Bigfoot News
Bigfoot Evidence
Bigfoot Evidence
RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 



Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:08 am

This is my attempt to create a composite of what is 'known' and/or speculated about bigfoot.
If anyone else wants to add more into this, or correct some things, I'd appreciate the input.

I know these things are not all evidence based features and descriptions, I'm more looking for what the observed or speculated consensus is at the present.

- Approx 7-9 feet tall
- 300-500 lbs
- Unknown primate. A possible human hybrid
- Generally benign
- Omnivore
- Possesses language
- Mimics sounds and other animals
- Hair, not fur covered. Black, brown, reddish-brown, grey or white in color
- Less hair on chest, hands and face
- skin is anywhere from pink to dark brown in color. Generally a tan color.
- Unfriendly/hostile towards dogs
- Kills large mammals for food. Deer, elk etc.
- Communicates by tree knocking
- Breaks branches/makes noise to intimidate
- Builds wood shelters?
- Lives in caves?
- Generally nocturnal
- Avoids humans, hides
- Possesses infra sound capability to stun or immobilize prey
- Causes panic and memory loss through pheromone release?
- Observes and is curious about human behaviour
- Makes sounds such as howls and whoops
- Large reflective eyes. Red or yellow in colour
- Tree peeks to avoid detection
- Hides it's footprints/tracks
- Human-like face
- Bipedal most of the time, quadrupedal at others
- Never enters a residential dwelling?
- Mid tarsal break
- Causes silence in area where it is present?
- Lives in small family groups
- Lives in isolated remote forested areas
- Are active and travel more in the spring and fall
- Lives near moving water
- Considered semi-aquatic
- Superior sense of smell, hearing and sight?
- Possesses high intelligence and reasoning ability
- Will 'freeze' when spotted
- attracted to sight or sound of children playing
- Emits foul, acrid odour
- Throws rocks
- Is mean and crazy ( just a joke )

...and that's about all I can think of for the time being.

I realize that a lot of this is highly speculatory, I just wanted to see it all in one place instead of picking up bits and pieces from different places.
I also know that there are different opinions. These are just some of the more popular and largely agreed upon descriptions and features.






Last edited by paul830 on Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:26 pm; edited 2 times in total
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  josephthebruce on Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:39 am

Interesting and good stuff. However I never heard of the theory about the pheromone being produced? Thats the only one that stands out to me as not being plausible.
avatar
josephthebruce

Posts : 14
Join date : 2013-01-05
Location : Kankakee, IL

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:52 am

Yeah, I'd read that a couple of times and thought it was an interesting theory providing a protection mechanism. One of the old 1st nation words for sasquatch is 'forget' as in, I believe, the man creature that makes you forget.

Thought I'd add it in as a possibility.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  josephthebruce on Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:26 pm

If that is true. That makes them even more terrifying,
avatar
josephthebruce

Posts : 14
Join date : 2013-01-05
Location : Kankakee, IL

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Squatchmaster G on Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:39 pm

There's quite a few reports of BFs that were 10 feet tall or even bigger. There's also been a handful of reports of them entering buildings and houses.
Most descriptions also mention that they have no neck and the head thrust forwards slightly (an ape-like nuchal angle), huge shoulders, a barrel chest, arms that reach down near their knees, broad hooded noses, wide jaws with a slight projection, wide ape-like lips, sloped foreheads, prominent eyebrow ridges and a slightly stooped posture.
There's also many reports that their eyes can glow (as opposed to just reflecting light).
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:37 pm

Squatchmaster G wrote:There's quite a few reports of BFs that were 10 feet tall or even bigger. There's also been a handful of reports of them entering buildings and houses.
Most descriptions also mention that they have no neck and the head thrust forwards slightly (an ape-like nuchal angle), huge shoulders, a barrel chest, arms that reach down near their knees, broad hooded noses, wide jaws with a slight projection, wide ape-like lips, sloped foreheads, prominent eyebrow ridges and a slightly stooped posture.
There's also many reports that their eyes can glow (as opposed to just reflecting light).


Yeah that's good stuff. The physical descriptions are great.

I'd like to hear the stuff about entering into houses because I haven't come across that yet. It always seems like a bigfoot is creeping up on a property, looking in windows, sometimes reaching a hand in but being wary of entering.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  CMcMillan on Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:41 pm

I think we are actually seeing different species of what we call bigfoot.

Dog-man and Sasquatch
I would try to break out the differences I know most feel Dog-man is more aggressive and stinks.
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

“KNOWN” ?

Post  YSPR on Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:48 pm

The only things that you listed that I would considerer even remotely known are the physical traits. In this area we can actually look at the footprints and the few semi decent photos / videos, which allow for a general confirmation as to basic appearance, height and weight.

The remainder of the items you listed is great for discussion, but to call those items known are a stretch. Talk to ten different enthusiast or researchers and you will get ten different lists.

avatar
YSPR

Posts : 88
Join date : 2012-08-13
Location : USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  josephthebruce on Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:09 pm

Personally I feel like the creature known as bigfoot is a lot more simplistic than what we make it out to be.

