Posted on 08/07/2009 8:44:34 AM PDT by Welcome2thejungle
Along with other educational cable stations such as the Military Channel, Nat Geo, and Discovery, I love watching the History Channel. Recently the History Channel has aired a number of programs on the legendary hairly man-like ape often called Bigfoot on a special series called Monster Quest. Some creatures thought to be myth actually do exist such as the Giant Squid. The Gorilla was only discovered and confirmed in the 1800s.
The evidence for the existence of a large primate living in the North American wilderness rests largely with a large number of eyewitness sightings and encounters as well as footprints and even a few videos of the legendary creature.
The most compelling evidence of the creature is the videotape made in 1967 in Northern California by Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin. There is much controversy surrounding this videotape. Some say the Patterson/Gimlin film is simply a man in a costume. Others believe it is in fact a seven foot female specimen (it has noticeable breasts) running through the forest. Even the most talented Hollywood costume designers have stated that if it was a costume, it was brilliantly made and remarkably realistic. Roger Patterson died of cancer in 1972 and on his dying day swore he filmed a real creature and he also had earlier passed a polygraph test with flying colors.
A number a footprints purportedly made by the creature have been examined in great detail by experts. While some are surely phony, others demonstrate a great deal of detail including dermal ridges and scars which would be next to impossible to fake.
Also it is hard to dismiss all of the eyewitnesses and there are thousands of them. They all report the same thing: A large dark hairy ape-like creature standing on two feet with a distinct foul odor.
Of course many scientists will remain unconvinced until a live creature is captured or until a carcass is brought in.
I think there is something out there. The creature has been reported in Indian oral history for centuries and is called Sasquatch. I cannot believe all of the witnesses who have had close encounters are liars and kooks. The witnesses I've seen on the History Channel seem very credible and believable.
If the whole thing is indeed one big fake and a fraud, the fakers are very clever liars and in the case of Roger Patterson, brilliant film makers.
You must be kidding, right?
I’m just reporting on what I saw on the History Channel. Watch it and judge for yourself.
Why wouldn’t the carcass or remains of any one of them have been found?
I have no idea. Perhaps they bury them. I, too, am a skeptic, but I also see some compelling evidence as well. More than the films, it is hard for me to believe ALL of the eyewitnesses are lying through their teeth.
I also strongly believe that Jesus walked on water, turned water into wine, and raised people from the dead, and rose on the third day. It is hard for me to believe that all of those hundreds perhaps thousands of witnesses were lying as well.
I am not necessarily a believer in BF, but I am willing to consider the evidence.
While I've never personally seen a Sasquatch, I've read and listened to enough testimony from sane and credible people to believe they exist.
“There is much controversy surrounding this videotape.”
No there isn’t. The man in the constume has been known for years and if you see him walk (as National Geo Channel did) you would know instantly it was him. He admitted it years ago and still is irritated the film makers reneged on their 1,000 dollar promise. Bigfoot is a joke.
Honk if you are one of Bigfoot’s love children?
Well how do we know he isn’t lying? I saw the program on the History Channel and saw no one claiming to be the man in the suit.
Medved, is that you?
There are a lot of people (including many prominent conservatives) who have suggested that those who question where BHO was born are wacked out loons as well. Me? I don’t know. But I keep an open mind and will look at all of the evidence before coming to a definite conclusion.
Take all the photos of "footprints" ever taken and line them up next to each other. Then ask yourself why the extreme variation from one set to the next?
I thought this was going to be another Hillary thread.
Now I never see BFs, ghosts, aliens, any of the good stuff. None of my friends have either, some who have been mauled by bear. Yet, we get tourists from allover who see them all the time; right around here too????? Guess, I'm just lucky to see bear & moose from time to time.
We don't find carcasses of bears, cougars or even deer laying around in the woods very often either, and they'd presumably be far more numerous. I'm not saying I believe there's a Sasquatch, but of the various mythical critters, I do have to conclude that it isn't impossible that they exist. A small but sustainable population might be able to live in remote places without much sign they were there. Again, not likely, but not impossible either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.