Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

It wasnt a person, it wasnt a bear, it was what it was.

2»

Comments

  • #32
    childsplay
    Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭childsplay


    First, can I begin by saying that I also find the idea of an unidentified species of primate to be quite a plausible possibility. Yes, many of the areas that sasquai have been seen in are areas that people have explored. However, if a creature doesn't what to come into contact with humans, they have ways of avoiding us. We are constantly surrounded by creatures that we are not even aware of. Isn't it a fact that most of the time we are never more than ten foot away from a rat? When was the last time you actually saw one.

    For me to actually believe that they exist, I would accept DNA evidence. And it seems that there are already groups engaging in DNA analysis of sasquai samples. This link leads to article discussing the results of one such analysis result. I don't think this particular result proves anything, but I point it out as one method to prove this creatures existence one way or the other. http://www.sciencealivenews.com/Sasquatch%20DNA%20Update%20-%20June%202011.pdf


  • #33
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    childsplay wrote: »
    First, can I begin by saying that I also find the idea of an unidentified species of primate to be quite a plausible possibility. Yes, many of the areas that sasquai have been seen in are areas that people have explored. However, if a creature doesn't what to come into contact with humans, they have ways of avoiding us. We are constantly surrounded by creatures that we are not even aware of. Isn't it a fact that most of the time we are never more than ten foot away from a rat? When was the last time you actually saw one.

    For me to actually believe that they exist, I would accept DNA evidence. And it seems that there are already groups engaging in DNA analysis of sasquai samples. This link leads to article discussing the results of one such analysis result. I don't think this particular result proves anything, but I point it out as one method to prove this creatures existence one way or the other. http://www.sciencealivenews.com/Sasquatch%20DNA%20Update%20-%20June%202011.pdf

    Hey thanks for the post I dont believe it either at the moment until I see a body or dna evidence. I find the hypothesis that there is an unknown ape involved the most credible. I dont believe the hoax hypothesis.


  • #34
    childsplay
    Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭childsplay


    It would involve a massive and an orchestrated effort to engage in such a hoax and to keep it alive over such a long period of time. Man is always discovering new species of creatures so a new species of primate really isn't such a huge leap of faith really. Such is my humble opinion anyway :)


Advertisement