We humans in our infinite wisdom like to make up radical excuses(theories) as to explain habits or behaviors of a possible animal we don't understand.

avatar
josephthebruce

Posts : 14
Join date : 2013-01-05
Location : Kankakee, IL

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Tzieth on Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:36 pm

I blame Matt Moneymaker for this... Bigfoot is not one creature. We call everything that is hairy and walks on two legs "Bigfoot"

This is copy-pasted from the "They are all "Bigfoot" thread, which I copy-pasted from:http://www.newanimal.org/h-human.htm


"Bigfoot" is a term that is applied in two ways. In its widest sense, it is applied to every type of hairy humanoid from all over the world, regardless of that hairy humanoid's characteristics. In other words, it is a catch-all category that is applied to every variety of legendary ape-man by those who don't know better.
In its more correct sense, "Bigfoot" applies to a certain type of hairy humanoid that is frequently reported in the Pacific Northwest area of America (roughly the states of Washington, Oregon and the northern part of California) and also found in similar habitats in western Canada, possibly as far north as Alaska. This type has a relatively stable set of characteristics and is often viewed as the standard Bigfoot.
The standard Bigfoot has a rather consistent appearance. Adults are described as six to nine feet tall, heavily built, and muscular, with large feet and a sagittal crest on top of the head, giving the head a somewhat pointed, elongated look, like a bullet. The forehead itself is generally sloping, suggesting a brain that has more in common with apes (or very primitive men) than modern humans. The entire body is covered with thick, shaggy fur of about the same length, without longer hair on the head. The body shape is often compared to a professional football player or a bodybuilder, with large muscles and a solid physique. Footprints measure fifteen inches long on average, with five toes. Behavior towards humans can be aggressive, but is seldom anything worse than a threat display.

The creatures are often sighted in family groups, with arrangements that would suggest they seem to follow the human rule of pair-bonding with one male and one female staying together to raise their young. They seldom use tools more sophisticated than a branch, do not wear clothing, and cannot speak, although they have a wide variety of calls that might count as language to another Bigfoot. They seem to be highly nomadic, occasionally sheltering in caves, but seeming to not stay in one area longer than a night or two. Those who believe in them think that their diet is probably mostly plant food such as tender leaves and acorns, along with some meat sources such as snails, frogs and scavenged deer carcasses.

This standard Bigfoot is not the only hairy humanoid to be reported from the Pacific Northwest of North America. Other beings that do not fit the standard model are also sighted, including true giants, marked hominids and many types of BHMs (big hairy monsters) of a decidedly paranormal character.

In recent years, the efforts of serious cryptozoologists to make the discipline sound more respectable has led many to discard the term "Bigfoot" as unscientific, replacing it with sasquatch. Some other researchers use "Bigfoot" for standard Bigfoot reports from the Pacific Northwest and reserve "sasquatch" for the Canadian Bigfoot. However, in general the two terms can be used interchangably."


ALMAS


"Described as looking like humans, but with fur covering most of the body, the almas (or almasti) is a variety of wildman or Bigfoot that is reported from the Altai Mountains in Mongolia and the Tien Shan Mountains in China (near the border with Mongolia). Sometimes, researchers consider the almas to have a much wider range, and the term is applied to any Bigfoot-like creature reported from Mongolia or regions of the former Soviet Union. For example, the abnauayu of the Caucasus Mountains is sometimes considered identical to the almas. Also called the bnahua and the ochokochi, this ape-man is reported from the regions near Armenia, a long way from the border of China and Mongolia.

The body hair of almas is often described as curly, the jaws are large, and the eyebrow ridges are heavy. Visible areas of skin on the face, hands and feet are usually dark. The body hair is usually described as red or reddish-brown, sometimes as black. Most reports indicate an adult height of about five feet, but some describe a creature as tall as six and a half feet. Available evidence seems to indicate that the almas near the border of Mongolia and China, if they exist, have been split into two populations which are rapidly dying out. Some researchers in the field of cryptozoology consider almas to be neanderthals. Almas are also called almasti in some reports.

Maero

"The maero are described by the Maori (the native race of New Zealand) as looking much like themselves, except that the maero were bigger and had shaggy hair growing all over their bodies. The maero were exceptionally strong, even for their size. They did not wear clothes and had few of the trappings of civilization, though they did use stone clubs. According to traditional history and folklore, the maero were more or less constantly at war with the Maori. As a result of this war, the maero had been driven into the most rugged and inhospitable areas, where they barely survived, in small numbers. The maero would kill any human beings they happened to come across, and they seemed to have no cannibalism taboo, because they generally ate these victims.

