we’ve been taught doesn’t exist. So I choose to look at it as if they are the apex predator, and they are, and they choose to be left alone, and they do, and to leave us alone for the most part, they must b somewhat peaceful. If i never see real “scientific” proof of their Existence, then I’ve taught my children to respect the forest, respect the animals that live in it, and at the worst, we’ve been leaving, apples, marbles, tin cups and peanut butter in biodegradable packages for squirrels and coyotes. I’m ashamed of any scientist that adamantly denies the existence of a Sasquatch. The very nature of denying their existence is biased, thereby rendering any observation, theory or hypothesis that scientist has invalid according to scientific method. Yes you develop hypothesis on what you think may occur but deciding before hand that something is impossible will lead them to the exact method of conclusion they accuse Bigfoot believers of, which is only seeking out evidence to support their beliefs. I use this next argument as why I know being gay is a genetic determination as well as proof of Bigfoot. That is, that no one in their right mind would choose a life of that much ridicule, condemnation and scrutiny! Couple that with the receipt of hate mail, public humiliation and shame that may be felt as result of their position on either subject. I don’t remember the name of this type of proof but scholars have been using it for centuries to prove or disprove the validity and accuracy of ancient texts.
My uncle Al, by all standards was considered Bigfoot royalty. He was as honest, forthright, compassionate, loyal and trustworthy as a man I’ve ever known. He was a leader in his community, an example of character and honesty. He is the man that called Patterson and Gimlin and said, what you’re looking for is here. The rushed from Washington to willow creek California, met with Al Hodgson and I believe Betty (her last name slips my mind) and found out exactly where s sighting had just occurred. He wasn’t a believer until about the time of the film. He was skeptical and suspicious of people that worked in the area of bluff creek, of whom, one has been proven to fake some trackways found in the area in the 50’s and 60’s. He knew first hand the film was authentic and I believe him. Ive never heard of a local willow creek resident that thought of him as anything but honest and truthful. When you say perpetrators of the hoax, are you referring to the man whose name that’s been removed from the title of the film? No! Because it’s the Patterson Gimlin film. There are no other known people associated with it except for self proclaimed hoaxers begging for notoriety and fame. You are slandering the name of some very respected men, that were citizens, scientists, Bigfoot researchers and explorers. You’re mistaken sir, there hasn’t been anyone of credentials or credibility that could disprove the validity of the film. People sometimes ask why the government never really took a stand against Bigfoot or made an effort to use disinformation to discredit people that believe in Bigfoot. The answer is because they never had to. Arrogant, narrow minded scholars did all the work for them. That brings me to reference if my comment below. Why would any one ever choose that kind of public ridicule and shaming if they didn’t absolutely know that Sasquatch exists?
Now I have read this article by Krissy Eliot and several of the comments. I am more or less studying the sasquatch phenomenon from a country far from North America. The subject has been one of my interests for 40-50 years. I have read several of the BFRO reports, probably hundreds of them. I must admit they represent a quite consistent proof when viewed as a whole. I find it very difficult to believe that all these people in the BFRO reports are a bunch of liars. They are just to many. Even if all those reports didn’t convince me about the existence of the sasquatch, I would at least stay modest and not write in public that the sasquatch doesn’t exist. I often wonder because so many witnesses tell that the sasquatch is ellusive. I feel quite sure that it exists, because the sum of all the reports are convincing. But what does that ellusiveness mean? I hope that the sasquatch is just a member of the primate family, like we are, and not some kind of fallen angel - able to become invisible.
The National Geographic Animals “Bigfoot the Definitive Guide” (2017) is very informative and free on YouTube.
Would you mind repeating that, in English?
ROBERT REPLIED ON JUNE 30, 2018 - 7:32AM PERMALINK I think people feel threatened by the fact that there is something that might be a threat to them but they instead don’t understand they denied that its real .
I think people feel threatened by the fact that there is something that might be a threat to them but they instead don’t understand they denied that its real . [Would you mind repeating that in English?]
That’s because the available photos and video of Panda are undeniably real. There is not one single photo or piece of film of “Sasquatch” that is of the kind of quality that shows undeniable proof of a real creature. Anyone that thinks otherwise is letting their emotions interfere with their logic.
