Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, there have been observations of elephant behavior, and a theory has been derived from such observations? Shocking, just shocking.
Now tell me, where are the scientific observations of bigfoot in which to derive a theory like they bury their dead?
It wasn't my theory, it was from an article I read the other day. There were a lot of articles circulating on the web when that one scientist said she had isolated DNA from one. I believe that study was debunked, but I haven't really followed up because it's not that big of a deal to me.
I don't know if they (bigfoot) exist or not. Certainly not in my suburban neighborhood.
Given they may bury their dead - do you also think they poop in latrines? If nothing else, dung deposits should have been discovered in Bigfoot territory by now. Examination of their scat should easily differentiate it from other animals'.
I hope they don't exist. If they do, they likely live shadowy, desperate lives in very inhospitable areas. Wouldn't wish that on any highly evolved creature.
This is another one of those arguments like the alien, ghosts, loch ness monster, lizard men, moth men, wild big cats, and every other non-touchable beings which may or may not happen to live here with us. The proof-men are always going to want proof - boring.
I would say that the bigfoot phenomena is at the more provable end of the scale as we have plaster casts of tracks and other bits and pieces of physical evidence which can be 'proof' if only they are accepted by science. (Why we have to have them 'accepted' by science to give the whole subject validity, I dont know) I guess it is just so that we know who are the scientists and if they say it is valid, then it is VALID. Everyone else who is not a scientist should take their word for it - they are scientists you know and we should listen to them.
The TV program about Finding Bigfoot is a waste of time and money. They play to the camera and dont stay out there and really want to track any of the sightings. We all know that as soon as the spot one, the whole area will be swarming with people trying to "see Bigfoot" and no-one wants to impose that on something which must be really rather shy and retiring (in general)
I dont believe it is unexplained as I think there are plenty of people who already know these things exist BUT probably once you start to study them, you dont want orthodox scientists and hunters to run out and start shooting them and cutting them up to see why we have to discovered them previously.
I think we need to have all these strange things properly investigated but as I said above, people will want to kill them and cut them up. We humans have just not grown up yet and we are all still little boys wanting to tread on the ants or pull the wings off flies.
Given they may bury their dead - do you also think they poop in latrines? If nothing else, dung deposits should have been discovered in Bigfoot territory by now. Examination of their scat should easily differentiate it from other animals'.
I hope they don't exist. If they do, they likely live shadowy, desperate lives in very inhospitable areas. Wouldn't wish that on any highly evolved creature.
I have seen some(what i think are). Do you really want the description?
Anything is possible, just like dragons possibly roaming the earth thousands of years ago, mermaids, and other possible animals that have never been properly videotapped or photographed. Anything is possible, I don't like saying it's not real because I have never been all over the earth, I have not seen everything, or read everything, I am ignorant to a lot of things so I cannot say that something does or does not exist.
I have noticed that most detractors have never had any experience with or met anyone that has had a Bigfoot experience/sighting. I know of a elderly man in Oklahoma and his take on nonbelievers is"They just haven't seen one yet".
Sure better than playing golf!
I would say that the bigfoot phenomena is at the more provable end of the scale as we have plaster casts of tracks and other bits and pieces of physical evidence which can be 'proof' if only they are accepted by science. (Why we have to have them 'accepted' by science to give the whole subject validity, I dont know) I guess it is just so that we know who are the scientists and if they say it is valid, then it is VALID. Everyone else who is not a scientist should take their word for it - they are scientists you know and we should listen to them.
It's too bad that my dad is dead and that I have no clue where the Bigfoot print castings he did in Equador are, probably still there. But he was a scientist. He would say Bigfoot is real. Maybe not as the perception we have, but real none the less.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Possible