The maero, unlike other mythical creatures of New Zealand, are endowed with little or nothing in the way of supernatural powers. They usually seem quite natural. Also, there are tales about humans of gigantic stature that are supposed to represent crossbreeding between Maori and maero. This trait is said to run in families, such as the Kaihai family of Waikato and the Haupapa family of Rotorua. Although these families produce big people today, it is said that these are nothing compared to the specimens they once produced - gigantic, muscular men who were perhaps between 8 feet and 11 feet tall. This idea parallels Tibetan reports of the yeti and humans interbreeding.

It is thought that the maero, if they ever existed, might be extinct today. To complicate the picture, the maero is often confused with two types of fairy folk from Maori mythology. One is the patu-paiarehe, the fair-skinned "mist people" with supernatural powers, who sound curiously like Europeans (with instances of red hair and blue eyes) but reportedly date from long before any European influence. The other is the Maori ogres, flesh-eating giants who are usually not so hairy as the maero and are also endowed with supernatural powers. The maero is sometimes called the mairoero."


Marked Hominids

"Marked hominids are a variety of ape-men that seems closer to human than ape. Like wildmen the world over, they look a lot like humans that happen to have fur growing over much of their bodies. However, they are stronger and bigger than most humans. The typical marked hominid is built like a professional football player, with heavy, wide, muscular shoulders, and a neck so wide and short that it almost seems like the head is connected directly to the body. The main characteristic, from which marked hominids get their name, is the fur colors. Marked hominids have a large number of albino members, and even their "ordinary" members are often marred by patches of white or blonde that look silly on a brown background. One example of a marked hominid may be the Canadian Bigfoot that locals have named Old Yellow Top.

Marked hominids also differ from the typical Bigfoot in their behavior and preferred habitat. They are one of the few types of hairy humanoid to sometimes wear clothing, and they seem to possess more intelligence and tools than usual. In habitat, they prefer areas that are farther to the north than Bigfoot is generally sighted, especially northern Canada, Alaska and Siberia."

NAPES (North American Apes)

"The word "napes" was invented by the researcher Loren Coleman to describe reports of North American apes. These creatures are distinct from Bigfoot and his cousins because, instead of seeming like something halfway between a human and an ape, the creatures in these reports seem rather like actual apes. They tend to walk on all fours with only brief moments of bipedalism, leaving knuckle-prints with their hands. Napes are usually described as resembling chimps. Napes are supposed to be distinct from both the skunk-apes and the giant monkeys that are also reported from North America, although they can be confused with both of the former cryptids, and some creatures present an intermediate mix of characteristics that make them hard to classify.
Napes are said to prefer swamps that are large and still wild, such as the Florida everglades, but they are reported from other areas of Florida and, in smaller numbers, throughout the southeastern United States. Since the New World is not supposed to have any native apes, only monkeys, these populations seem most likely to represent feral populations of discarded pets or lab animals. However, some researchers working in the field of cryptozoology think that North America does have an undiscovered ape. The more chimp-like napes often present an overall look that seems different from actual chimps, and they are frequently reported to swim, an act that is supposed to be impossible for real chimps." (On that note, if you look up "Skunk ape" not to be confused with the much more foul smelling, "StankApe" you will find that the earlier the reports, the more ape-like they are. The foot prints are even Hand like. The Hominid shaped foot prints are a relatively new phenomena for Florida. So like the Many things called "Bigfoot" you might have two different creatures now called "Skunk Ape")

Sisemite

"The sisimite is a hairy humanoid that is reported from the Guarunta Mountains of Central America and nearby wild areas in Guatemala. They look like ape-men, often described as having shaggy hair so long that it sweeps the ground as they walk. Their screams are loud and piercing, and they prefer hilly or mountainous country with few human inhabitants.

In Chorti Indian folklore, the sisemite is a rapist who abducts human women. It has supernatural powers and is appointed as a kind of guardian of the wilderness. It will attack hunters in order to protect wildlife. In these features, the sisemite resembles the hairy forest ogres of South American folklore."

Neanderthaloids

"The Neanderthals are a separate species of human than homo sapiens, the kind we are. They were robust, short people with strong muscles, with far heavier bones than modern humans, and with larger brains than us, despite their reputation for stupidity in popular culture. They were a very successful species in their time. Their ancestors left Africa far earlier than our ancestors did, and the Neanderthals lived in cold climates during the ice ages for so long that they became evolutionarily adapted to cold weather, something that modern humans haven't had time to do. As far as our adaptations go, we are still tropical animals. The Neanderthals had fire, made tools (including flutes), buried their dead and had some sort of religion. The last of them went extinct about thirty thousand years ago in Europe, according to today's science.

This has not stopped people from reporting Neanderthals (or things that sound much like them, the Neanderthaloids) in modern times. Footprints of Neanderthals in these modern sightings are said to look just like real Neanderthal footprints that have been found in caves. These modern Neanderthals are described as very hairy, short humans. Many of them are nearly as hairy as Bigfoot. They have heavy brow ridges, use some tools and may or may not wear clothing, depending on how hairy they are and how cold it is at the moment. Both sexes tend to have red hair, and the males have a distinct beard of longer hair running along the edges of their chins.