Prior to the Wallace hoax there were no sightings or footprints. Then,after the Wallace tracks went on the news,people started seeing them. Not only that..but people seem to forget that at one time,our country really existed only on the east coast. Then thousands,upon thousands, of settlers began traveling west. Traveling west and clearing land as they went. There were people crawling all over the countryside. And NO ONE was seeing giant bipedal apes or their footprints. There were also thousands of people traveling all over the countryside during the revolutionary and civil war. Again,no one was seeing any giant,bipedal apes. If they existed,people definitely would have been seeing them during the “Great Westward Expansion”. They do not exist. People saw the fake footprints on the news,prior to them being revealed as a hoax,and then everyone was finding their own tracks. Back then,there was much more boredom to contend with. But if you had a story about finding your own tracks,like on the news,now you’re the talk of the Bowling Club for the weekend. Etc. There are no giant,bi-pedal apes,living in North America. As a hunter and outdoorsmen, I probably have a bit more insight into the feasibility of such a notion than most.
Walter there have been sightings throughout history : Leif Ericson in 986 AD. 1792 Jose Mariano Mozino described them in his journal of Nootka Sound (Pacific Coast) . Sightings were reported in local newspapers from the early 1800s to the 1940s before the term Bigfoot was coined. Even Teddy Roosevelt described an encounter. The Army field guide for Washington State also describes them. Just because you haven’t seen one doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
Our government has NOT acknowledged anything with respect to Bigfoot. The son of the man who wore the costume…Said himself on television in the late 1980s that he and his father were pranksters, that his father wore a rented suit. Anybody in their right mind can tell by the rigidity of the suit that it is all fake. The insistence of some people that Bigfoot exists is indicative of how our society thrives on superstitions and things we can’t control. Most Bigfoot believers love the supernatural. They believe in a hoax in spite of the fact that it has openly been refuted by one of the pranksters himself. It was a costume, a poorly done imitation costume. NOTHING else.
Poorly done imitation of bear fur costume. Sorry, forgot to add “bear fur”.
Where do you get “Patterson-Gimlin Film” is fake. No where and no one has ever admitted to wearing a suit to fake such film. One of the most studied films ever. Special effects people say this - the technology to fake such an incident did not exist in 1967. As one who witnessed a UFO fly directly overhead on 9-18-1967 I did not need an expert to tell me what I saw was not real. The same goes for my aunt who lost a guard dog (head was left in chain) and a 360 pound calf (tracks clearly indicated a creature carried the calf off by stepping over a barb wire fence). This Oklahoma family story needs no expert to disprove or discredit our narrative, thankyou.
The son of the man who wore the suit said himself in an interview on television that it was a suit that he and his father rented … The fact you saw what you call a UFO doesn’t qualify you to be an expert in other areas. Sorry about your aunt’s dog. I’m sorry but you as well as many other people prefer to superstitious beliefs instead of reality. The hoax was publicly admitted. The man wore a suit. It isn’t a “special effect”. It is a suit. It is a hoax.
Correction: no “to” before superstitious beliefs.
Bigfoots are real, it is just a matter of more people realizing it. I’ve seen a Bigfoot a long time ago an it changed me.
Anthropology Professor Jeff Meldrum has dedicated his time at Idaho State studying Bigfoot. He is convinced something we don’t understand is in the wilderness and has cataloged information from rational individuals. With so many rational people, including law enforcement personnel, who have witnessed a large being with proportions unlike humans, they give credence to this animal. It’s a relief a psychiatrist doesn’t believe witnesses are crazy. I live in a rural area by a river. From my reading research, it is the habitat these creatures in the southern states prefer and have been witnessed by rational people. Never did I think such a creature would be lurking outside my house at night. The evidence of its presence is overwhelming. With the help of family and close friends, we have been able to rule out humans and other animals. My dog has been acting strangely since October of this year, especially at night. She is able to smell it and hear the low frequencies it makes. Ape-like chatter and the imitation of owls and other strange ‘whoop’ vocalizations are witnessed by my husband and me. We have made recordings of them and family are also perplexed. This animal was bold enough to jump our chain length fence and sneak onto our porch. My husband had accidentally left a garbage bag with half-eaten pizza slices on the back porch on a bench. The bag was meticulously opened without scattering any trash. Plus it left large, deep footprints, only something weighing at least four hundred pounds could make. My husband, who weighs in the two-twenties, was unable to replicate. The arch on the animal was tremendous and it’s stride had to be at least five feet. My dog awakened from a deep sleep and began barking strangely at the window. It must have frightened her as she ran back into my room and wanted under the covers. I was too petrified to get up and look. The fear I feel at night knowing something is living in the woods behind my house is terrifying. If the government and science would admit these animals are real, then we could study their behavior and protect them and our citizens. Who knows how dangerous these creatures can be? We all deserve answers. Reporting our suspicions could lead to unwarranted media attention and questions about my sanity. I feel a terror at night that is beyond comprehension. No, thank you for not labeling us crazy. What is crazy is the reaction of those who have never seen or been stalked by these creatures .
