Bigfoot Classification Poll, What do you think Bigfoot is? Options

[mike2k1]

If they were simply some kind of ape, would they be able to have a "spoken language"?
I have heard them talking, within 200 feet of my house. No doubt about it being them, & no doubt that they were talking.

You heard "them" talking? No doubt about it being "them"? What did they have to say?

I'll see your and raise you a

[watch1]

The strange thing about the mimic of the voices is this..what is said a lot of the time..seems to fit the occasion. It seems they have some understanding of what the words mean.

Like I posted on creekfreaks discussion. When your out there and you have a reflector dish set up and game ears and night vision and heat finders and you hear something that says "get your junk and leave" and then you hear "him and (wifes name) hunting us"..now this shows me that they have a little understanding of what is going on and understand the meaning of "some" of these words..even if they are spoken in a mimic voice.

One night one of the fellow researchers had a bull dog that thinks its a child in the car. I kept watching the dog and he knew something was out there in the woods. When I listened to the recordings made that night..I hear "there's big-ole dog in-that car". The reason I put the dashes in the words..because it was said in a way that the words ran together. If you notice the other things said..5 words .. this was said as if it was 5 words also.

Call me crazy if you like..first time I heard it..I thought I was. I have heard this too many times. There are a few times that what we heard did not make any sense to us. Those times that they do fit what is going on..is spooky.

Mike (watch1)

[moregon]

The point is unless you see a bigfoot actually speaking the words it's proof of nothing. You may have stumbled across someone who's hiding in the woods for one reason or another. Or if you want to stretch your imagination you may have picked up EVP (Electronic Voice Phenomena) recording, often associated with paranormal activity. If the conversation has nothing to do with what's going on, the possibility exists you may be recording some sort of audio broadcasts, ie radio, tv, shortwave.

[CountryCousin]

You heard "them" talking? No doubt about it being "them"? What did they have to say?

I have no idea what they were saying, because I don't speak or understand "bigfoot".
I woke to a loud scream & raised the window & heard a deep, low-pitched mumbling not more than 200 feet from the house. If it was people, they must have had cajones that wouldn't fit in a bushel basket, to be standing there, calmly talking, just after hearing that blood-curdling scream right beside them.
I didn't just hear random mumbling, & immediately determine that it was bigfoot. I have been hearing roars, screams, howls, dog mimicing, cattle terrorizing, etc. for more than a year, & have seen a track, limb twists where they cross the fence, & a pair of huge red eyes. Several other people in this area have heard & seen relevant things, too.
It's no wonder that more isn't known about these creatures, when somebody that has many legitimate encounters, gets nothing but ridicule, when trying to share some of their experiences.

This post has been edited by CountryCousin: Dec 19 2006, 11:37 AM

[watch1]

The thing about all this that is so puzzling is ..when I look at the number of times we have been out doing research and the number of different locations we have been to and the differences in the time of night, I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt..we are not hearing someone playing jokes on us. Some nights we changed our mind to go to another place while on the way. No one could plan to be out there ahead of us.

Seeing one of these creatures in the dark is the hard part. They hide behind the trees and bushes even at night. Even with nightvision..you are still looking for something thats hiding from you.

Hearing..now hear is something they can't hide from. They make noise..it might be small at times but they still make it. They can be loud also. I jumped up one night and snatched my game ears off, grabbed my light and started looking for what sounded like a bull running across the field in my direction. The problem is..there are no bulls, cows, horses in the field. It is just a hay field and has been that way for several years. Something BIG ran up close to us and stopped just out in the thick brush and set there watching us. My game finder (heat detector) showed something warm there. I could not see it with the nightvision. No doubt something was there..I just could not see it.

Mike (watch1)

[Smiles]

The thing about all this that is so puzzling is ..when I look at the number of times we have been out doing research and the number of different locations we have been to and the differences in the time of night, I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt..we are not hearing someone playing jokes on us. Some nights we changed our mind to go to another place while on the way. No one could plan to be out there ahead of us.

Seeing one of these creatures in the dark is the hard part. They hide behind the trees and bushes even at night. Even with nightvision..you are still looking for something thats hiding from you.