These reports come from two areas: the Pacific Northwest of North America (including parts of America and Canada) and Central Asia (an area between Europe and China that is roughly bordered by the countries of China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey and the Balkan states). Some researchers say that Bigfoot sightings are really of Neanderthals. Some researchers say that reports of Neanderthals are really of Neanderthaloids, a separate class of beings that look similar to Neanderthals but are something else. Neanderthaloids may be a race that resulted from hybridization between Neanderthals and homo sapiens, they might be a separate species, so far undiscovered, that is related to Neanderthals or is simply like them in outward appearance, or they might be very primitive members of our own species that happen to look like Neanderthals."


Orang-pendek

"Reported from the island of Sumatra in Indonesia, the orang-pendek is described a red-furred bipedal ape-man about four feet tall. It is supposed to be attractive and graceful, and has been sighted by many natives. Westerners have seen this creature regularly since 1923, but numerous expeditions have failed to find anything better than footprints and hairs that don't test as any known creature. Some people think the orang-pendek is a new species of ground-dwelling bipedal orangutan, while others favor the idea of a very primitive human.

Recently, much more attention has been focused on legends of the orang-pendek because of the discovery of the Indonesian "hobbit" or Homo floresiensis on the nearby island of Flores in 2003. Homo floresiensis is an extremely small species of human that was known to have survived at least until 12,000 years ago, which means it likely co-existed on the island with modern homo sapiens. According to local legend, which names Homo floresiensis the ebu gogo, it survived until at least the year 1900, and may still be alive today. Some researchers think that the orang-pendek is the same species as the ebu gogo. The orang-pendek is often classified as a proto-pygmy, a type of smaller, more human-like hairy humanoid.

This renewed interest, coupled with the extremely remote area the orang-pendek is supposed to inhabit, has caused even mainstream scientists to label the orang-pendek as the hairy humanoid that is most likely to be a real creature. There had been very little investigation of the orang-pendek before 2003. Like many cryptids, it was categorized as a legend early on, without any professionally funded expeditions to see whether there might be any good reasons for the legends. It often happens that when a creature has been categorized as a myth for long enough, everyone just assumes a scientist must have done the work to properly disprove its existence at some point.

Now we know that the earlier investigations were little more than folklore-collecting expeditions, generally self-funded, that nevertheless managed to bring back some circumstantial physical evidence that has proved genuinely puzzling to experts. Now that the spotlight has singled out this little cousin of Bigfoot, there is a chance that it might receive enough attention to settle the mystery once and for all."

Yeren

"The yeren, otherwise known as the Chinese wildman, is a hairy humanoid reported from the dense forests of China. About man-sized, it has distinctive red hair. Unfortunately, the same term may be used to cover several different ape-like cryptids, such as the mainland orangutan, leading to confusion for those who want to learn about the yeren.

The yeren usually sounds like a bipedal, more human-like version of an orangutan. It could be an orangutan that has evolved to fill a more ground-dwelling niche, with associated bipedalism and thus it ends up looking like a Bigfoot or missing link through sheer coincidence. Bipedalism has evolved independently in the ape family at least two times, so it is at least slightly possible that this has happened yet again with an isolated population of orangutans.

In some reports, yeren sound less like bipedal orangutans and more like standard ape-men such as Bigfoot. These reports typically describe a creature varying between six and seven feet tall, with a heavy, muscular build and anatomical features that lean more towards the human side than towards the ape side. Fur colors are also more variable, with less instances of red. Some reports in this category sound so human-like than the yeren is thought by some researchers to be a primitive species of human, such as a Neanderthal man."

Yeti

"The words "yeti" and "abominable snowman" are applied to several types of hairy humanoids similar to North America's Bigfoot, but these creatures are distinct from Bigfoot because they are reported from a different continent altogether.
The Himalaya Mountains of Tibet and Nepal are the homeland of these legendary creatures. The two terms "yeti" and "abominable snowman" are sometimes applied to creatures from other remote areas of Asia as well.
Cryptozoologists and other serious researchers prefer the term "yeti" over "abominable snowman" because "yeti" sounds more scientific and because it is not based on a mistranslation of a native word, as "abominable snowman" is.

The most picky cryptozoologists refer to each individual type of yeti by its own native name, dzu-teh for the biggest, hulking giants who sometimes walk on all fours and seem half bear, half ape, meh-teh for the "classic" yeti that stands about six feet tall and has a pointed top of the head, and teh-lma for the three-foot-tall frog-eating yeti that makes its home in steamy jungle valleys between mountains (sometimes thought to be a juvenile yeti by researchers).

The teh-lma is the most human-like of the yetis and is thought to be a race of primitive humans by some researchers, compared to the proto-pygmies. It is also the most ignored of the yetis. Very little research has been focused on it recently, although several decades ago, when it was lumped in with the meh-teh more often than not, this little yeti was more in the spotlight.