I think Bigfoot is real but I want more solid reasons why he is defiantly fake!
Hi Izzac or however you spell it!
Hi
Do you believe in the giant hairy ape like creature named the Sasquatch?This giant, wild, and untamed creator is about 7’ 10’’ and weighs over 1,000 pounds! Also its foot is about 14’’ long! Definitely not a creature you want to run into on accident of course unless you are looking for one. When they are moving around the woods they are mostly silent but loud growls and roars. You are about to read to theories about bigfoot one discussing that it is real and one discussing that is is not. These are the reasons that bigfoot can be thought to be real. First of all bigfoot is believed to be more than just one creature but a whole spices. The reason that this is believable is because there is a bigfoot sightings in just about every U.S. state! Patterson Gimlin was the very first person to take a picture of bigfoot. He also recorded a video of bigfoot and when scientists studied the studied the video and from the movement they could see the joints moving like humans there for it was not a fake! Also there were hairs found with a piece of skin attached to it and when the DNA was analysed it matched no animal species or human. These are the reasons that bigfoot is thought to be a hox.In 1958 Ray L. Wallace made a set of giant cut out feet and pressed them into the ground a bunch of times making giant footprints. After he was caught people stopped believing in bigfoot as much and thought it was just a big joke.
JOHN SONNTAG/OPERATION ICEBRIDGE/NASA Ice circles in the Arctic are most likely seal breathing holes. ICE CIRCLES? . The bizarre holes NASA found in the Arctic sea ice are actually a sign of a more worrying trend By Katherine Ellen FoleyApril 24, 2018 https://qz.com/1259720/the-bizarre-holes-nasa-found-in-the-arctic-sea-ic... On April 14, a group of NASA scientists were flying over the Beaufort Sea, north of Alaska and the Canadian border, when they saw something puzzling: Three holes in the sea ice with what look like rings around them and some wavy ice to their left. “I don’t recall seeing this sort of thing elsewhere,” John Sonntag, a meteorologist with NASA who took the above photo, said in a statement. At first glance, it may look like the frigid equivalent of crop circles, but scientists are pretty sure that in this case there’s a simple explanation. “My first guess is that these are seal breathing holes,” says Walt Meier, an atmospheric scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center who focuses on sea ice. Harp and ring seals have been known to make these kinds of holes in thinner Arctic sea ice, and then use those holes repeatedly to come up for air. For that theory to hold, there needs to be a good explanation for why the sea ice in this particular spot is thin enough for the seals to break through. Meier says these holes could be the result of warmer water coming in from the nearby Mackenzie delta, the shallow outpouring of the Mackenzie river from the nearby Canadian coast. According to Meier, warmer water from the river flows into the ocean, and then, because warm water is less dense than cold water, it naturally floats to the surface in plumes. That, in turn, thins out the ice at the surface, and could have drawn seals to the spot since the sea mammals more likely to pick spots to come up for air where the ice is already thin. There are formations near the holes that look like waves, which the scientists say could be the result of water sloshing over the edges—a sign that warm water was rising up through the holes. On their own, these holes don’t tell us all that much about the Arctic sea environment. They’re more spectacle than anything else, Meier says. But they do point to a trend in sea ice in general. The photo above shows ice with evidence of “finger rafting”—which is when the wind pushes together two ice sheets, causing them to overlap like clasped hands. The likeliest explanation, says Meier, is higher Arctic temperatures. In the past—as recently as the 1980s, sea ice in the region would be thick enough to withstand the southern winds that begin to blow north at the start of the winter. But in recent years, thanks to warmer Arctic waters, the ice tends to be less stable and more easily blown away by the wind. Then, over the winter, the exposed water freezes‚ but only into thin sheets. Those thin sheets are more likely to get blown together, creating the “finger rafting” phenomenon, and to be susceptible to melting due to plumes of warm river water from the shores. “In recent years, how often that happens and the scale of [this pattern] is much more than it used to be,” Meier says. It’s impossible to directly connect this photo—just one data point—to climate change or warming Arctic waters. However, the photo does suggest that future research in the region may find a trend of diminishing ice over these waters. Mysterious Arctic Ice Holes Baffle Scientists Were these strange features caused by melting ice, seals, or something else? BY STEPHEN LEAHY https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/04/arctic-ice-hole-photos-s... PUBLISHED APRIL 23, 2018 WHILE FLYING OVER the eastern Beaufort Sea as part of NASA’s Operation IceBridge, mission scientist John Sonntag made photos of something he had never seen before on April 14: odd crater-like holes in the ice. While experts agree the sea ice in the photograph is thin and likely young, since it is a grey color (indicating there is little snow), what made the holes is a mystery. “I have