Hearing..now hear is something they can't hide from. They make noise..it might be small at times but they still make it. They can be loud also. I jumped up one night and snatched my game ears off, grabbed my light and started looking for what sounded like a bull running across the field in my direction. The problem is..there are no bulls, cows, horses in the field. It is just a hay field and has been that way for several years. Something BIG ran up close to us and stopped just out in the thick brush and set there watching us. My game finder (heat detector) showed something warm there. I could not see it with the nightvision. No doubt something was there..I just could not see it.

Mike (watch1)

That reminds me of my encounter I had in the early morning of fall 2005. Loud, and distinct footsteps. Its on the 16th page of the MN sasquatch activity thread. The seem to stay JUST out of sight of us when they are spying on us.

I personally think, based on my information gathered so far, and with my personal religious beliefs, think bfs are a highly adapted primate. There is no doubt that the Patterson/Gimlin film is a hoax, it just hasn't been debunked out of all the attempts. If we look at that female, we can see from the phenotype that it resembles a gorilla...The head and all. But that is my assumption, cant be sure until someone is dumb enough to kill one, or someone is keen enough to capture it. I don't think it's a hominid, for reasons I won't preach about now. And because I think it has more ape features than human features. Plus the behavior is more ape/wild animal than human. But then, they can possibly use tools, they throw rocks and build huts out of big logs, and they obviously communicate in distinct ways. It's mind boggling.

[Crow Logic]

Sasquatch I suspect is a reasonably intelligent bipedal Great Ape. I strongly doubt that they have language but I wouldn't dissmiss some sort of tool use. It is worth remembering that creatures such a Lucy were fully bipedal and walked almost the same as we do yet they were little smarter than Chimps. So Sasquatch can walk much as we do and maybe dig with sticks and rocks but I don't think he can make a tool. I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in Native American stories about "talking" with Sasquatch since the Native Americans were "talking" with all the animals in pre whiteman times. But communication is another thing altogether and I've little doubt that the Native Americans and Sasquatch understood each other.

As for believing Sasquatch exists I'm 50.3% certain he does and 49.7% he dosen't.

[wvbig]

There are so many arguments as to the whether the evidence of bigfoot is good enough to make a classification. I thought we should open it up and let the Forum Decide what bigfoot is. The results are final and once the poll is complete, we will all know exactly what bigfoot is.

I screwed up the poll

But here are the options

1. Homonid
2. Not of this earth
3. Interdimensional Being
4. Other (Of this earth)
5. Non Existent
6. Cannot Answer

I've always thought it was some type of ape & a descendant of Giganto. But recently, since there seem to be some type of Bigfoot in many different parts of the world & because of it's human characteristics, I'm starting to wonder if it's some primative form of human dating all the way back to the days of the super continent Pangea.

[ufoabduction]

I've always thought it was some type of ape & a descendant of Giganto. But recently, since there seem to be some type of Bigfoot in many different parts of the world & because of it's human characteristics, I'm starting to wonder if it's some primative form of human dating all the way back to the days of the super continent Pangea.

Actually, I think it is some kind of advanced human with abilities beyond ours. It is the next level in "evolution" waiting to take over. That is why no one can ever kill or capture one, unless it wants to present itself (BFRO 9552). It does not need technology to function at a higher level than we can reach even with technology. Just kidding. Heh, heh. --ufo

[bipto]

Just kidding.

Sure you are.

[yowiie]

Sasquatch I suspect is a reasonably intelligent bipedal Great Ape. I strongly doubt that they have language but I wouldn't dissmiss some sort of tool use. It is worth remembering that creatures such a Lucy were fully bipedal and walked almost the same as we do yet they were little smarter than Chimps. So Sasquatch can walk much as we do and maybe dig with sticks and rocks but I don't think he can make a tool. I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in Native American stories about "talking" with Sasquatch since the Native Americans were "talking" with all the animals in pre whiteman times. But communication is another thing altogether and I've little doubt that the Native Americans and Sasquatch understood each other.

As for believing Sasquatch exists I'm 50.3% certain he does and 49.7% he dosen't.

Just getting of the track a bit here, but does anyone know of one particular BF vocalisation where when it is played back slowly it sounds like it is saying "Your not welcome"
The reason I ask is that I had Don Munroe from USA BF researcher visited me in Oz last year and I was telling him about the call blasting success I had and he listened to the recording.
There was another recording on the disc that I copied (which I never broadcast) that he wanted to listen to, and it was this particular vocalisation that some guys in US believe is saying "your not welcome"
Anyone heard of this.