The dzu-teh is thought by many researchers to be a bear. It has claws and carnivorous habits, in addition to its bear-like appearance.
However, many cryptozoologists think that, if it is a bear, it must be a new species of bear, because the descriptions don't sound like any known species.

The meh-teh is the subject of the most research, and is the only variety of yeti that most people hear about these days. Whenever you've read about the yeti before, it is likely you were reading about the meh-teh, the classic yeti that sounds most similar to Bigfoot. It looks something like a cross between a gorilla and a man. It could not easily be mistaken for a bear.

Even though it has long, shaggy hair, it is actually supposed to be a valley-dweller, like all other varieties of yeti. The snow-capped peaks don't contain enough food for such a creature to live there, but it is said the meh-teh often has to go through high mountain passes to travel from one valley to another, where it becomes highly visible to human observers and sightings are most likely to take place. In its forested, remote valleys, it is supposed to be nearly impossible to locate, living in a remote territory much like the panda, which eluded researchers for sixty years after its discovery.

Even though the yeti (at least the meh-teh) is one of the best documented of the hairy humanoids, it is also one of the most disputed. Native folklore has heavily obscured whatever real animal or animals that might possibly exist behind the mythology.

According to legend, the yeti is a spiritual being, not an animal. It is sometimes worshipped, attributed with many supernatural powers, and is said to interbreed with humans.

In addition, some legends say that there is no actual breeding population of yetis. Instead, each yeti is actually the transmogrified quasi-solid ghost of a dead human.

Other local mythology states that the yetis are actually demons that have been assigned to guard mountains, so that humans do not ascend to the peaks and disturb the gods who live there. If this is true, then the yetis have failed miserably in their task to keep people from climbing Mt. Everest.

With western observers involved, the picture can get clouded too. The yeti has been shown to be confused with actual humans, bears and even suggestive-looking rocks on some occasions.

In popular culture, the picture gets even more confusing, with the label "yeti" being applied haphazrdly to any Bigfoot-like creature anywhere in the world, even though it should technically apply only to those creatures reported from Himalaya Mountains of Tibet and Nepal, or at the very least to those from Asia."

Skunk Ape

"Skunk-apes are hairy humanoids sighted in many areas of North America, but especially in swamps, and especially in the South. They are held distinct from Bigfoot by having a different home range (Bigfoot is generally considered as being restricted to the Pacific Northwest) and by having both a different physical appearance and a different set of habits ascribed to them. The Florida variety of skunk-ape is sometimes referred to as the "Florida Sandman" and other local varieties often have local nicknames.
At least two, if not three, distinct varieties of skunk-ape exist in these legends. This is partly because the definition of skunk-ape has varied from one cryptozoologist to the next and because this definition has also evolved over time. Another reason why it is hard to think of the skunk-ape as just one kind of creature is because the creatures in these reports show enough natural variation that it is hard to lump them all together.

The most consistent characteristic ascribed to skunk-apes is the smell. It is generally said that all of them have a rather extreme odor that is nauseating. In other respects, the definition varies. In the past, this horrible odor was the one characteristic used to define a skunk-ape, but today more non-smelly beasts are given the label of "skunk-ape." Some skunk-apes are generally said look something like Bigfoot, but they tend to be really large, and sometimes have oversized heads that look more monster-like than ape-like. Other creatures labeled as skunk-apes look more like a cross between a dog, a giant monkey, and a kangaroo.

The fur color of skunk-apes is usually dark, with many individuals who are black or deep brown, and there may be a tail. When it exists, this tail is often bushy like the tail of a wolf or fox (thus linking skunk-apes to North American devil monkeys). Some individuals are described as particularly big, up to ten feet tall, but the average height seems to be about six feet.

Skunk-ape feet are often described as being different from Bigfoot, especially in terms of the foot shape and the number of toes. Skunk-ape toe numbers are sometimes quite variable, with three-toed footprints often being found.
Since the number of toes is one of the slowest-changing features as a species evolves, it is not generally thought that a primate could have developed such a foot. This leaves a lot of problems for those who hope to prove that skunk-apes with atypical feet are real creatures, because the skunk-apes' feet really ought to match up to biological expectations better.

Skunk-apes tend to be very aggressive towards dogs, and are often reported as carnivorous. In any case, they seem to kill a lot of livestock, especially the smaller varieties such as goats and chickens. Every so often, a panic breaks out about the idea that skunk-apes are about to start eating humans, but reports of man-eating are extremely rare and often based on very old legends, so that it cannot be verified that anyone even died, let alone that an unidentified creature killed them.

All too often, skunk-apes exhibit paranormal characteristics as well in these reports, features that make them decidedly unattractive to cryptozoologists who hope to uncover a new species instead of a mere urban legend. They may be described as having glowing red eyes, or they might be bulletproof at close range or have other weird abilities. Like many mythical creatures, they seem to be mysteriously attracted to anyone who has sex in a car in a remote area. Most of them are bipedal, but they show a tendency to drop to all fours and run that way at times.