never seen anything like that before,” said IceBridge project scientist Nathan Kurtz. (See what the world would look like if all the ice melted.) Now in its tenth year in the Arctic, Operation IceBridge is an airborne mission flown annually over both polar regions using various instruments to measure the changes to the ice sheets, ice shelves, and sea ice. And with global warming there are lots of changes in the polar regions. This past winter, the Arctic had 448,000 square miles (1.16 million square kilometers) less sea ice than it normally has in winter. In fact, the last four winters have had less sea ice than the 1981 to 2010 average winter maximum.Duration 2:14 These odd holes might be connected to the rapidly warming Arctic region, which has experienced unusually warm conditions for much of the winter. “The sea ice is more mobile now, and has more open areas that can re-freeze,” said Walt Meier, a scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Meier thinks it unlikely this is the result of a fragmented meteor strike, since the holes are so close together. At first, one likely explanation was thought to be seals, since they are known to gnaw through the ice for breathing holes and sometimes haul themselves onto the ice to rest. “If those holes are less than 2 meters in size, then the encircling features may be due to waves of water washing out over the ice when the seals surface,” Meier said. Another possibility is warm-water upwelling, because this part of the Beaufort is quite shallow. But Dartmouth College sea ice geophysicist Don Perovich doesn’t think so, because the effects would be broader, he says. On Monday, he went with the seal hypothesis: “My guess is a seal pushed ice out of the way to make a hole and thus also made the ice around the hole thicker.” But after returning from another long day flying over the Arctic ice, Sonntag said on Tuesday that the mysterious holes are several meters in size, perhaps even tens of meters. That would seem to rule out the “seal hypothesis.” Thus, given the size, they were more likely caused by bowhead whales punching up through the thin ice to breathe, says Sue Moore, senior scientist at the NOAA/Fisheries Office of Science and Technology. “It is a fascinating picture,” Perovich concluded. NC, NAT GEO IMAGE COLLECTION Aurora Alert! Watch Now for Northern Lights A storm of particles from the sun just slammed into Earth—here’s how to see the resulting sky show and capture the best aurora photos. Ice Holes If you flew over the Arctic Circle you would see crater-like holes in the ice. They are in groups of three in a formation of an arrow. There is a mystery about what made them and what they are used for. Some people think that they might be made by meteorites. When they hit the ice they make crater like holes and water gets splashed out. That’s a good explanation for why there’s rings around them but probably not the actual reason. Most scientists say that seals made the holes. The other theory is that whales made the holes. Ice holes are made by seals for breathing holes. Scientists say that the holes are made by seals. The seals gnaw on the ice to break it. When they break through the ice, they either use the hole for breathing or to rest on the ice. Hot water coming from the Mackenzie Delta thins out the ice, The hot water floats to the top because it is less dense than cold water making the ice thin which is easier for seals to make their breathing holes.When seals come up on the ice, water comes up with them. Then the water freezes making the rings around the holes, which explains why the rings look like waves. Whales. NASA scientist from Operation Icebridge have been measuring changes in the polar regions of ice. NASA found the ice where the holes are was thin and gray which means the ice is young because it has not collected snow. Sonntag flew over ice holes lower than anyone else did and saw that some of the ice holes were tens of meters wide. Everyone thought that the holes were smaller than they actually were. Seals make small holes for breathing and to climb out of. Whales make bigger holes in the ice than seals because they are bigger creatures and they need bigger places to get air. That makes it easy to rule out seals. conclusion Seals might have made the holes because they have to have holes to breathe with. Whales might have made the holes because both the holes and the whales are bigger. I think that whales did it because they can crush and ram into the ice to break it. This would make a bigger hole and a bigger splash which explains why there are wavy rings around the holes. Ice Circles If you flew over the Arctic Circle and looked down you could see three crater-like holes with waving rings around them. The shape of the three rings looks like an arrowhead pointing somewhere. As the hole gets deeper it gets more narrow. What made them? Did meteorites come down and break through the ice and the water splashed out and made the unpredictable ring around them? Scientists say they are most likely breathing holes made by seals, but could they be made by another animal? Seals tend to gnow on ice and to make breathing holes and also they like to climb out of the holes so they can rest Seals might have made the holes because they have to have holes to breathe with. Whales might have made the holes because both the holes and the whales are bigger. I think that whales did it because they can crush and ram into the ice to break it. This would make a bigger hole and a bigger splash which explains why there are rings around the holes.