[ufoabduction]

Sure you are.

You bet, BIP. I was kidding about the "next step in evolution" part.--ufo

[wvbig]

Just getting of the track a bit here, but does anyone know of one particular BF vocalisation where when it is played back slowly it sounds like it is saying "Your not welcome"
The reason I ask is that I had Don Munroe from USA BF researcher visited me in Oz last year and I was telling him about the call blasting success I had and he listened to the recording.
There was another recording on the disc that I copied (which I never broadcast) that he wanted to listen to, and it was this particular vocalisation that some guys in US believe is saying "your not welcome"
Anyone heard of this.

Yes I've heard of it. It was how Robert Morgan interpreted a vocalization captured by a gentleman whose name I can't recall at the moment. But he will be Robert Morgan's guest next Thursday night at 6:00pm eastern on the AARF Radio Show

[WmRoy]

I've always thought it was some type of ape & a descendant of Giganto. But recently, since there seem to be some type of Bigfoot in many different parts of the world & because of it's human characteristics, I'm starting to wonder if it's some primative form of human dating all the way back to the days of the super continent Pangea.

There certainly were no 'primates' of any kind & certainly no 'primative form of humans' wandering around Pangea. There were at the end some small shrew like mammals, but no primates........ sorry!

http://www.fossils-facts-and-finds.com/triassic_period.html
http://www.fossils-facts-and-finds.com/mesozoic_era.html

The Mesozoic Era: Both plants and animals reached giant proportions during the mesozoic. During the 180 million years of the Era, reptiles lived on land, in seas, and in the air. Small mammals, although not significant during the time, did exist during this era.

The separate continents of the Paleozoic, after having drifted apart through the fragmentation of the supercontinent of Rodinia, around 650 million years ago (Ediacaran period) eventually drifted together again during the Paleozoic, colliding to form the supercontinent of Pangea during the Devonian and Carboniferous periods, some 350 million years ago. More specifically Pangea was assembled by the collisions of three main blocks, Gondwana, Euramerica, and Siberia, during Permo-Carboniferous time, around 350 to 260 million years ago. Various smaller blocks, especially in southeastern Asia, were late arrivals. In the initial collision between Gondwana and the northern continents, South America abutted central Euramerica. Modern Spain and central France are former pieces of Venezuela. Pangea was essentially complete by the Kungurian Age (late early Permian).

[wvbig]

There certainly were no 'primates' of any kind & certainly no 'primative form of humans' wandering around Pangea. There were at the end some small shrew like mammals, but no primates........ sorry!

http://www.fossils-facts-and-finds.com/triassic_period.html
http://www.fossils-facts-and-finds.com/mesozoic_era.html

Just because no fossil evidence has been found, it doesn't definitively prove they weren't there. Look how long it took for fossil evidence of other great apes to be found.

This post has been edited by wvbig: Jun 23 2007, 08:34 AM

[tony46inga]

I begain by saying that the following is just my opinion, not meant as a declairation of fact, just my
own opinion. What I think bigfoot is:
I believe that the creature that we(humans) collectively refer to as bigfoot are two distinct and different
"animals". I will label them Bigfoot Type A and Bigfoot Type B.
Type A: Primate. Related to the GIGANTOPITHECUS or is a surviving species of GIGANTOPITHECUS.
It is not human in the same way that a gorilla is not human. It is related to humans by being within
the same family order as the "great apes". I believe that there are at least 4 different species living
within the USA,and most of the Americas. Each species has its own specific characteristics in relation
to its habitat. The BF of the Pacific Northwest has its own specific characteristics that differ from the
BF that inhabits the Southeast. This may answer the question as to why the different describtions of
BF in each geographical areas of reported sightings (generally speaking). These different characteristics
may be linked to diet(which may be directed by location),general seperation by distance may alter
some basic characteristics(facual structure, with/without a snout, rounded ears(primate ears)or pointed
ears, body hair length,behavior toward humans- BF in a more remote location may react to humans
with shyness,avoidance or childlike curosity while a BF in the North East(New England) or southeast
may react aggressively,due to the encrouchment of human kind in its habitat)or vice versa. Lately
there seems to be more aggressive attitude toward humans from BF,especially in the southeast.
As with all unknown(or even known)animals, due caution is warranted. Also, I do believe that sooner
than later there will be a BF killed,either on purpose or by accident(hit by vehicle)then the real circus
will begin. And another creature will fall to the ongoing push by man.