Some creatures labeled as skunk-apes seem very much like known primates, especially chimps and orangutans. These sightings could represent feral populations that have developed from abandoned pets or lab animals, and this is the interpretation given to skunk-ape reports by some researchers working in the field of cryptozoology. However, mystery hairy humanoids that resemble known primates are more properly known as napes, short for "North American apes."

The Florida variety of skunk-ape is seen most often in swampy areas such as the Everglades. Florida skunk-apes tend to be more physically normal than skunk-apes found elsewhere, so that some researchers define them as a unique type that is much more likely to turn out to be a real species. Some people think that these creatures smell so bad because they spend most of their time in underground dens, curled up with carrion stolen from alligators. It is said that this underground lifestyle is the also the reason why they are rarely sighted and have not yet been captured by scientists.

Since certain types of skunk-apes often sound more like supernatural creatures such as werewolves or hairy ogres from some fairy tale than a legitimate variety of Bigfoot, and even the more normal varieties often suffer from other weird characteristics that seem unlikely from a biological viewpoint, skunk-apes have a credibility problem and they have received less attention and funding in the cryptozoological community than their more respectable cousins in the Pacific Northwest. Some examples of famous skunk-apes include the Honey Island Swamp Monster, the Fouke Monster, Momo, the Myakka Skunk-Ape, the Green Chimp, the Holopaw Gorilla, the Abominable Swamp Slob and the Everglades Ape."

I don't know how old this Cryptozoo is, but it seems to be pre-Southern Sasquatch) Momo, and the Fouke Monster are now in the "Southern Sasquatch" label. But this is my point. Look at how many creatures could fall under "Skunk Ape" alone. And now EVERYTHING that is hairy and walks on two legs is Bigfoot.
Our fossil records show many distinct species of hominids and the theory is we wiped them out? lol It does not make sense. The theory is that it was over Competition for food. What competition? They were all nocturnal according to their eye-sockets. They had the night shift and we had the day shift. Bears eat the same stuff we eat, why weren't they wiped out? Lions, Tigers? Hell how did deer survive this long with EVERYTHING eating them?

fossil evidence shows that bears also inhabited the grasslands along side humans (Other wise we would not have the fossils.) I think it was human urbanization that drove bears into the forests. This probably drove the other hominids into the forests as well. Just because they "vanish" from the fossil record does not mean they went extinct. There are no fossil records for chimps at all, and yet here they are.

I have no doubt that all these HB's that we call "Bigfoot" are the very same guys in our fossils but how will we ever find out if we can't even make up our minds as to what defines "Bigfoot"?





Last edited by Tzieth on Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tzieth

Posts : 478
Join date : 2012-08-27
Age : 43
Location : Vancouver, Washington

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Squatchmaster G on Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:39 pm

YSPR wrote:The remainder of the items you listed is great for discussion, but to call those items known are a stretch. Talk to ten different enthusiast or researchers and you will get ten different lists.

The first post said this was a thread for "what is 'known' and/or speculated about bigfoot" and there's definitely been a lot of speculation about pheremones and subsonic vocalisations lately. (Whether or not we agree with that speculation is a different matter altogether.)
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:50 pm

I put the word known in brackets and reiterated several times that these can't be stated as facts. They are just commonly held assumptions or observances that seem to fit patterns.

All of these at any time can be considered alleged of course.There are no facts here as far as I know them.

That dogman thing as well as the skunk ape really start to take the discussion into some stranger places. However if I accept the possibility of the existence of one, I can't deny the possibility of others.
Could be several species. Could be 5, 8 or 10 species. I'm just looking for as many consistencies as I can find and cross referencing those.


avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:54 pm

Wow, that's some amazing post there TZ. ( Too long did not read ) Just kidding.

I will definitely be reading that but it's almost like getting too much homework. I'll take a day or two.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Tzieth on Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:11 pm

paul830 wrote:Wow, that's some amazing post there TZ. ( Too long did not read ) Just kidding.

I will definitely be reading that but it's almost like getting too much homework. I'll take a day or two.

LOL It's just a compilation of all HB's here in the U.S. and the world that I sorted through when I made the "They are all called "Bigfoot" thread. http://www.newanimal.org/h-human.htm And I had to weed through a bunch of other cryptids to find them. The point is that the only thing they all have in common is that they are humanoids that are hairy. We generalize everything fitting this description as "Bigfoot" when we have other cryptids out there that we do not call bigfoot because they have distinct differences (Chupacabra [SP] and Dog-Man)
avatar
Tzieth

Posts : 478
Join date : 2012-08-27
Age : 43
Location : Vancouver, Washington

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:25 pm

josephthebruce wrote:Personally I feel like the creature known as bigfoot is a lot more simplistic than what we make it out to be.

We humans in our infinite wisdom like to make up radical excuses(theories) as to explain habits or behaviors of a possible animal we don't understand.


