is a sasquatch a preditor?

Hey,they did not find the gorrilla till the early 1900's.
Yes there are some real nuts claiming they have seen them,but there are some credible people that have seen them also.
I am keeping an open mind.
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: BAYSTATE YOTEHey,they did not find the gorilla till the early 1900's.

Quote:Troglodytes gorilla Savage, 1847. Thomas Savage described the first gorilla on the basis of a specimen (skull and skeleton) that is now in the Museum of Comparative Zoology in Harvard.
http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/gorilla-timeline/

Quote:There was a time, prior to 1847, when the gorilla was the 'yeti' of Central Africa. It was dismissed as a "silly native legend" until white men saw gorillas for themselves and had to accept that the great ape really did exist! It was the lowland gorilla that was first seen by white men - the mountain gorilla was not 'discovered' until 1901.
http://www.ypte.org.uk/animal/gorilla/123

This is partly because white men ("they") didn't get to gorilla territory until then. Once they did get there, though, there was a lowland gorilla skull waiting for examination.
 
I don't care what anybody say's, that "Patterson Footage" is the real deal.


Two out of work cowboys ain't pulling that off in 1968
scared.gif
 
Errick,, I'm one of those that believes in the possibility of their existence. But, I'm also one of those waiting for some kind of physical proof, past the casts of reported footprints...A smelly, hairy, way oversize, DNA producing body would really fill the bill....
blushing.gif


It's my position that we, or someone, needs to prove the existence before our learned legislators start passing laws protecting them...
 
Quote:Errick,, I'm one of those that believes in the possibility of their existence.

Yep, me too. That's why I keep my eyes open for sign when hunting. I foot hunt the heavy brush on the Coast Range (not the roads), and 30 years, nothing yet.
 
One of my Bro's was Army Recon in Viet Nam circa;1970. He told me about one night they were out on a mission in the jungle mountains. A few miles away, another squad was also on a mission.

They heard, yelling & full auto, off in the distance. When they got back to base camp. They learned the other squad was attacked by a large up-right hairy creature. One Veteran was physically attacked & bitten on the upper shoulder area.

The other's in that squad, scared the creature away during the attack.

Days later in the same area, while on another mission. By their camp site @ night. A large creature was roaring at them & throwing pieces of broken off tree limbs. At them in the darkness. He said, it sounded like a gorilla like creature. But when the creature roared, they could tell it was high up off the ground. As being, a very tall creature.
 
Thats an interesting story. I think that there either was something or still might be something out there. The very few reasons i think that are the native american history of it. Why would they make it up ,everything else they drew or talked of is real ? All the footprints. I know some people have faked them but theres no way all of them have been. Ive seen and read of everyone trying to debunck the patterson gimlin film and nearly everytime they try, they find more things that prove it couldnt have been faked. Either way, it will end up taking a body or skeleton to prove it's existence. In nature nearly anythings possible.
 
Last edited:
I agree that anything is possible as much as I wantto believe those baffoons on monsterquest and other shows make anyone who does look like a fellow baffoon.
 
I agree with you on that aspect with the advent of the newer shows like that that have self proclaimed bigfoot experts looking for 15 minutes of fame ,but what im refering to is historical and fossil record. Gigantopithacus was real and very much resembled "sasquatch". The books im refering to i own were written in the early and late 1950's and 1960's that dont force the idea of the animal but provide nearly 300-400 pages of evidence from "eyewitness testimony", historical references from the 1700's and 1800's through to 1960's, and have chapters from people that have devoted years looking and analyzing evidence and taking very detailed notes pics and hair samples. In the end they let the reader make the decision and ive made mine. Im not argueing anything but ive done my homework not just turned on the history channel.
 


It's my position that we, or someone, needs to prove the existence before our learned legislators start passing laws protecting them...[/quote]

I heard some states have already got laws to protect them
 
Sorry podunkcowboy i just reread the entire thread. I thought you were slamming my post. I agree with you and back in the 1960's there were organized hunts for sasquatch but they ran out of funding mainly cause noone took the hunters seriously or someone was fakeing photos and prints leading them in the wrong places and eventually it all ended. Those tv shows do have the worst people as wittnesess but there are serious groups hunting them. Also bullwhip several states have pretty hefty fines for killing/harrassing them.
 
Last edited:
The credibility of a subject is only as good as those known for studying it was all I meant. As an independent thinking adult I agree with you. The problem is that Billly joe and bubba who "seent em rite ovar thar..." dont help your case.
 
Exactly. Those shows only seem to be getting worse by the episode. Then anyone that has an actual honest sighting or encounter are to scared to speak up cause they end up being lumped in with bubba and bille joe.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top