BigFoot, Yeti, Sasquatch?

6th

So what do people think? New animals are found all the time, sure most are insects etc but surely its possible?

Black Swan

Should the Locke Ness Monster be added to this group you proposed? (although they appear to be similar and Nessy is different)

6th

Blue_Lagoon wrote:

Should the Locke Ness Monster be added to this group you proposed?

No thats a different kettle of fish. The one's included are similar and interchangable depending on the region they are spotted.

superfly

you forgot the Abominable Snowman and i think a Wendigo is similar

6th

Yeti/Abominable Snowman and Wendigo are all very northern examples. Adominable Snowman and wendigo usually associate with far northern canada and yeti is more of a himilayas kinda guy. But yes they are other suitable candidates. There's even more names which cover similar creatures from future back and differnet cultures.

So if these sightings are so far reaching and date back so far, surely its a case of no smoke without fire?

Kernel

I think it's very possible that many cryptids, including Bigfoot and Yeti are real, particularly with the amount of witness reports and sightings. However the only thing that we have as proof apart from witness reports are the infamous Patterson film at Bluff Creek (which many think is a hoax, but if it is, the costume is amazing), and some footprints.

Here's a few good sites for anyone interested in cryptozoology:

http://www.cryptozoology.com/
http://www.cryptomundo.com/
http://www.americanmonsters.com/home.php

And a short summary of the Patterson film:

http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/bf_pgfilm.html

6th

Kernel wrote:

I think it's very possible that many cryptids, including Bigfoot and Yeti are real, particularly with the amount of witness reports and sightings. However the only thing that we have as proof apart from witness reports are the infamous Patterson film at Bluff Creek (which many think is a hoax, but if it is, the costume is amazing), and some footprints......

Here is a stroy from BBC News today:

Conservationists say they have found conclusive proof of the existence of a rare giraffe-like creature in the wild in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Experts from the conservation group WWF say they came across 17 okapi tracks in the Virunga National Park.

Despite its zebra-like markings, the okapi is related to the giraffe.

The region in the eastern DRC has been battered by years of conflict. The last time the shy forest-dwelling creature was spotted in the park was in 1959.

"We rely completely on tracks, on footprints, on dung, on signs of browsing to identify where the animals have been," WWF's Peter Stephenson said.

"But we did find 17 different tracks of okapis which suggest there are a few animals there - we can't put precise numbers on it. For us, the exciting thing is that they're there at all," Mr Stephenson said.

Here's an animal not seen in the wild for 45 years and then suddenly its spotted. It was always a rare creature but if this at over 6" height and 8" long can keep out of sight surely its a good sign for sasquatch?

I think the hoaxers have done alot of damage as its a case of people thinkings its all rubbish because of a few, the same has happened with Nessie. But surely just because something can be recreated it doesnt mean that the whole thing can be written off?

6th

another report on the resent "Hobbit" find:

Cryptozoologists and scientists alike have also suggested that the discovery of the creature may be a boost to the search for Bigfoot. Locals in the area have myths about short, furry people living in the jungle, much like modern America has myths about very tall, furry people.

"You pick a country and there's either large Bigfoot and Yetis, or small leprechauns and Yowies, depending on which part of the world you're in," says Brown. "On Flores there is a mythical human-like animal called Ebu Gogo, known for small body size, inarticulate speech and an unusual bipedal gait."

Even the editor of the prestigious journal Nature, Henry Gee agrees. "The discovery that Homo floresiensis survived until so very recently, in geological terms, makes it more likely that stories of other mythical, human-like creatures such as Yetis are founded on grains of truth," he says. "Now, cryptozoology, the study of such fabulous creatures, can come in from the cold."

Full Story: http://www.sploid.com/news/2006/05/a_hobbit_or_a_h.php

comer_97

if you read the book Congo Journey by Redmond O'Hanlon (he is looking for a nessy like creature in a lake on DR Congo) he mentions the giraffe like creatures as well as forest elephants. The locals numbering system is 1 and 2, 2 being any number bigger than one so there may be more than suggested.

The terrain in Congo is nearly impassable by humans as it is vast marsh land.

Kernel

comer_97 wrote:

if you read the book Congo Journey by Redmond O'Hanlon (he is looking for a nessy like creature in a lake on DR Congo) he mentions the giraffe like creatures as well as forest elephants. The locals numbering system is 1 and 2, 2 being any number bigger than one so there may be more than suggested.

The terrain in Congo is nearly impassable by humans as it is vast marsh land.

If the creature is the Mokele Mbembe (http://www.qsl.net/w5www/mokele.html) then AFAIR there were a couple of expeditions in recent times to track it down, but nothing was found. As you say, the congo jungle is notoriously dense, so it's possible that there are many species still to be discovered in there.

Riamfada

Homo Florensis was killed off by or ancestors when we still lived in caves, as a matter of fact there were many offshoots of the genetic stream to which we are the only survivor. For a mythical creature to survive it would surely have to be part of a colony , reproducing for thousands of years yet never spotted. Its all a bit fishy to me. Anway as I was saying Homo Florensis dosnt prove the existance of current variations sof the Human Gene but merly shows that we didn't go Fish ->Monkey ->Man but not that anything is alove today

Oryx

There are thousands of species out there still to be discovered, even tho most are insects, orchids and the like. Of course there is a possiblity of finding larger mammals in dense unexplored jungle. But the chance that their are large furry bipedal mammals roaming the woodlands of america strikes me as far-fetched. Not because its impossible, but for them to exist they would have to be in breeding colonys, and that would seem highly improbable.

Edit: soz Grimes thats what I get for speedreading a thread.

CrazySka

Think this is the first time ive posted here actually.
I personally dont see why not, after all wasnt there a previously unkown species of monkey found recently?
Perhaps a form of neanderthol or earlier form of human, isolated from the evolutionary process? however as people know what they are looking for (whereas most new species seem to be stumbled upon) i would have thought that there would be some kind of clear proof by now, along with the fact that the breeding stock would have to fairly high for its continued existence.
imo possible but unlikely

Vulpiner

I find it hard to believe a creature the size of a Big Foot could be out there, even in the wilderness. Primates are by and large social animals, so having groups of these creatures foraging for food and not being discovered by reputable scientists, sounds a bit hard to believe.

Zillah

john_dub wrote:

i would have thought that there would be some kind of clear proof by now, along with the fact that the breeding stock would have to fairly high for its continued existence.
imo possible but unlikely

Not neccessarily. There was a cave found in Israel recently that had been completely sealed off from the rest of the world. There were dozens of of never before seen species including insects and an entirely new type of creature like a primitive scorpion. They all survived with extremely small breeding stock.

Granted a primate species is quite different but considering how incredibly isolated some forested areas can be its not impossible.

However, I must say I'm extremely skeptical about the existence of an American "Bigfoot". No part of the mainland US is remote enough to maintain a whole primate species without leaving a corpse at some stage. And a corpse is the only thing that will convince all the skeptics.

I find it hard to believe a creature the size of a Big Foot could be out there, even in the wilderness. Primates are by and large social animals, so having groups of these creatures foraging for food and not being discovered by reputable scientists, sounds a bit hard to believe.

However, in south east Asia there are lots of jungle areas that have been absolutely free of human presence for thousands of years. Only recently they found a new species of primate, Orang Pendek I think it was called. It was pretty unusal and the stories about it followed the exact same pattern as the Yeti stories. Natives accept it existence, tell stories about, but Westerners are sceptical and there are no example on record, but with enough research eventually it existence was confirmed.


And Kernel, we can always give a nod to the ever present Ultra Terrestrial theory


EDIT: I'm not sure if it was Orang Pendek actually, I think that one might still be on the maybe pile, but there was definately some sort of new primate discovered.

EDIT 2: Sigh, so many edits. The one definately found was the "Highland mangabeys" or Lophocebus kipunji in Tanzania. The Orang Pendek is still unconfirmed but I recal a documentary where they found unidentifiable hair sample.

6th

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20060612/1072906.asp

Zillah

Seems relevant: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060614/ap_on_sc/species_survivor

6th

Yeah i'd read that but presumed people would winge with comments like"but thats small, bigfoot is ...er....BIG".

i do take the point of breeding stock though.

Zillah

6th wrote:

Yeah i'd read that but presumed people would winge with comments like"but thats small, bigfoot is ...er....BIG".

i do take the point of breeding stock though.

Well obviously the existence of a species of rats thought extinct isn't proof for bigfoot, but it does show that a mamalian species thought extinct for 11 million years can elude science.

Pink Bunny

Video of footprints recently found http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=fce4b6ba-674f-4bf2-9ee5-98a0b2d771d9&t=m137&f=06/64&p=hotvideo_viralvideos&GT1=8211

*edit* Sorry, you have to watch the advertisement first but the video comes on right afterwards.

Wibbs

For me I think some survivor of bipedalism is possible. After all this would be the first time in history that we're the only species of hominid around. The most likley places would be in asia or the vast forests/areas of the former USSR. The consistancy of sightings and reports of behaviour, often from uneducated people strongly suggest primate behaviour patterns. The wealth of footprint evidence, which when graphed shows the right pattern for a population(with few outside the box, likely fakes). Even someone like Jane Goodall expresses interest in the consistancy of reports.

I actually know someone who claims to have seen "bigfoot" in Canada while fishing. He's a highly qualified medical type who lectures in same, so hardly a man prone to exitable conjecture. He is a keen fishing type to boot, who knows the woods well, so mistaking it for a bear(which he used to hunt) is unlikely. He claims to have seen it quite clearly, in good light from less than 30 feet away, crouching by the river.:eek:

According to him it was about his height(6ft 2) and was quite slim but powerful, with a face like a gorilla. It also walked quietly away on two legs like any human(he reckoned it looked very different to the famous film BTW). At the time he was over 30 miles from the nearest small town, so a hoax is unlikely IMHO. Also he was armed with a powerful pistol(in case of bear), so a hoaxer would have been playing a very dangerous game. He left the area very quickly as it really rattled him. Needless to say he doesn't advertise the fact he saw it to many people. Personally I believe he saw something that wasn't a bear, so you can call me a skeptical believer on his report alone.

6th

Miller followed the path of famous explorers before him. He also met monks who claimed to have the scalp of the mysterious creature and the skeleton of its hand........Now, the photos of the evidence have gone to Disneyland, where they will be displayed as part of a new exhibit.

Full Story

mysterious

what a load of trumpet, there is hoax like these exist today to keep all the gullable members of humanity entertained.:rolleyes:

6th

Ok tahst your opinion, actually its a common opinion but you jump on board with posts like that cos it saves you coming up with anything original.

The facts are that there are many areas of the world (such as part of the congo) that are unexplorable, also new animals or animals believed to be extinct for decades turn up all the time (i think its 7 so far this year, not including insects).

Now I am not say that the guy above is right or that the Yeti/Sasquatch/BigFoot exist, what I was doing by starting this thread is showing that most people think it is not outside the realm of possibility.

Jumping in and slating an idea without adding anything intelligent only shows you up as anything but.

mysterious

6th wrote:

Ok tahst your opinion, actually its a common opinion but you jump on board with posts like that cos it saves you coming up with anything original.

The facts are that there are many areas of the world (such as part of the congo) that are unexplorable, also new animals or animals believed to be extinct for decades turn up all the time (i think its 7 so far this year, not including insects).

Now I am not say that the guy above is right or that the Yeti/Sasquatch/BigFoot exist, what I was doing by starting this thread is showing that most people think it is not outside the realm of possibility.

Jumping in and slating an idea without adding anything intelligent only shows you up as anything but.

So your saying it's not original, explain what you mean that I can't come up with something original. Your reading into it too much!!!! Just so you know I'm open minded about the Paranormal if I were't, I would'n't be on here now would I. Maybe it's a pity I wasn't original as you. But let's not take it as personal shall we.

Man I have looked up so many documentaries on this and the famous ones of big foot taken in America during the early 80s of bigfoot 100 yards away from the side(cant remember where it was taken) give me your ideas sir, cus all the ones above I mentioned are fake. there are countless more. Another thing people make money out of this to, I think it's helpful for me to say it. I'm not slating anyone, as it''s my opinion. Loch ness is another, people make bazillons out of it. People get suck into this stupid nonsense all the time. When the fact is there I will be excited to see if bigfoot exist, now let's not get carried away on other species that were thought to be extinct this is spreading wings a bit too far. Stick to the topic.

oh please tell me the facts, you know this is where the gullable part comes in, people lie all the time you know and people believe it,
You mentioned Congo, elaborate on your point. I don't think Big foot would hide in there since th e1600s when Europeans discovered the place.afterall it's shrinking at a rapid rate. surely Big foot would be out by now? I just wanted to stop there about Congo in case you pop Bgifoot into this since you started it.

I know I'm blunt about but sometimes it's no harm in getting a bit straight about it, don't you think.:p

As for intellegence you saying I'm what?

6th

I'm not saying there are no hoaxs, there are ... plenty but what i'm taking about is the idea of the existance. I put up reports like the one above to show the spread and interest people have in the subject.

Yes people do lie all the time, gullable doesnt come into it. You seem to accept that spirits may exist but not a living creature?

Ok you have looked at what the Tv has shown you but my point was that your original post held nothing of your own ideas and just a blurt of the first thing that pops into your head when you see the word Yeti. I made reference to the Conga as an dense area which is quiet large and unexplored - a possible ground for previously undiscovered speciaes or creatures previously believed to be extinct.

If you want to get straight to the poiunt as you say then basing your beliefs on conclusions from watching Tv is very close minded especially for someone who as I said believes in the possibility that a ghost walked up his stairs.

For your benefit I will point out my position again: I believe in the possibility that some sort of "Yeti" exists or has existed in the last 200 years.

mysterious

6th wrote:

I'm not saying there are no hoaxs,

good. 99% yeti is not proven, so where does this leave us, as for new speicies I'm all for it, as we discover them in real life not photoshoped ones.

6th wrote:

gullable doesnt come into it.

oh yes it does why do you think UFO and yodo yada is very popular in America, I need to respond much more to this. But steering from this I was on a forum about UFOs(again open minded) it attracted over 100,000 viewsin short space of time if I can remeber, me among a good few others were skepitical) as so many young people were sucked into such nonsense, I mean this guy was like a medium/member of CIA/ being part of the Millitary etc. This guy said he spoke to Aliens etc. It turned out with the help from me, because like here i didn't to react to all the nonsense i.e not giving ideas to something IMO is not fully true. It turned out to be a total hoax.After two years! This could be among many reasons you might think I was a bit harsh. As for Yeti, not much hope there.

6th wrote:

You seem to accept that spirits may exist but not a living creature?

so this is why you think I'm not original. I don't except entirely that they exist. I have experiences that i cannot explain but. sadly I cannot prove it. A living creature, my dog is one, does this count:D

6th wrote:

your original post held nothing of your own ideas and just a blurt of the first thing that pops into your head when you see the word Yeti.

give me a break. My ideas ? My opinon is enough, i'm not going to try win people with my ideas over yeti, sorry.

6th wrote:

If you want to get straight to the poiunt
For your benefit I will point out my position again: I believe in the possibility that some sort of "Yeti" exists or has existed in the last 200 years.

Not relevant, you said there is facts are there,(which I'm going on to your conclusion} that big foot may exist in such dense exotic places otherwise you would not have brought it up. THis is what I mean about getting to the point.

6th

Oh I've been involved in too many of these this to take this further in its current format.

Going by the poll at the top of this thread ... what would your answer be?

My question of your original was nothing to do with your belief in spirits. My point about your paranormal experiences was that if you are open to the existances of spirits ina creature matching discription of Yeti sightings so unbelieveable?

6th wrote:

For your benefit I will point out my position again: I believe in the possibility that some sort of "Yeti" exists or has existed in the last 200 years.

mysterious

6th wrote:

Oh I've been involved in too many of these this to take this further in its current format.

Going by the poll at the top of this thread ... what would your answer be?

My question of your original was nothing to do with your belief in spirits. My point about your paranormal experiences was that if you are open to the existances of spirits ina creature matching discription of Yeti sightings so unbelieveable?

I've already done it long before I was drawn to your attention. I don't think they exist, what would your answer be?

I think I've already answered your question I quoted and responded to your question and gave a reason too if you care to read above, only now you have put more effort into the same question second time round;)

6th wrote:

so unbelievable

6th

Pointless arguing between us is of no benefit to this thread.

You have stated you dont believe its possible for a creature like Yeti to exist and I ahve stated that i do believe its possible.

No reason why too people cant have different opinions is there? I just dont hold my opinion in such high regard that i would call people gullable for believing or not believing in something.

I think we are done here.... i know i am.

Firewalkwithme

The Yeti definitely exist, no doubt about it.

In fact here's a video of him attacking Hulk Hogan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGT_ogHoMMo

6th

Thats longer than any two men should embrace! (joke)

mysterious

6th wrote:

Pointless arguing between us is of no benefit to this thread.

You have stated you dont believe its possible for a creature like Yeti to exist and I ahve stated that i do believe its possible.

No reason why too people cant have different opinions is there? I just dont hold my opinion in such high regard that i would call people gullable for believing or not believing in something.

I think we are done here.... i know i am.

Lol glad your done cus it was you that was creating a big deal because I had a harsh opinion!:D
Sorry if I was to much to the point. I'm done ages ago:D Sure there is now video evidence of yeti fighting Hulk Hogan. God I'm impressed, feck Congo!

imprezza

I read a great article about h. florensis in a newspaper last year, I think they called it Flores woman it was the first time I heard about it being discovered.

Kernel

mysterious wrote:

Lol glad your done cus it was you that was creating a big deal because I had a harsh opinion!:D

A harsh, but pointless and minsinformed opinion which hasn't added anything to the thread.

mysterious

imprezza wrote:

I read a great article about h. florensis in a newspaper last year, I think they called it Flores woman it was the first time I heard about it being discovered.

That was a hominoid that was 3 foot tall in the middle of Indoneisa, not Yeti I'm afraid, nor does it look anthing rometly like it.

What about chubaka? in star wars sure dosent he exist, at lease both big foot and Chubacka were in films:p

mysterious

Kernel wrote:

A harsh, but pointless and minsinformed opinion which hasn't added anything to the thread.

Will you lay it off. It was forgotten about earlier today it's "pointless" (your words lol) starting it again, stop looking for attention. I have an opinion like anyone else, I have apologised for being harsh. It was more relevant here to type it here I guess, than let's say the regions thread. If Hulk hogan get a mention, it's all idle, over to you dude. bubb off.

so let's really get back to the topic. Has anyone any pictures/evidence to post up? I mean I have heard nothing significant over the last few years, only the hoax ones that most people have seen.

6th

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.

6th

mysterious wrote:

That was a hominoid that was 3 foot tall in the middle of Indoneisa, not Yeti I'm afraid, nor does it look anthing rometly like it.

What about chubaka? in star wars sure dosent he exist, at lease both big foot and Chubacka were in films:p

Wow I actually though you might have something intelligent to say about it when you got around to it but it appears not.

Again we are talking about the possible existance, when someone mentions Flores woman you say thats different but that doesnt make the idea of "Yeti" any more impossible.

Really you're just way off the mark here.

You say certain footage in hoaxed (and it may well be) but you are basing this on a hour long special on Discovery Channel or something similar. People here are looking at a bigger picture which you seem to be unable to see ... until E4 does a special most likely.

Kernel

mysterious wrote:

so let's really get back to the topic. Has anyone any pictures/evidence to post up? I mean I have heard nothing significant over the last few years, only the hoax ones that most people have seen.

What are your thoughts on the Patterson film? Why do you think it was a hoax?

mysterious

Kernel wrote:

What are your thoughts on the Patterson film? Why do you think it was a hoax?

don't know but what are your thoughts about it. And why did I say it was a hoax? what the patterson film. Em to different analogys there. but enlighten me, and I'll get back to you on it.

mysterious

6th wrote:

Wow I actually though you might have something intelligent to say about it when you got around to it but it appears not.

Again we are talking about the possible existance, when someone mentions Flores woman you say thats different but that doesnt make the idea of "Yeti" any more impossible.

Really you're just way off the mark here.

You say certain footage in hoaxed (and it may well be) but you are basing this on a hour long special on Discovery Channel or something similar. People here are looking at a bigger picture which you seem to be unable to see ... until E4 does a special most likely.

about that chubacka thing it was a joke, you know jokes something you might know much about. I'm not intellegent?, explain this to me, if not I guess ur arrogant. Arrogance is'nt intellegent if you ask me.