I agree, and even when it comes to physical attributes which may be perceived as being different genotypes when in fact it may be phenotype.

I was out last night and saw a guy with a huge very round head. I have an oval shaped skull. I was thinking about how our skulls were so different in shape that a future anthropologist could actually classify us as different genotypes with different capabilities. Just positing.

I'd say, yes, we can complicate things too easily, although the possibilities always are there too. Especially when the physical and behavioural consistencies are the same geographically. Very tricky to know the difference.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  YSPR on Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:34 pm

Common sense says to keep it in the realm of plausibility and proof or the list is unwieldy and meaningless; (I know what you posted). I just chose to make my statement based on the physical evidence that actually exist.

If everyone else wants to speculate, then by all means continue to grow your list. Just be ready for all aspects of the community; Paranormal, Magical, UFO’s, Kidnapping, Orbs and so on. There are books and articles that lead credence to this type of association directly linked to Bigfoot. That is why I stay away from speculation and things that provide no physical evidence.

I will wait until Bigfoot is actually proven to be real before giving merit to the more fantastic claims. Just because they are possible, does not make them plausible. In the end, they either will or won’t have them, but first we must prove they are real.
avatar
YSPR

Posts : 88
Join date : 2012-08-13
Location : USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Squatchmaster G on Mon Jan 28, 2013 5:21 pm

YSPR wrote:If everyone else wants to speculate, then by all means continue to grow your list. Just be ready for all aspects of the community; Paranormal, Magical, UFO’s, Kidnapping, Orbs and so on. There are books and articles that lead credence to this type of association directly linked to Bigfoot. That is why I stay away from speculation and things that provide no physical evidence.

I know of one Footer who read about hairy little creatures called nains in an old fairytale book and from that drew a connection between fairies and Bigfoots. She didn't realise that 'nain' is just French for 'dwarf'.


Tzieth wrote:The point is that the only thing they all have in common is that they are humanoids that are hairy. We generalize everything fitting this description as "Bigfoot" when we have other cryptids out there that we do not call bigfoot because they have distinct differences (Chupacabra [SP] and Dog-Man)
I completely agree with you on that point, it's pretty annoying that they all get lumped under that one name. I'd much rather they were called Unknown Hairy Bipeds (UHBs) or something like that. I guess Animal Planet wouldn't have greenlit a show called "Finding UHBs" though. Laughing
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  CMcMillan on Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:15 pm

"UHB"
LOL Love it.

So some UHBs are seen around some UFOs and the MIBs will come and question you
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:44 am

Matt Moneymaker and crew could just be laying down on the beaches in the South of France and Spain and capture them as they walk by.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:42 pm

I'm sticking with the majority of sightings and behaviours. If one bigfoot was observed walking on it's hands, I wouldn't tend to give it much weight and probably dismiss it. I don't think you would say, well at least now we know they can walk on their hands too.
They might do that, or that one might, or it could just be a B.S report. I don't know. It's just much safer to stick with the consensus when you're trying to create a composite.

I just got through reading a bunch of threads where Tzieth and CMcMillan both talk about a variety of creatures being lumped into the same category as this thing we call bigfoot. The points are all valid and I do tend to believe that a lot of what we think of as myth, handed down in oral traditions and sometimes being committed to writing or drawings do in fact have some basis in truth. ( The dragon, werewolves, leprechauns etc ). After the discovery of floresiensis, even 'hobbit' types are not beyond the realm of possibility.

It seems the more we know, the stranger the world actually becomes and the tidy science world of the last 150 years begins to crack under the weight of it. It cannot explain what shouldn't exist but does.

Nothing can be thrown out, so better to be a hoarder of info. Myself, I'm just trying to stack the largest boxes together so I can still make it to the kitchen.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Squatchmaster G on Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:44 am

paul830 wrote:After the discovery of floresiensis, even 'hobbit' types are not beyond the realm of possibility.

In Auatralia they have reports of the Yowie which is pretty similar to a regular Bigfoot but they also have reports of a smaller creature about 4 to 5 feet tall which is called a Brown Jack.
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Tzieth on Sat Feb 02, 2013 5:26 pm

Squatchmaster G wrote:
paul830 wrote:After the discovery of floresiensis, even 'hobbit' types are not beyond the realm of possibility.

In Auatralia they have reports of the Yowie which is pretty similar to a regular Bigfoot but they also have reports of a smaller creature about 4 to 5 feet tall which is called a Brown Jack.

Squatchmaster, I believe the cryptid you speak of is now a confirmed animal.. Let me go check on that. But to be fair as to the reports of Leprechauns, Faeries and whatnot...

"
The Cryptid Zoo: Proto-Pygmies

Proto-pygmies are small hairy humanoids, with adult heights ranging from three feet to five feet. The hair on their heads is often a different length and texture than the fur that covers the rest of their bodies. Faces are usually fur-free, as are the palms of the hands and soles of the feet. The prefered habitat of proto-pygmies is swamps, forests and seashores in tropical regions of the world. Their tiny footprints can be distinguished from those of human children because the foot shape is so different. Their faces look wizened, ancient, and distinctly non-human. Hair/fur colors tend to be black or red.

