For those who didnt guess this is about sasqautch, almas and the yeti ect. The mystery here is the fact that there is over 2500 sightings of sasquatch alone in north america and canada. Many footprints that defy classification and have consistent antomical details even when found hundreds of miles apart. I dont find over a hundred years of hoaxing and or misidentification plausable in my humble opinion.
Whats everyone elses take in it?
I'll be honest, I'd like to believe, but I think that there's a reason that sightings have all been from a distance, and photos/footage have all been blurry and inconclusive.
If they do exist, they must be the worlds rarest animals, to exist in well explored places and yet nothing conclusive shown for them.
Well thats my point in a way. Its not a matter of belief for me. I find the evidence points in the direction of an unknown primate and come tomorrow when Im not as tired Ill back up my claim!
Sorry for the delay. I cant talk about just one aspect of the evidence I find convincing for sasquatch because It is the combination of trace evidence (footprints) and sightings I find compelling. On the subject of sightings they can be either misidentification, the witness lying or someone playing a trick on somebody.
I dont see this as misidentification or a hoax. The other possiblity is lying but I dont see how 2500 pre internet can be lying to the same description. Anyway Ill start with one of my favouraites reported in 1955 the witness signed a sworn affidavit:
This the picture drawn of the creature which was evidently a female.
If you lived here in England where I do, you'd see things that look exactly like this, but with clothes on, walking down main street on any morning.
Isn't it curious how there are so many sightings, yet no one has photographed them clearly or unambiguously or found other evidence.
Have you any explanation as to why that is?
Yes indeed. Some animals display behaviour termed as cryptic, that is they prefer to remain elusive. Particularly primates. There are several shots that people say was a sasquatch but until they bring in a dead body there is no definative proof. My point is the theory of an unknown primate makes more sense than a conspiracy group lasting hundreds of years. Im skeptical of that assesment.
In recent years, the amount of camera phones and such means that there absolutely should be definitive picture or video evidence by now. I'm betting these unexplained sightings have dried up over the past 5 years
We dont have more pics of elusive animals like the wolverine (the animal) despite this. Whys that? No sightings havent went away.
Is a picture of a Wolverine.
Are you trying to say that this elusive race of primates is in existance somewhere in N. America and that no bodies have been located?
It is indeed we also have pictures of the mountain gorilla but a hundred years ago you would have been telling me that no way could a man sized primate exist in an area the size of munster. Ill do better on that not only will I say there is a ape in n america/ canada and there are no bones but that we know gorillas chimps ect lived in africa for millions of years and untill recently there was no fossil evidence. Now we have four chimp teeth. Ill add that the wolverine is seldom seen in the wild. Some biologists will work in areas with them for decades without seeing one.
Just before people ask me more questions I would like to ask whats everyones opinion of centuries of sightings and footprints which indicate primate anatomy and behavior? Im not asking you to disprove bigfoot but to give me your theory that explains the. sightings foot prints eg bears or secret society of hoaxers are a few explanations thrown out there
As you were wrong about there being no pictures of the wolverine, do you allow for the possibility that you may also be wrong about your speculative view about this creature?
I think an additional mystery is that there have been 2500 claimed sightings, and not one person out of that 2500 happened to have a camera, or a camera phone. Not even one of them. Now that is a real mystery.
Look on Youtube, there's a bunch. But they're all at a huge distance and looks like a person in the distance. There's also a bunch of very obviously fake/joke vids, some of which are funny!
Youtube is not evidence, and we know there is lots of "evidence" on youtube for UFO's, and for Homoeopathy, for the supposed paranormal powers of psychics and all sorts of things which are bogus.
The fact that steadyeddy has thanked your post, and from his posts here, suggests he wants to believe this, in the absence of any real evidence.
My position is different in that I want proper evidence. The world is full of cranks who believe in homoeopathy, UFO's and all sorts of paranormal claims made by others, and we all have to distinguish between a belief, and a fact.
I know anadin works because there is a lot of proper evidence to demonstrate that it works. I know homeoepathy doesn't work because there is no proper evidence to show it is effective. I don't have to "believe" anadin works because I know it works. those who have to believe in something are, in essence, saying there is no evidence, as if there was proper evidence belief would not be necessary. You don't need belief when you have evidence, you only need belief when there is no evidence.