I find it personally difficult to not believe in the existence of some sort of large undiscovered primate. The arguments concerning the lack of skeletal remains never consider that we also have a lack of skeletal remains for chimpanzees and gorillas who were considered myths before their discovery. From what I remember, we only have a few chimp teeth and a few gorilla bones to serve as “proof” of their existence and most of those remains were found after their discovery. With both primates, we also had reports from natives who attested to the existence of them and that was all that we knew for about a century and a half. I don’t think that many of the reasons stated make very much sense, especially the 2nd and 3rd points; really? People falling into believing in a large, rare, hairy man simply because their neighbor says they saw the thing? If my neighbor told me they saw a herd of flying bison-like animals last night, I would nod and continue sipping my coffee. The fact is: we are talking about the existence of a primate species, perhaps the closest currently alive related to modern humans. If it took us a century and a half to find gorillas while still having a near insignificant amount of evidence related to remains, I do not see why we should expect to already have conclusive evidence of a large, bipedal, reclusive species that exists in our forests.
Wheres the poop ?
Noel, your logic, while intriguing, is completely fallible. I’ve scene pandas and many other “rare” species with credible evidence of their existence (zoos, film, my own footage, etc…). Bigfoot/Sasquatch has literally ZERO evidence, none, zilch, zip, nada. Not a hair, no DNA and not a single, solid picture or piece of video that couldn’t have been hoaxed, and certainly no evidence of a body, dead or alive. No bones. No poop. Nothing. And while the idea that this bipedal hairy giant exists and has this extraordinary and uncanny ability to thwart our very efforts to prove it does indeed exist (somehow avoiding our unlimited technology while subsisting on twigs, berries and…deer?), well my friend…it just ain’t so. But I will continue watching the unintentional comedy these silly shows provide. I may even go make some tracks for the neighbors in the snow.
Patterson Gimlin is not one person. Do some research, please.
Omar, please explain how it took “us” a century and a half (150 years) to find these gorillas and chimpanzees? Are you saying the in 1850, we should have had the technology, the need and even the desire to find new species that were previously undetected? How absurd is that…people were literally just trying to survive. And that has literally held true until maybe just a half century ago and even then they didn’t have the technology we have today. When Jane Goodall went to Tanzania in the 60’s to study primates in the wild, I’m pretty certain she already knew that great apes existed. And yes, because of pictures, bodies, bones, live animals and of course, poop. And that was without any off-road AVs, trail cams, drones, night vision…should I go on? Bigfoot is a fun fantasy for children to wonder about. Science says otherwise for adults. No proof. Not one shred of evidence. Look it up.
You people that speak of those having Bigfoot sightings as believing in fairytales are complete fools for blindly going along with what you have been taught in public schools and colleges that are bent on hiding so many truths. We have been lied to about Christianity as a beginning all the way up to Bigfoot. If you actually do have some brain power, set the sarcastic hubris aside and look at the picture from a point other than what you were taught by your duped elders. Step outside the box. And yes the panda was a myth until the Roosevelt’s finally killed two. Lloyd Pye lays it out effectively. Give him a look. Or don’t and continue living in lies. Haha fools.
Sasquatch are a people, not an ape species. They utilize more of their brain than do humans. which is most likely why we can’t find or photograph them. They have and utilize what we humans call the sixth sense…with uncanny results, given their enhanced brain. Turns out size does matter..I used to want to have their mystery solved definitively before my own death.. but having now seen one, I’m completely content…not withstanding my uneasiness every time I go to the bush. Thanks
No my friend! There is zero evidence of Bigfoot! Not a skeleton, not even a bone. Thats whey people dont believe! Most sightings are fake or just from people who are scared. I can take 9 out of 10 people in the woods for a few days and convince them of anything. People are gullible!
How were they captured? What are they?
I know that there aren’t any bones and not many valid hair samples, but look at it this way, how can you not believe when literally on almost every continent, some tribes of said continent have several stories of a tall ape-like creature that stand upright, and why would it be so hard to believe that there’s just another undiscovered or thought to be extinct but not ape out there, and if you could believe just for a second that gigantapithecus could still be alive, then in that casewe do have bones
Your not looking hard enough only then can you have an INFORMED opinion! Until then be quiet!
What ever! u are SOOO out for attention
If you believe in bigfoot, you are a Liberal or a Democrat. (not a compliment)
I didn’t believe in them a year ago. Thought people that did are silly. I had 2 come into my camp in a national forest. They’re very real. Maybe you should get out of your armchair and go out on a hike. Or do some actual research.You’ll discover there are a lot more sightings all across the country than can be dismissed. The 2 in my camp were as close as 3 feet to me so I’m not mistaken about what they were.
Always cracks me up to hear people making categorical denials as if they are omniscient! Say it louder!!
Bigfoot/Sasquatch type creatures are reported in many countries across the globe. The number of such eyewitness accounts is extensive. Those who view such witness statements through the lens of scientific criteria, dismiss all such evidence. I think this poses a big question about the validity of the scientific inquiry into the nature of reality itself. For if these creatures are real, then not only is the scientific method shown to be lacking - but if they are not real, then science needs to explain how so many people can be so mistaken. It is unscientific to merely dismiss the witness statements of so many, lightly.
I have seen a lot of rare animals.
People that look into this subject seriously will see the truth. Most know that “science” is run by entities that pay Universities and therefore control what gets proven. On top of that our society when concerning science is based in material reductionist. These 2 facts alone are enough to fully understand why the Sasquatch Genome Project was railroaded and all the 300plus dna samples would not be included in peer reviewed journals. If you seriously want to understand the truth, go to Scott Carpenters YouTube page. He lays that entire ordeal out. Once you hear all the schools and scientists involved and what was done to Dr. Ketchum you will have an excellent picture of the facts. They are real. They do exist. They have been here longer than us. They are more advanced than us. If you are the type of person that still believes in “science” as an honest endeavor and you sport a Nasa bumper sticker, you may be too deeply brainwashed to ever see any truth about this planet. Good luck.
I could care less if BF is real or not….the real entertainment is all of u fools arguing! Talk about a useless endeavor. It’s oh so hilarious and pathetic all at the same time. I felt down today…came across this and feel so much better knowing people like all of you r out there. I’m doing more than alright. Comment sections on the internet. Best place to come to see true idiocy and to feel better about oneself. Thanks.
Big foot has bean around for sencherys .even in native american history. If pepol wold see the caves and writings on whales. Thay are older then you or I. I being part native blackfoot I beleve .just because you have not seen one dus not mean that donot exist. Thay do I wold love to see one befor my life is over .god bless the bigfoot keep howling .
“Neither does God!”
true
Cognitive dissonance: What a scientist claims is true about everyone else except for himself and his colleagues. One great definition of genius is realiziing that it is not everyone else that is wrong, but yourself, and that your social group is your primary source of influence and belief (e.g. earth is at the center of the universe and man is the center of all life—not mythical beings like bigfoot/aliens). I dont believe nor disbelieve bigfoot, and am familiar with legendary creatues around the worold, but the cognititve dissoance of finding them would be too much for some. Reminds me of this quote “Eugene Dubois, who in 1895 locked the first Homo erectus fossils in a strongbox in the Teyler Museum of Haarlem for the next 28 years because of denigration and unappreciation that came from the popular theory of the time that a large brain had evolved first and then upright status came later”

Add new comment