Creatures such as the duende of South American lore, the orang-pendek, the teh-lma variety of yeti and the Menehune of Hawaii are often classified as proto-pygmies. What could proto-pygmies be? Most researchers think they are some kind of primitive human, perhaps homo erectus, perhaps Australopithecus, or even a unique subtype of our own species, homo sapiens. Homo floresiensis, discovered in 2003, may also qualify as a proto-pygmy, especially if native legends regarding its extreme hairiness turn out to be true (right now, all specimens are known only from bones, so we have no idea how hairy they were
)."

It's not just Orang-Pendeck being reported. Everyone seems to have these.

http://www.newanimal.org/protopyg.htm
avatar
Tzieth

Posts : 478
Join date : 2012-08-27
Age : 43
Location : Vancouver, Washington

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Tzieth on Sat Feb 02, 2013 5:35 pm

Found it.. Squatchmaster, is this the creature you were talking about?


The Cryptid Zoo: Bondegezou (or "Man of the Forests")

The Moni tribe of Irian Jaya, in Indonesian New Guinea, have stories about a being they call the bondegezou, which roughly translates as "man of the forests." A little under three feet tall, this creature looks like a little man covered in bold patches of black and white fur. It can climb, but it is often seen on the ground, where it stands on its hind legs in a bipedal stance.

Even though the folklore has existed since time immemorial, and a clear photograph of a bondegezou even managed to find its way to an Australian scientist in the 1980s, the bondegezou wasn't the subject of any serious scientific inquiry until 1994, when a scientist managed to obtain skins and bones and it was declared a real, new species of mammal. The bondegezou wasn't a creature like Bigfoot. It wasn't even a primate. Instead, it was the oddest-looking species of tree kangaroo anyone had ever seen. It spent more time on the ground than in the trees, had a very short tail, and some oddly human mannerisms. It was often standing on its hind legs when sighted by humans, because this was its alarm posture.

The story of the bondegezou is a good example of how a perfectly real animal can remain hidden from science, especially if it lives in a remote area and is obscured by folklore. Even a clear photograph in the hands of a scientist is no guarantee that there will be a scientific inquiry anytime soon. It also shows that you need to be open-minded about cryptids. They might turn out to exist, but at the same time they might be a species you never imagined. Few people think that Bigfoot-type cryptids could be anything other than primates or primitive varieties of humans, but it is always possible that some could turn out to be something entirely diffe
rent." http://www.newanimal.org/bond.htm

I was in the process of posting all the confirmed cryptids.. I guess I should add this guy lol
avatar
Tzieth

Posts : 478
Join date : 2012-08-27
Age : 43
Location : Vancouver, Washington

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Squatchmaster G on Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:16 am

Tzieth wrote:Found it.. Squatchmaster, is this the creature you were talking about?
Nope, Irian Jaya isn't Australia.

Tzieth wrote:Even though the folklore has existed since time immemorial, and a clear photograph of a bondegezou even managed to find its way to an Australian scientist in the 1980s, the bondegezou wasn't the subject of any serious scientific inquiry until 1994, when a scientist managed to obtain skins and bones and it was declared a real, new species of mammal. The bondegezou wasn't a creature like Bigfoot.
....
The story of the bondegezou is a good example of how a perfectly real animal can remain hidden from science, especially if it lives in a remote area and is obscured by folklore. Even a clear photograph in the hands of a scientist is no guarantee that there will be a scientific inquiry anytime soon.
The way that article is written is pretty unfair to Dr Tim Flannery, the guy who discovered the dingiso (aka bondegezou). Tim first found evidence of the dingiso in the early 1980s during an earlier ecological survey when he found a tree kangaroo jawbone he couldn't identify and a piece of black and white tree kangaroo fur that a local tribesman had used to make a war bonnet. He would have returned to search for the creature a lot sooner but you don't just waltz into that forest without the approval of the local Moni tribesmen and it wasn't until 1993 when he got an invitation to go to Tembagapura to identify a rare possum that he had an opportunity to continue the search. Saying that "the bondegezou wasn't the subject of any serious scientific inquiry until 1994" and "Even a clear photograph in the hands of a scientist is no guarantee that there will be a scientific inquiry anytime soon" makes it sound like no one was really interested in following up the reports when the exact opposite was true.

You can read an excerpt about the discovery of the dingiso in Flannery's book Throwim Way Leg here, it's a pretty fascinating look into the discovery and confirmation of a cryptid.
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  paul830 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:33 am

That avatar is getting crazier by the minute.
avatar
paul830

Posts : 97
Join date : 2013-01-16
Age : 44
Location : Toronto Canada

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Everything 'known' about bigfoot

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum