Reply to thread

Message

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1960's that dont force the idea of the animal but provide nearly 300-400 pages of evidence from "eyewitness testimony", historical references from the 1700's and 1800's through to 1960's, and have chapters from people that have devoted years looking and analyzing evidence and taking very detailed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.

[QUOTE="Savage_Fan2, post: 1590016, member: 25703"] 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1960's that dont force the idea of the animal but provide nearly 300-400 pages of evidence from "eyewitness testimony", historical references from the 1700's and 1800's through to 1960's, and have chapters from people that have devoted years looking and analyzing evidence and taking very detailed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. [/QUOTE]

Verification