About Flores women. Wtf are you trying to argue, It's petty if I were to respond, Flores women was found indonesia, part of the human evolution. A species, which is documented, proven, bones were discovered and is still being examined. It's almost identical to modern man. Yeti is what? and of course Big foot? no comparison 6thsense, Sure mr. smartarse could tickle my brain cells and tell everyone about your analogy

On a side not Yeti is "more impossible" fill me in on this argument please:D I haven't argued this one yet, maybe your quick on it.

This is the level I've to deal with. psst. I thought you said you were done?:rolleyes:

6th

mysterious wrote:

don't know but what are your thoughts about it. And why did I say it was a hoax? what the patterson film. Em to different analogys there. but enlighten me, and I'll get back to you on it.

ok looks like none of us can drag an intelligent conversation from you, go off and google the patterson footage and come back and pretend you knew about it all along

Its not that you "need" to educate yourself on the topic but if you had a little more to say your posts wouldnt look so foolish. You seem to have very strong feelings based on very little knowledge.

Wibbs

mysterious wrote:

Man I have looked up so many documentaries on this and the famous ones of big foot taken in America during the early 80s of bigfoot 100 yards away from the side(cant remember where it was taken) give me your ideas sir, cus all the ones above I mentioned are fake.

Well there are fakes, no doubt. The joke about the discovery channel "outing" of the patterson film is that their fake was so obvious by comparison. If it was that easy to fake you would think they could have done a better job.

Another thing people make money out of this to, I think it's helpful for me to say it. I'm not slating anyone, as it''s my opinion. Loch ness is another, people make bazillons out of it.

Loch ness is a bad example. It's in a highly populated area that's been scanned from top to bottom with not enough food to support a large animal, no mind a breeding population. Ask any trout fisherman.

People get suck into this stupid nonsense all the time.

True enough. Blanket dismissal is equally dopey though.

You mentioned Congo, elaborate on your point. I don't think Big foot would hide in there since th e1600s when Europeans discovered the place.afterall it's shrinking at a rapid rate. surely Big foot would be out by now? I just wanted to stop there about Congo in case you pop Bgifoot into this since you started it.

Do more reading. The congo basin has given up plenty of very rare animals, some very recently. The Lion killer subspecies of chimp(billi ape) the most recent(after years of dismissal by many). The pygmy elephant another. the largest elephant population in Africa is in the Congo. That wasn't known ten years ago. Did you know that even now? The congo as an example hardly bolsters your argument re undiscovered animals. Not by a long shot.

That was a hominoid that was 3 foot tall in the middle of Indoneisa, not Yeti I'm afraid, nor does it look anthing rometly like it.

It's an extinct hominid that may have existed into historical times, if the local tribal lore is anything to go by(and a british army witness in WW2). In any event what does a "yeti" look like to you? In tibetan legends one type of yeti is described as small.

This crowd apparently have high quality photos as evidence. One to watch anyway. I've been following this one for a while. It would surprise me less given the area. http://johorhominid.org/home/
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/Sunday/National/20060702085704/Article/index_html
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/johorhominx/

This is another interesting angle. http://www.bfro.net/news/bodycast/images.asp
The site itself can jump to way too many conclusions for me, but the university backed research contained therein is at least interesting.

About Flores women. Wtf are you trying to argue, It's petty if I were to respond, Flores women was found indonesia, part of the human evolution. A species, which is documented, proven, bones were discovered and is still being examined.

Actually it may be a branch of human evolution(dwarf homo erectus).

It's almost identical to modern man.

No it's not. Far from it. Read more on the subject. It's morphology is quite different.

Yeti is what? and of course Big foot? no comparison 6thsense, Sure mr. smartarse could tickle my brain cells and tell everyone about your analogy

I take it that english is not your first language so misunderstandings abound. The fact is that you need to read up on some of the more credible writings on this subject and the basics of hominid/pongoid evolution to make anything like decent points for or against the existence of extant relict members of that group.

Kernel

mysterious wrote:

don't know but what are your thoughts about it. And why did I say it was a hoax? what the patterson film. Em to different analogys there. but enlighten me, and I'll get back to you on it.

If you don't know what the Patterson film is, then I suggest you do some research. Before commenting that yeti/bigfoot is all a hoax for gullible people, you should at least be familiar with the most famous footage.