Bigfoot Type B. [Insert theme from "the twilight zone" here]
Now for a large leap.
Type B. In no way,shape or form is this type related to humans. This type is a canifomia(dog like). It
is a canidae yet has some of the characteristics of the ursidae(bear) and the procyonidae(racoon). It
shares characteristics of the canine-wolf,dog,fox,etc. It exhibits basic "looks" of a canine, is capable
of standing on its hind legs(like the bear) possesses "hands"but without oppossing thumbs(like the
racoon)thus is able to grasp things(may be able to open doors by turning a door knob).It would possess
the skull shape belonging to the canidae,have large canine teeth,have the hearing,and scent(smelling)
of the canidae,due to the capability of either walking upright on its hind legs(although it would walk
stooped over)or on all fours,it would be very fast and agilie,quiet when stalking prey due to it being a
digitigrade(meaning that it walks on its toes not the sole of the foot) whereas a primate walks plantigrade(meaning foot flat on the ground).It would essentually walk "tip toe".This would make it
very hard to hear even with leaves and other ground litter. It would be able to climb trees(bear and
racoon-although some canine can also climb)swim very well (well, swim like a dog). It would(note I'm
taking a WAG here-WAG: engineering term for:wild ass guess)be without a doubt a meat eater. It would
also scavage when and where the opportunity arose. Its claws would be typical of the canidae-non
retractable, five digit front paws, four digit back paws. WAG: It would weigh maybe 300-400lbs, standing on its hind legs-about 6- 7 feet tall. Behavior: Not nice. Aggressive to the extreme-especially
if surprised or startled;may attack on sight;would stalk anything smaller than itself;would chase if the
"victim" ran;would be territorial;would not tolerate anything or one within its territory(wolf);as with all
canidae be very protective of its young;rouge males would be very dangerous and unpredictable.

Well.There you have it.For what its worth. My thought as to what Bigfoot is/are. Now if you all will
excuse me, I have to go fix a very relaxing drink. I hope I'm wrong;especially about type B.

[Crow Logic]

Bigfoot -Primate

Subspecies reported canine like. Well what is a great big massive animal with a long canine like snout? SOunds like a bear to me.

[SquatchCommando]

What do you base the assumption, that they are sub-human, on? That's scarey considering they've easily outwitted us at every turn to collect more definitive evidence of their existence.

Sas is not evolved into a "human" but a shy Sas.

here is the senerio I would use, so bare with me please. 10 000 years agothere was bold Sas there was not so bold Sas and there was the Sas so shy he had a hard time getting dates. Bold Sas just walks up to Homo Sapian and bashes him over head and bang he has the food of the homo Sapian.


Well Homo Sapian doesn't have a 35 inch bicept like a Sas but he has real big noodles in his head and figures with spears arrows and a few freinds he can Make Bold Sas into an ex Sas so when Bold Sas trys it again he may take out a homo Sapian in the group but generally Bold Sas's start becomoing rare. and not passing on the bold gene. Now Homo Sapians like killing the Sas. One, it elemnates the guy taking his Carabu and Salmon and also makes him look studly to that chick in the white deer skin. So he goes out to kill more Sas's. with his buds. Well bold Sas's are gone so the find some not so bold Sas's hang out eating Samon in the Day. Soon the not so bold Sas gene is not being passed along but the homo sapian hunter and the chick in the white deerskins' are.

So what's left. the Homo Sapian and the few Sas so shy he almost can't get a date. Well now that Bold and not so bold are not around picking up lady Sas's guess what, Sas's so shy is getting more dates, and passing his genes on and his desendants are now being disscussed on the BFF and Blog Radio shows and scaring the hell out of campers, teens in lover lanes, and Marines in the woods at night.


Basicaly Sas has evolved to be elusive, 'cause non elusive Sas became rugs in Mr Homo Sapians cave. Not because they are real smart but because shy was the gene that got passed

This post has been edited by SquatchCommando: Jun 27 2007, 02:30 AM

[tony46inga]

It could very well be a bear or a surviving Amphiryonidae(bear-dog),that lived some 10000 plus years
ago. Also, it would not be a subspecies of PRIMATE. It would belong to the Order of Carnivora,suborder
Caniformia(dog like). Let me pause here, I think we're discussing Type B. Type A is definately Primate.
"A" possesses all the standard characteristics of a primate;could be a surviving member of the "great
ape" known as Gigantopithecus. However, type B is not a primate. Think of it as a very well developed
canine. A bear is a Ursidae;while in the same suborder as the canidae(dogs,wolves,foxes,etc)it's skull
structure would be different from the true canine. There are only 8 species of bear in the world. Each
species has its own "particular" skull structure: the skull of a black bear is more slooped and narrow
than that of the grizzly-which is shorter,more wide. Each species exhibit their own specific characteristics. The skull structure that I mentioned for type B would be (WAG)more of a canidae
skull than a Ursidae skull. Type B would be more related to a canine than to a bear; a well developed
canine with the ability to: stand up on its hind legs(at least for a short period of time)have well developed "hands"(simular to the racoon-which belongs to the same order and suborder as do canines;
species "Procyonidae"-except the racoon's hands do not have opposing thumbs. Type B might or might
not have hands with opposing thumbs;its abilities to manipulate objects like opening jars, door knobs,
and grasp objects(like the racoon);the capability of standing up on its hind legs plus walking and running on its hind legs;it can change: drop and walk/run on all fours. It would leave footprints of a
canine,a very large canine. Also, based on some of the reports(sightings) of "ears and snout like a dog
or wolf": this would suggest that its skull structure would be canine(canidae) not bear. So, what type B
would be is a very well devoluped canidae, exhibits some of the characteristics of other speices within
the caniformia suborder of the order of carnivora(meat eater);would to some point resemble a giant
wolf,walks/runs upright on its hind legs(though probably not all of the time)possess hands simular to
the racoon but sized for its own build, would tend to be aggressive(such as staring people down,holding
its ground rather than fleeing-these are traits of behavior of the wolf)will take a meal wherever and
however it can get it(roadkill- easy pickings-no chance of being injuried by the prey/no energy consumed during the stalk and kill; so it would absolutely hang out close to roadways. Pastured animals
again easy prey for this creature. All this is a WAG of course. Bigfoot, whatever it really is(and there
could be more than one species-but belonging to the same suborder/order or there could be two or
more unknown bipedial creatures roaming around. Some maybe primate others maybe some kind of
hybred bear-wolf/dog,still others might be some large canine (wolf like)thing that sometimes walks as
a biped. All of this is just guessing. Some of the reports of BF sightings seem to suggest just that.

[Wolf Among Dogs]

Different species of deer are all over the world. As are there different monkeys and people for that matter. We lump all of our Bigfoot together as we do other animals is all.They are all different species as can be proven just from the size and style of the tracks alone.

[colstonewall1]

Different species of deer are all over the world. As are there different monkeys and people for that matter. We lump all of our Bigfoot together as we do other animals is all.They are all different species as can be proven just from the size and style of the tracks alone.

Do you have your encounter posted anywhere W.A.D.?? If not, I'd love to hear about it! . . .by the way, are you related to Greg Allman by any chance??

[SquatchCommando]

Different species of deer are all over the world. As are there different monkeys and people for that matter. We lump all of our Bigfoot together as we do other animals is all.They are all different species as can be proven just from the size and style of the tracks alone.

If I can point out,if you take some of the ladies in here, put there foot prints in the dirt with delecate toes, high arches then put my nasty 14 EEE with no arch would we be from different species.

This post has been edited by SquatchCommando: Jul 8 2007, 03:37 AM

[Crow Logic]

For certain feet vary in structure. Years ago I had a friend whose foot print looked identicle to this BF print (Patterson print?) He was flat footed and part Native American which he claimed was what gave his walk and foot its unique character. Of course his foot was perfectly normal in size. When I saw the print pic I've posted I immedately thought of the feet of my childhood friend.

Attached image(s)

 

[wufgar]

Yup, that's a print from the PG filmsite.