They wear military camouflage uniforms as well after killing the soldiers who were tasked by the government to secretly find and capture one for research
Bigfoots can sense trail cams. And high powered night vision cameras. And regular film cameras. And digital cameras. And smartphones. And drones. And human eyes.
Nah, man, (takes a hit) Bigfoot is, is like, an interdimensional being man. Like, some kind of Alien Ghost Shaman with with fur that reflects light maaaan
Human eyes seem to have the best track record. Everything else could be explained by perception in the IR range. All those things light up like a Christmas tree in IR.
That was a very insensitive comment. The real reason is bigfoots are technologically advanced creatures. They have developed more advanced camouflage techniques to stay hidden from the eyes of cameras. Last I heard that they got those invisible cloaks from some guy named Harry. Cool stuff.
Yeah, this is why i love this cryptozoology subreddit and not the others. You're allowed to say something is most likely fake.
I will never understand why some people treat their favourite cryptids as a "monster believing religion" where bigfoot CAN'T be fake, it HAS to exist.
Exactly. There's so much real stuff we haven't discovered/rediscovered. We don't need to lie to ourselves to make the field sound interesting, it's already wild what's actually possible.
Giant ground sloth, thylacine, giant snakes, or other such things. There's a lot of potential real undiscovered animals living in small populations in isolated areas.
I was banned for arguing with a guy whose "best argument" for the existence of Sasquatch is that Jesus existed, and we only know of him through stories, and there are a bunch of stories about Sasquatch, therefore it must exist. I just said there are so many levels of stupid in that and it's embarrassing to see nonsense like it on the sub.
The Bigfoot subreddit is full of fanatics. They always say "uh lets discuss it" when in reality they cannot handel people holding a different view on them. I studied earthsciences with a focus on paleontology. I know a thing or two because I actually researched the topic and did not just watch "Top 10 Bigfootmoments" on youtube. They are almost identical to Flatearthers when it comes to "discussing" their topic.
Its honestly more sad then funny at this point. Cryptozoology is such a interesting thing but thanks to bigfootfanatics and the likes it qill never be more than a joke to the majority of people.
Not necessarily would it be found in the fossil record. Fossilization is such a rare occurrence that it is (usually) reserved for the most common animals of their period, or the most unfortunate that die in tar pits/ peat bogs. Not saying it’s impossible it’s just less likely.
But yeah we would have found remains by now?? lol
Fact is, if any primates existed in North America over the past few hundred thousand years, we would've found some evidence of it. We've found plenty of evidence of the humans that have lived here, we've found evidence of the many species of megafauna that have lived here. We would almost certainly have found something. Even something as small as a single tooth would be monumental, but no. Nothing whatsoever
Yeah seriously. I had an ex girlfriend argue that “you’ve never seen a bear corpse, but you know they exist.” Yeah dude but other people see bears all the time. I hate to be a debbie downer but I don’t think Bigfoot is truly out there
Not to chime in with your girlfriend but…I’ve seen a bear in real life and something crossed the road in front of me in real life that I still can’t explain and does not match any known descriptions of any bear we have in Ohio. I’m educated, was not intoxicated or under the influence, was fully awake and alert. The fossil record is woefully incomplete.
Please explain what I saw and almost hit. I am not prone to storytelling. I have sought answers for years without explanation, and would consider myself rational. This is why I hang on to the mass amounts of other witness stories. We all can’t be crazy. Some explanation has to exist, and I’m hoping we find it before I leave this earth.
Not every species leaves fossils, that is true: the vast majority don't. But these animals don't exist in a vacuum. Bigfoot, if real, didn't appear from thin air. It evolved from something. And if it had a significant enough population size to not only exist here for thousands of years but spread out to the range of areas it's been sighted in, we would have found some evidence, whether of bigfoot itself or it's ancestors, by now. But we haven't. We have found zero evidence of non human bipedal apes in North America.
And the idea that this particular ape lineage that supposedly actively avoids being seen, buries their dead in unaccessible locations, and is all around not recognized by science , and not to mention had no credible sightings prior to the 1900s, JUST SO HAPPENED to also not appear in the fossil record to any capacity.....that's just so perfectly convenient, isn't it.
Remember people are usually " terrified" and can't take any pictures or Remember anything at all about bigfoot when they see one , but they can be 100% sure that they did see one.
Whenever someone says with 100% confidence that anyone meeting bigfoot would be too terrified to take out their phone and take a clear video, I think of this one:
https://youtu.be/9ktRhBcHza4?si=HHYOCElSENuv6H3n
Spoiler - no, it's not a bigfoot, but the guy who filmed it seemed to have done a good job of taking out his phone and holding it steady, even in very scary circumstances.
Yet bigfooters assure me that this never, ever, ever happens with bigfoot. Go figure.
Wow yes I remember that video, it's one of many like that . People swim freely with sharks and think a little safari jeep will protect them from giant bull elephant.
But yet far too scared to get any footage of bigfoot lol
What if the Patterson Bigfoot was the last of its kind, and they went extinct in the 60’s-70’s? Explains why it walks like it doesn’t give a fuck anymore.
I can hardly get a good picture of a bloody fox by dusk, there is plenty of footage of these creatures but all the big brains in their all knowing genius are extremely quick to exclaim photoshop, cgi, ai, man in costume and other trickeries.
People underestimate the intelligence of everything other than themselves, if there is a ‘hill i would die on’ so to speak, it would be that many animals are just as intelligent, aware and sentient as we are.
Bigfoot if real is obviously our closest living relative and very likely a damn sight smarter with a much more recognisable form of intelligence than any other animal we know of.
I am sure they hear us, see us and smell us long before we ever see them and it really does seem like they want very little to do with us, they may know more about us than we do of them.
When you get a moment have a look at maps of population density around the world and you will see that most of this planet is largely uninhabited and with the exception of a few places there is much wilderness with little to no habitation.
Plenty of room for many things we have no knowledge of, especially that which possesses the intelligence and wherewithal to actively avoid us, which would surely be wise, no?
Unfortunately we do live in a world where AI and image editing software are more accessible than ever, so photo and video evidence is steadily becoming less and less reliable, especially when we still don't have anything physical in any substantial amounts. We've kinda just reached the point where photos and even videos aren't really sufficient anymore. At this point, we need an actual body or a live specimen to have any real justifiable confidence. We have plenty of that stuff for other large forest-dwelling megafauna like deer, bears, and moose.
YES EXACTLY! THERE ARE SO MANY ANIMALS THAT ARE JUST AS SENTIENT AS US!
TALK ABOUT THOSE ANIMALS WITHOUT MAKING UP NEW ONES!
Crows, magpies, Cockatoos, African greys, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos
WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH A WHALE WHICH PROVES THEIR WAILING IS AN ACTUAL LANGUAGE!
It's all incredible
With the abundance of cameras and drones—we’d have irrefutable evidence by now.
As much as I want Bigfoot to be real, unfortunately—for me, he’s crossed into Tooth Fairy & Easter Bunny territory.
To be fair actual scientists are interested in giant squid. There are probably like 5 academic types that are actually putting money into finding Bigfoot
There could easily be evidence we aren’t aware of or have been commonly dismissed. Do you know of the guy
who was an expert in dermal prints (finger prints) who was convinced that Bigfoot was real simply because he analyzed an alleged Sasquatch print?
I would rather trust a literal expert in ape prints, who catalogued dozens of species than an experiment that could possibly disprove it. But even then he could very well be wrong. I’ll only fully believe when (more likely if) I have my own encounter
Human prints yes, but how many cases did the Conroe Police Department have involving apes that would establish Jimmy Chillcut as an expert in ape finger and foot prints?
Sperm whale eat an estimated 1.2 million giant squid per year total. The species isn’t extinct so there must be at least enough to sustain that consumption and still have progeny, and that’s only one predator. Theres literally million of giant squid out there believe it or not, and there is absolutely no way there’s even 100k Bigfoot in the entire world, there’s likely less than ten thousand. It should be substantially easier to find a less crypic, less intelligent and more numerous animal.
Yea because it is a waste of money and time. There is no evidence of bigfoot. Zero. While the myths and legends are literally tracable al the way back to east asia.
> There are probably like 5 academic types that are actually putting money into finding Bigfoot
That's pretty irrelevant since Bigfoot is a 10' tall apeman. They're pretty hard to miss even if you're a deer researcher or a bear researcher, or a bird researcher. If Bigfoot was the size of a mouse, then maybe only people who go looking for them would find one.
That’s assuming they are like bears or deer which they wouldn’t be. If they are apes, they would be crazy intelligent compared to any other large animal in NA.
And they probably aren’t 10 feet tall, probably witnesses over exaggerating size due to shock or fear, I doubt an ape can be that tall and bipedal, doesn’t make sense to me but I’m not educated in this stuff.
Who knows, what if Bigfoot directly evolved to get away from humans? Maybe hunting and killing pushed them to become evasive, which is what is currently happening in some groups of chimps. If they really do exist, they wouldn’t he just like any forest animal. They would be incredibly intelligent, fast, and experts at evasion.
Also, people that allegedly see Sasquatch don’t go out looking for them. They just stumble upon them or the animal tries to scare them and stuff. It isn’t like how you can track a deer or a fox. It’s just very different.
My point is that if you set up a trail cam to monitor deer populations, if Bigfoot is around, you'd see him as clearly on that cam as you would a deer. Trail cams unintentionally capture all kinds of rare animals from spirit bears to formerly extinct birds. So what would be special about Bigfoot if every other large animal that lives in our forests can be found on trail cam footage, but not the giant bipedal ape?
Primates are known, depending on the species, to display a reasonable amount of aversion to trail cameras if they notice them. The smaller the group of apes, the less likely they are to interact with a camera or show up on said camera. Orangutans, for example, rarely show up on cameras and are known to evade humans. The fact that this is changing is recent. Apes back then were not keen on allowing humans in their territory. This changed with Goodall afaik.
This could be even further shown in Sasquatch. What if they are even keener on avoiding cameras? Or maybe some random dude in the middle of nowhere has images of Sasquatch on his trail cameras and we don’t even know. Or maybe we are aware of atleast one, the Jacobson photo.
By definition, since bigfoot avoids trail cameras, any trail cam pictures of him are fakes or misidentifications. So we can dismiss the Jacobs picture, which is a bear anyway.
You can't claim the logic both ways. Either bigfoot avoids trail cams, which explains the lack of pics, or he doesn't avoid them, which explains the Jacobs photo but begs the question why there aren't more.
Orangutans avoid trail cameras aswell but we do have pictures of them from said cameras. Just because they avoid them some times doesn’t mean we can’t catch them lacking rarely.
The Jacob’s photo has some details that doesn’t conclusively say it’s a bear.
The Jacobs photo is a bear. There are clear pics of bear cubs from a few minutes before the 'bigfoot' pic.
The photos that should have been taken just before the 'bigfoot' one have never been shared, which makes me believe they are clearly showing bears.
Unless you can make an argument that the only bigfoots to get caught on trailcams are the sadly deformed ones that look like skinny bears...
Anyhow, yes, non-bigfoot primates get caught on trail cams. So do all animals, including humans.
So, if bigfoot can trigger trail cams, and assuming that there are 1m trail cams in the US and 5,000 bigfoots, how many interactions and pics can we expect in a year?
Remember [the bigfoot sightings map](https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/looking-bigfoot-follow-map-others-have-seen-em-there-4b11203811) though, and we can't argue that all the bigfoots are in an inaccessible wilderness where humans never go. They're not, they're everywhere.
Remember the [California wolverine](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thedodo.com/amphtml/california-wolverine-trail-cam-922167684.html) - there was only one of those and we still got multiple pics. Is bigfoot likely to be the same?
So how many bigfoot pics should we expect each year?
Humans are keen to avoid cameras and law enforcement and yet fugitives still get captured. Humans know the rules of the road and to look both ways before crossing a street, but tens of thousands of them still get hit by cars every year. Somehow bigfoot has a perfect of being completely elusive. But then r/bigfoot has pages and pages of stories of bigfoot being extremely visible and going out of their way to be seen by people. So how does that work? It's a game of Shrodinger's Bigfoot. It's elusive and that's why we can't find it, but then plenty of them aren't.
I would bet if we had a body, like we do for the giant squid, scientists would be more inclined to study. With the giant squid we had them wash up, which completely changed scientific opinion about it because there was a type specimen and irrefutable proof. For Bigfoot there is no type specimen yet, the closest thing we have is the PGF. So scientists don’t study it. When a Bigfoot turns up dead the amount of money thrown at getting good footage will be phenomenal, and when that happens we will in fact find a lot of footage. You don’t look like an academic kook with the giant squid because no one doubts it and we don’t have a substantial culture around ridiculing it anymore, for Bigfoot it’s the opposite, people won’t look at the evidence including most academics and have been conditioned to automatically ridicule it. There is in fact a substantial amount of evidence though.
Correction: IT WAS just like Bigfoot, except at that time in history wild men and apemen were treated more as real and likely. They ridiculed the shit out of the idea of a giant squid. All those old paintings of what look like a giant octopus attacking ships, the so called “kraken” if you believe that you’re a moron. Well it turns out there are in fact enormous cephalopods.. we forget history so fast, things that were just yesterday ridiculed will be treated as fact and obvious by the masses tomorrow as soon as a body is found. People that ridiculed and made fun will be the same people first in line saying shit like “I always believed it”, or “I always knew”, because the average person wants to appear intelligent and aware when in fact the average person is well pretty average overall. They haven’t researched the available evidence, they haven’t seen the terror in a persons eyes after an encounter, they haven’t seen the paradigm shifting trauma that was experienced. But when you do see it and you do a deep dive, there’s alot more to it than meets the eye on Bigfoot. Theres something to it and I can’t say what it is or is not exactly just that there is something. We have this tendency of taking common fact as ordinary and uncommon or edge of understanding fields and topics as untrust worthy or ridiculous when in fact many of our greatest discoveries originate on the fringes.
Another fun fact about those old paintings of seeming giant octopi attacking ships, distinctly not squid. A large piece of flesh washes up a few years back that does appear to be a large and undiscovered piece of an octopus, the piece of flesh would make the entire octopus quite large, possibly giant squid large, I haven’t seen any studies drop as of yet but that’s something possibly in the works as well, and if substantiated could make those paintings we ridicule maybe not seem so outlandish, a squid isn’t climbing up a ship, but an octopus might, especially in the days before loud engines and metal hulls.
My stance has always been, "Yes, Bigfoot did once exist. Like 300,000 years ago. It was called Gigantophitecus and it was from China." That's the closest you're gonna get to an extremely large 'ape man'. An extinct orangutan that we now think doesn't even look that much like the stereotypical Bigfoot.
If there was ever a Bigfoot, it's long since extinct. Just like the plesiosaurus or the megalodon or whatever dinosaurs people keep saying are still alive in Africa. Just because coelacanths are still with us doesn't mean every other cool extinct creature someone once claimed they saw is for certain alive.
A bunch of people claim to have seen the Jersey Devil, and we all know that whole mythology started as Ben freaking Franklin trolling a dude.
And when anyone points out something like “Well what about the new species of insects that are getting discovered all the time in places like Borneo?” they’re conveniently forgetting things like 1) Insects in remote uninhabited jungles on the other side of the world are harder to find than 10 foot gorillas in Washington state, and 2) New species of insects that are discovered are very similar to insects we already know about. It’s not like some brand new completely abstract insect never before been visualized is being discovered. It’s just some beetle with a slightly longer thorax or a butterfly with a slightly different pattern. I’d only buy the likelihood of a species of giant ape men existing in the Pacific Northwest if the area was already inhabited by thousands of variations of giant ape men species.
Thank you for being totally convinced by this meme made in paint showcasing an exaggerated version of how we have multiple confirmed videos of one animal that used to be a cryptid while we have none of the other.
And one of those cryptids lives 6000ft below water while the other "lives" in the forests of north america.
Im also totally convinced by the 5x10 pixel video showing a suspiciously gorilla costume-esque hominid.
In all fairness, the giant squid hasn't been a cryptid for hundreds of years, as their carcasses regularly wash up on beaches. That being said, I love your post and find it hilarious.
I still think there may be *something* that is Bigfoot. Maybe it’s not a giant undiscovered ape (actually, it’s most likely not that lol) but there’s just been so many sightings and stories that I don’t think the entire idea can be dismissed. Even if it’s just some weird looking bears or something mundane like that, I do think there’s some existing thing out there that inspired the legend of Bigfoot.
it's simple, a few people misreported something, which happens, and a thousand people make up or embelish stories to catch on to the bigfoot bandwagon. Same thing happened with Mothman.
Got any sources? Or numbers, timeline, any actual information at all? Or is this just your personal hot take?
And really, if no one else is going to say it: photographic/video evidence of the Big Guy should be called Bigfootage.
This is a meme, while there's no direct sources involved in the making of this, look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear giant squid footage when it used to just be a monster told by sailors.
Now look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear bigfoot footage.
This is the problem with a lot of Cryptids. Probably the reason why I'm still skeptical of 99% of Cryptids. I'm guessing they extremely endangered so we don't have as much footage of them. But even then there is a lot of footage and studies of animals whose population is probably in the single digits by now. Also, there should be some archeological evidence. Maybe there is but I haven't seen it idk.
Here's the thing, most cryptids don't stay cryptids for long if theyre genuine. Giant squids used to be cryptids, monsters told from sailor to sailor and used as inspiration for novels, but now we know they exist.
Still no bigfoot.
Im very conflicted, I used to believe, now im leaning more towards not believing/not caring. On one hand, there is no evidence. On the other, North America is huge with a huge forest. Theres also the gigantopithecus to think about. I dont think there is based on a lack of body. But who knows.
It's not, it's a clearly exaggerated meme meant to portray how giant squid used to be a cryptid but with the rise of cameras we got a ton of clear, confirmed footage of them, while there's still none for bigfoot.
I've never seen anything more legitimate in my life than the 5x10 pixel video of a blurry figure.
This is a meme, while there's no direct sources involved in the making of this, look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear giant squid footage when it used to just be a monster told by sailors.
Now look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear bigfoot footage.
My man . . . There are trailcams that record at 4k. I've seen plenty of amazing, crystal clear footage of deer, bear, coyote, wolf, wolverine, elk, moose, etc. but somehow only people with potato quality cameras come across Bigfoot?
If that is the case, How do you reconcile all the sightings? Did the bigfoots who were supposedly seen by people just make a mistake? If they are hyper vigilant about people, why do so many people claim to have seen one?
Even eliminating smartphones, there are likely still many more high quality cameras in the forests around the world then there are in the depths of the oceans. So one would expect at least some better photos of Sasquatch.
That might be the case but the two have been used interchangeably for long enough that I don’t see how it would be confusing or detract from the actual point of the conversation.
Ah, my bad. Sorry if I came off rude. There was a great video done by Trey the Explainer that delved into the links between Bigfoot and many native myths and lore. I’d check it out for information about that.
https://youtu.be/7zJhJsdoTYQ?si=m0fx8174JB0I3DD1
Gotcha, I can see how it would cause some confusion. I think by this point the term Sasquatch has been firmly integrated into the topic of Bigfoot and is now recognized as a moniker of Bigfoot. It may not be true to the actual origin of the term, but I guess it’s just an aspect of language evolving over time.
That still applies. We have clear footage of an animal that lives 2000 feet into the ocean, but nothing of a giant ape in America? No bones, no fossils, no clear footage?
Collation is not causation,... This graph ( as painstakingly constructed as it is) illustrates a false premise/equivalent. One can never prove a negative.
For example one doesn't capture a picture of whatever in a place so one increases the number of cameras in that place, still no pictures. This only proves an increased likelihood that there isn't anything in that place not that there isn't anything anywhere else.
There is a lot of space in the wilderness where humans just haven't touched grass . The assumption that because we have an area surrounded by a border that everything inside that border has been surveyed, is fairly silly.
Gorillas were cryptids until the mid 19th century, so were pandas, now we have both in zoos.
Did you see my post earlier with [the map of bigfoot sightings ](https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/looking-bigfoot-follow-map-others-have-seen-em-there-4b11203811)
Bigfoot aren't in the wilderness. People see them by highways, in trailer parks and by casino dumpsters.
You can't use the 'untrodden wilderness ' argument to explain the lack of bigfoot evidence.
Thanks - all credit to Joshua Stevens, who created it. I just borrowed it. It is nice though.
I've used it three times in your thread. It's my way of disagreeing with people who say "Of course we don't have any evidence for bigfoot. Duh! He only lives in the remote untrodden wilderness where people never go!"
(They usually follow it up with "You're a stupid Brit and you don't understand our proper American wilderness and how big it is and that's why you don't believe in bigfoot because our forests are really really big" etc)
Which, from the map, isn't true. He's reported everywhere, so there should be evidence everywhere.
There could be a mixture of real sightings and made up sightings.
Of course, I don't believe in bigfoot due to the lack of evidence but just because some sightings are made up does not prove that all sightings are made up.
When a real animal is rare and people are looking for it there are often sightings that turn out to be misidentifications.
Has anyone "lived" in an area where Bigfoots are known to exist? I always imagined setting up trail cams all over the place (and not just the blurry 720p cams but 4K?). It has to be done for months. It could even be up to a year. So far I feel most explorers tend to stay for a few days and that's it.
That graph clearly shows that bigfoots are better at hiding than giant squids.
they’re camera shy
I thought they had that same thing Matthew McConaughey had in Frailty.
Today I learned that Bigfoot is stealthy.
They wear military camouflage uniforms as well after killing the soldiers who were tasked by the government to secretly find and capture one for research
Today I learned that made up graphs mean nothing.
And that the amount of supposed footage of both is increasing
That was exactly what I was going to say
Or... it could also mean that more people are going to the beach now than camping out in forests.
Bigfoots can sense trail cams. And high powered night vision cameras. And regular film cameras. And digital cameras. And smartphones. And drones. And human eyes.
Nah, man, (takes a hit) Bigfoot is, is like, an interdimensional being man. Like, some kind of Alien Ghost Shaman with with fur that reflects light maaaan
And intention, and farts, but most importantly, they can sense camera crews.. somehow
And satellite cameras
Human eyes seem to have the best track record. Everything else could be explained by perception in the IR range. All those things light up like a Christmas tree in IR.
I have come to the conclusion that Bigfoot is just naturally blurry
and that's extra scary to me. There is a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside
- Hedburg
That was a very insensitive comment. The real reason is bigfoots are technologically advanced creatures. They have developed more advanced camouflage techniques to stay hidden from the eyes of cameras. Last I heard that they got those invisible cloaks from some guy named Harry. Cool stuff.
Harry? Isn't he from the Keplar Intergalactic Empire? Didn't know he came for a visit!
Like Adam Ried on *America's Test Kitchen*
I got banned from r/Bigfoot for pointing this out. 😂
Not gonna lie, as a childhood cryptid fan I'm pleasantly surprised that this sub dedicated to cryptozoology actually allows for skepticism.
Yeah, this is why i love this cryptozoology subreddit and not the others. You're allowed to say something is most likely fake. I will never understand why some people treat their favourite cryptids as a "monster believing religion" where bigfoot CAN'T be fake, it HAS to exist.
Exactly. There's so much real stuff we haven't discovered/rediscovered. We don't need to lie to ourselves to make the field sound interesting, it's already wild what's actually possible. Giant ground sloth, thylacine, giant snakes, or other such things. There's a lot of potential real undiscovered animals living in small populations in isolated areas.
I was banned for arguing with a guy whose "best argument" for the existence of Sasquatch is that Jesus existed, and we only know of him through stories, and there are a bunch of stories about Sasquatch, therefore it must exist. I just said there are so many levels of stupid in that and it's embarrassing to see nonsense like it on the sub.
As a Christian myself this is the most absurd thing I've read today holy cow...
I got banned for "unhelpful skepticism", haha!
The Bigfoot subreddit is full of fanatics. They always say "uh lets discuss it" when in reality they cannot handel people holding a different view on them. I studied earthsciences with a focus on paleontology. I know a thing or two because I actually researched the topic and did not just watch "Top 10 Bigfootmoments" on youtube. They are almost identical to Flatearthers when it comes to "discussing" their topic. Its honestly more sad then funny at this point. Cryptozoology is such a interesting thing but thanks to bigfootfanatics and the likes it qill never be more than a joke to the majority of people.
I got banned for saying a bigfoot encounter was probably embellished.
Join the the club!
Yeah, we would definitely have footage by now. Or the very least, we would have found some evidence in the fossil record.
Not necessarily would it be found in the fossil record. Fossilization is such a rare occurrence that it is (usually) reserved for the most common animals of their period, or the most unfortunate that die in tar pits/ peat bogs. Not saying it’s impossible it’s just less likely. But yeah we would have found remains by now?? lol
Fact is, if any primates existed in North America over the past few hundred thousand years, we would've found some evidence of it. We've found plenty of evidence of the humans that have lived here, we've found evidence of the many species of megafauna that have lived here. We would almost certainly have found something. Even something as small as a single tooth would be monumental, but no. Nothing whatsoever
Yeah seriously. I had an ex girlfriend argue that “you’ve never seen a bear corpse, but you know they exist.” Yeah dude but other people see bears all the time. I hate to be a debbie downer but I don’t think Bigfoot is truly out there
Not to chime in with your girlfriend but…I’ve seen a bear in real life and something crossed the road in front of me in real life that I still can’t explain and does not match any known descriptions of any bear we have in Ohio. I’m educated, was not intoxicated or under the influence, was fully awake and alert. The fossil record is woefully incomplete. Please explain what I saw and almost hit. I am not prone to storytelling. I have sought answers for years without explanation, and would consider myself rational. This is why I hang on to the mass amounts of other witness stories. We all can’t be crazy. Some explanation has to exist, and I’m hoping we find it before I leave this earth.
It is more likely not every animal that has existed on the planet has left evidence of its existence in the fossil record.
Not every species leaves fossils, that is true: the vast majority don't. But these animals don't exist in a vacuum. Bigfoot, if real, didn't appear from thin air. It evolved from something. And if it had a significant enough population size to not only exist here for thousands of years but spread out to the range of areas it's been sighted in, we would have found some evidence, whether of bigfoot itself or it's ancestors, by now. But we haven't. We have found zero evidence of non human bipedal apes in North America. And the idea that this particular ape lineage that supposedly actively avoids being seen, buries their dead in unaccessible locations, and is all around not recognized by science , and not to mention had no credible sightings prior to the 1900s, JUST SO HAPPENED to also not appear in the fossil record to any capacity.....that's just so perfectly convenient, isn't it.
Now add a line of "footage seen after AI generated art became commonplace"!
Remember people are usually " terrified" and can't take any pictures or Remember anything at all about bigfoot when they see one , but they can be 100% sure that they did see one.
Whenever someone says with 100% confidence that anyone meeting bigfoot would be too terrified to take out their phone and take a clear video, I think of this one: https://youtu.be/9ktRhBcHza4?si=HHYOCElSENuv6H3n Spoiler - no, it's not a bigfoot, but the guy who filmed it seemed to have done a good job of taking out his phone and holding it steady, even in very scary circumstances. Yet bigfooters assure me that this never, ever, ever happens with bigfoot. Go figure.
Wow yes I remember that video, it's one of many like that . People swim freely with sharks and think a little safari jeep will protect them from giant bull elephant. But yet far too scared to get any footage of bigfoot lol
It’s such a bullshit excuse and the only thing they have to cling to when pressed on the topic of photo/video evidence.
What if the Patterson Bigfoot was the last of its kind, and they went extinct in the 60’s-70’s? Explains why it walks like it doesn’t give a fuck anymore.
Legit I am a very optimistic believer but i have not believed in Bigfoot since I was a kid. I can certainly say he’s not real
That's what Big Foot want you to think
BF don’t give a shit what I think all he wants is to eat berries and trout and stuff
Is a bigfoot's boyfriend shortened down to BF BF?
How about Bigfoot's Boyfriend in Burkina Faso eating a Burger with Fries? BF BF BF BF!
BFBFFF BF's Best Friend Forever
That's good too
Yes and he’s part of the LGB[f]T community. Although he’s still in the closet.
No you don't understand... Big Foot is an illuminati like kabal/corporation like Big Pharma. They get money by people thinking Bigfoot isn't real
I didn’t believe in him but then I saw a tire cover that said he didn’t believe in me either so I started not believing in him harder to spite him
Sounds like something Bigfoot would say
NO NUH UH NUH UH
Yeah the babie eaters got exterminated
You eat babies! Everyone knows that!
We eat berries and mushrooms.
You should meet my ex. She wore size 11 shoes and was as hairy as a bear, but she claimed she was Italian.
I can hardly get a good picture of a bloody fox by dusk, there is plenty of footage of these creatures but all the big brains in their all knowing genius are extremely quick to exclaim photoshop, cgi, ai, man in costume and other trickeries. People underestimate the intelligence of everything other than themselves, if there is a ‘hill i would die on’ so to speak, it would be that many animals are just as intelligent, aware and sentient as we are. Bigfoot if real is obviously our closest living relative and very likely a damn sight smarter with a much more recognisable form of intelligence than any other animal we know of. I am sure they hear us, see us and smell us long before we ever see them and it really does seem like they want very little to do with us, they may know more about us than we do of them. When you get a moment have a look at maps of population density around the world and you will see that most of this planet is largely uninhabited and with the exception of a few places there is much wilderness with little to no habitation. Plenty of room for many things we have no knowledge of, especially that which possesses the intelligence and wherewithal to actively avoid us, which would surely be wise, no?
>I can hardly get a good picture of a bloody fox by dusk Yeah but people who know what they're doing can
I actually got tons of footage of a fox last year and I wasn't even looking for one...
Unfortunately we do live in a world where AI and image editing software are more accessible than ever, so photo and video evidence is steadily becoming less and less reliable, especially when we still don't have anything physical in any substantial amounts. We've kinda just reached the point where photos and even videos aren't really sufficient anymore. At this point, we need an actual body or a live specimen to have any real justifiable confidence. We have plenty of that stuff for other large forest-dwelling megafauna like deer, bears, and moose.
Environmental DNA will be our saviour. It crushed the Loch Ness monster, it's about time bigfoot gets the same treatment.
YES EXACTLY! THERE ARE SO MANY ANIMALS THAT ARE JUST AS SENTIENT AS US! TALK ABOUT THOSE ANIMALS WITHOUT MAKING UP NEW ONES! Crows, magpies, Cockatoos, African greys, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH A WHALE WHICH PROVES THEIR WAILING IS AN ACTUAL LANGUAGE! It's all incredible
To be fair, the ocean is pretty small.
Very clear as well, you can see for miles underwater
With the abundance of cameras and drones—we’d have irrefutable evidence by now. As much as I want Bigfoot to be real, unfortunately—for me, he’s crossed into Tooth Fairy & Easter Bunny territory.
There is no tooth fairy, there is no easter bunny, and there is no bigfoot.
You were right. I was, less right.
You sure there is no tooth fairy
I think about this all the time...
I mean, you aint wrong, friend.
To be fair actual scientists are interested in giant squid. There are probably like 5 academic types that are actually putting money into finding Bigfoot
I agree on that, but surely thered be more of a giant ape in NORTH AMERICA than of an elusive squid living 6000ft deep in the water?
There could easily be evidence we aren’t aware of or have been commonly dismissed. Do you know of the guy who was an expert in dermal prints (finger prints) who was convinced that Bigfoot was real simply because he analyzed an alleged Sasquatch print?
Idk, who was it? What was his name?
Jimmy Chillcut, forensic expert in Texas. It’s an interesting little thing in Bigfoot history.
[https://skepticalinquirer.org/newsletter/experiments-cast-doubt-on-bigfoot-evidence/](https://skepticalinquirer.org/newsletter/experiments-cast-doubt-on-bigfoot-evidence/)
I would rather trust a literal expert in ape prints, who catalogued dozens of species than an experiment that could possibly disprove it. But even then he could very well be wrong. I’ll only fully believe when (more likely if) I have my own encounter
Human prints yes, but how many cases did the Conroe Police Department have involving apes that would establish Jimmy Chillcut as an expert in ape finger and foot prints?
Sperm whale eat an estimated 1.2 million giant squid per year total. The species isn’t extinct so there must be at least enough to sustain that consumption and still have progeny, and that’s only one predator. Theres literally million of giant squid out there believe it or not, and there is absolutely no way there’s even 100k Bigfoot in the entire world, there’s likely less than ten thousand. It should be substantially easier to find a less crypic, less intelligent and more numerous animal.
first provide proof bigfoot is real at all, then give status of how many of them there are.
Yea because it is a waste of money and time. There is no evidence of bigfoot. Zero. While the myths and legends are literally tracable al the way back to east asia.
There are dozens of tv shows and docos on teams looking for Bigfoot . Channels have poured millions into these shows.
Be honest, do you really think Finding Bigfoot is good science into looking for an animal? It’s just entertainment.
TBH no its not. But finding giant squid is not a program I have heard about nor sever likely to happen, thus my point
> There are probably like 5 academic types that are actually putting money into finding Bigfoot That's pretty irrelevant since Bigfoot is a 10' tall apeman. They're pretty hard to miss even if you're a deer researcher or a bear researcher, or a bird researcher. If Bigfoot was the size of a mouse, then maybe only people who go looking for them would find one.
That’s assuming they are like bears or deer which they wouldn’t be. If they are apes, they would be crazy intelligent compared to any other large animal in NA. And they probably aren’t 10 feet tall, probably witnesses over exaggerating size due to shock or fear, I doubt an ape can be that tall and bipedal, doesn’t make sense to me but I’m not educated in this stuff. Who knows, what if Bigfoot directly evolved to get away from humans? Maybe hunting and killing pushed them to become evasive, which is what is currently happening in some groups of chimps. If they really do exist, they wouldn’t he just like any forest animal. They would be incredibly intelligent, fast, and experts at evasion. Also, people that allegedly see Sasquatch don’t go out looking for them. They just stumble upon them or the animal tries to scare them and stuff. It isn’t like how you can track a deer or a fox. It’s just very different.
My point is that if you set up a trail cam to monitor deer populations, if Bigfoot is around, you'd see him as clearly on that cam as you would a deer. Trail cams unintentionally capture all kinds of rare animals from spirit bears to formerly extinct birds. So what would be special about Bigfoot if every other large animal that lives in our forests can be found on trail cam footage, but not the giant bipedal ape?
Primates are known, depending on the species, to display a reasonable amount of aversion to trail cameras if they notice them. The smaller the group of apes, the less likely they are to interact with a camera or show up on said camera. Orangutans, for example, rarely show up on cameras and are known to evade humans. The fact that this is changing is recent. Apes back then were not keen on allowing humans in their territory. This changed with Goodall afaik. This could be even further shown in Sasquatch. What if they are even keener on avoiding cameras? Or maybe some random dude in the middle of nowhere has images of Sasquatch on his trail cameras and we don’t even know. Or maybe we are aware of atleast one, the Jacobson photo.
By definition, since bigfoot avoids trail cameras, any trail cam pictures of him are fakes or misidentifications. So we can dismiss the Jacobs picture, which is a bear anyway. You can't claim the logic both ways. Either bigfoot avoids trail cams, which explains the lack of pics, or he doesn't avoid them, which explains the Jacobs photo but begs the question why there aren't more.
Orangutans avoid trail cameras aswell but we do have pictures of them from said cameras. Just because they avoid them some times doesn’t mean we can’t catch them lacking rarely. The Jacob’s photo has some details that doesn’t conclusively say it’s a bear.
The Jacobs photo is a bear. There are clear pics of bear cubs from a few minutes before the 'bigfoot' pic. The photos that should have been taken just before the 'bigfoot' one have never been shared, which makes me believe they are clearly showing bears. Unless you can make an argument that the only bigfoots to get caught on trailcams are the sadly deformed ones that look like skinny bears... Anyhow, yes, non-bigfoot primates get caught on trail cams. So do all animals, including humans. So, if bigfoot can trigger trail cams, and assuming that there are 1m trail cams in the US and 5,000 bigfoots, how many interactions and pics can we expect in a year? Remember [the bigfoot sightings map](https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/looking-bigfoot-follow-map-others-have-seen-em-there-4b11203811) though, and we can't argue that all the bigfoots are in an inaccessible wilderness where humans never go. They're not, they're everywhere. Remember the [California wolverine](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thedodo.com/amphtml/california-wolverine-trail-cam-922167684.html) - there was only one of those and we still got multiple pics. Is bigfoot likely to be the same? So how many bigfoot pics should we expect each year?
Humans are keen to avoid cameras and law enforcement and yet fugitives still get captured. Humans know the rules of the road and to look both ways before crossing a street, but tens of thousands of them still get hit by cars every year. Somehow bigfoot has a perfect of being completely elusive. But then r/bigfoot has pages and pages of stories of bigfoot being extremely visible and going out of their way to be seen by people. So how does that work? It's a game of Shrodinger's Bigfoot. It's elusive and that's why we can't find it, but then plenty of them aren't.
TIL there are pastel black bears
There are blue ones
I would bet if we had a body, like we do for the giant squid, scientists would be more inclined to study. With the giant squid we had them wash up, which completely changed scientific opinion about it because there was a type specimen and irrefutable proof. For Bigfoot there is no type specimen yet, the closest thing we have is the PGF. So scientists don’t study it. When a Bigfoot turns up dead the amount of money thrown at getting good footage will be phenomenal, and when that happens we will in fact find a lot of footage. You don’t look like an academic kook with the giant squid because no one doubts it and we don’t have a substantial culture around ridiculing it anymore, for Bigfoot it’s the opposite, people won’t look at the evidence including most academics and have been conditioned to automatically ridicule it. There is in fact a substantial amount of evidence though.
Mhm. If we never found giant squid corpses it would be just like Bigfoot.
Correction: IT WAS just like Bigfoot, except at that time in history wild men and apemen were treated more as real and likely. They ridiculed the shit out of the idea of a giant squid. All those old paintings of what look like a giant octopus attacking ships, the so called “kraken” if you believe that you’re a moron. Well it turns out there are in fact enormous cephalopods.. we forget history so fast, things that were just yesterday ridiculed will be treated as fact and obvious by the masses tomorrow as soon as a body is found. People that ridiculed and made fun will be the same people first in line saying shit like “I always believed it”, or “I always knew”, because the average person wants to appear intelligent and aware when in fact the average person is well pretty average overall. They haven’t researched the available evidence, they haven’t seen the terror in a persons eyes after an encounter, they haven’t seen the paradigm shifting trauma that was experienced. But when you do see it and you do a deep dive, there’s alot more to it than meets the eye on Bigfoot. Theres something to it and I can’t say what it is or is not exactly just that there is something. We have this tendency of taking common fact as ordinary and uncommon or edge of understanding fields and topics as untrust worthy or ridiculous when in fact many of our greatest discoveries originate on the fringes. Another fun fact about those old paintings of seeming giant octopi attacking ships, distinctly not squid. A large piece of flesh washes up a few years back that does appear to be a large and undiscovered piece of an octopus, the piece of flesh would make the entire octopus quite large, possibly giant squid large, I haven’t seen any studies drop as of yet but that’s something possibly in the works as well, and if substantiated could make those paintings we ridicule maybe not seem so outlandish, a squid isn’t climbing up a ship, but an octopus might, especially in the days before loud engines and metal hulls.
I wish Bigfoot was real. That would be so cool. But I don't think it is.
People who hunt BF cannot afford a camera
...or dont know how to use one
This sounds like something a Bigfoot would say
No, uhh i uhh THEYRE ONTO US
[Let’s get out of here!](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/229/093/3a0.gif)
Lol exactly...bigfoot ain't real. I used to believe too when I was younger then I grew up lol
My stance has always been, "Yes, Bigfoot did once exist. Like 300,000 years ago. It was called Gigantophitecus and it was from China." That's the closest you're gonna get to an extremely large 'ape man'. An extinct orangutan that we now think doesn't even look that much like the stereotypical Bigfoot. If there was ever a Bigfoot, it's long since extinct. Just like the plesiosaurus or the megalodon or whatever dinosaurs people keep saying are still alive in Africa. Just because coelacanths are still with us doesn't mean every other cool extinct creature someone once claimed they saw is for certain alive. A bunch of people claim to have seen the Jersey Devil, and we all know that whole mythology started as Ben freaking Franklin trolling a dude.
We DO have some dinosaurs still living with us, the birds :) Symbols of peace and love.
And when anyone points out something like “Well what about the new species of insects that are getting discovered all the time in places like Borneo?” they’re conveniently forgetting things like 1) Insects in remote uninhabited jungles on the other side of the world are harder to find than 10 foot gorillas in Washington state, and 2) New species of insects that are discovered are very similar to insects we already know about. It’s not like some brand new completely abstract insect never before been visualized is being discovered. It’s just some beetle with a slightly longer thorax or a butterfly with a slightly different pattern. I’d only buy the likelihood of a species of giant ape men existing in the Pacific Northwest if the area was already inhabited by thousands of variations of giant ape men species.
The same logic works for megladons or giant sea monsters. We're finding blind crabs and slightly different shaped fish, not gigantic predators
Bigfoot is a bear standing up
False. **Dwight Shrute Impression** It's a barn owl standing on top of a crane.
it's a crane on top of a barm owl wearing a basking shark's skin.
I'm not against cryptids such as living Thylacine, but bigfoot is so stupid to me. In the 1950s, there could be some basis for it, in 2024 though?
Giant squids can't teleport.
You sure?
Yes, however they can teleport with the help of a Bigfoot riding them underwater.
Good to know!
Yikes. Its 2024 and people still think Bigfoot exists...
Wym there are plenty of big feet pictures all over the internet
Same with UFOs too.
Accurate
Oh bigfoot footage is much more common now. The problem is quality has gone down
Quality hasn't gone down, it's stayed the same since the 1960s.
At least the PGF was clearly some bigfoot thing there are some very blurry photos now
Whoa I'm now totally convinced by that totally scientific graph OP made in Paint.
Thank you for being totally convinced by this meme made in paint showcasing an exaggerated version of how we have multiple confirmed videos of one animal that used to be a cryptid while we have none of the other. And one of those cryptids lives 6000ft below water while the other "lives" in the forests of north america. Im also totally convinced by the 5x10 pixel video showing a suspiciously gorilla costume-esque hominid.
Heh yeah, I'm just being smart ass and felt the need to knock your MS paint job. Don't really need more than that to convey your (valid) point though.
In all fairness, the giant squid hasn't been a cryptid for hundreds of years, as their carcasses regularly wash up on beaches. That being said, I love your post and find it hilarious.
Yeah exactly, that's the point. One of those used to be a cryptid and it didn't remain one for long. Still no bigfoot.
😭
Well thats because they go underground, DUH!
There are no trees in the ocean to hide behind.
I still think there may be *something* that is Bigfoot. Maybe it’s not a giant undiscovered ape (actually, it’s most likely not that lol) but there’s just been so many sightings and stories that I don’t think the entire idea can be dismissed. Even if it’s just some weird looking bears or something mundane like that, I do think there’s some existing thing out there that inspired the legend of Bigfoot.
it's simple, a few people misreported something, which happens, and a thousand people make up or embelish stories to catch on to the bigfoot bandwagon. Same thing happened with Mothman.
Not a believer or a flat denier but don't we at least have a decent idea where to look for these squid now? (genuine question)
Not when they first found them, but yeah. Though habitats are much less specific in ***THE OPEN OCEAN*** compared to dry land.
Thank you for the reply.
Got any sources? Or numbers, timeline, any actual information at all? Or is this just your personal hot take? And really, if no one else is going to say it: photographic/video evidence of the Big Guy should be called Bigfootage.
This is a meme, while there's no direct sources involved in the making of this, look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear giant squid footage when it used to just be a monster told by sailors. Now look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear bigfoot footage.
I really enjoy the use of ms paint for this graph
Got too many cameras in the ocean and not enough in the woods
It's almost like the sightings can be written off as a bear sighting.
The Patterson Gimlin footage would like a word.
Dehh babbabban blimblim oogeg
This is the problem with a lot of Cryptids. Probably the reason why I'm still skeptical of 99% of Cryptids. I'm guessing they extremely endangered so we don't have as much footage of them. But even then there is a lot of footage and studies of animals whose population is probably in the single digits by now. Also, there should be some archeological evidence. Maybe there is but I haven't seen it idk.
Here's the thing, most cryptids don't stay cryptids for long if theyre genuine. Giant squids used to be cryptids, monsters told from sailor to sailor and used as inspiration for novels, but now we know they exist. Still no bigfoot.
Lol was this made with Paint?
Crayons more probably.
Can't see what's not there
Im very conflicted, I used to believe, now im leaning more towards not believing/not caring. On one hand, there is no evidence. On the other, North America is huge with a huge forest. Theres also the gigantopithecus to think about. I dont think there is based on a lack of body. But who knows.
That's an impressive graph. is the dataset available to download :D I felnit's a good and valid point though.
Yeah but giant squids are...giant
Is this a real graph? What or where is the original? What is the data that was used to make this graph? Yes, I am wondering and curious about this....
It's not, it's a clearly exaggerated meme meant to portray how giant squid used to be a cryptid but with the rise of cameras we got a ton of clear, confirmed footage of them, while there's still none for bigfoot.
See one, hear one! [https://youtu.be/iJP2CJy5xEY?si=NZyxHznSkJtvnJgh](https://youtu.be/iJP2CJy5xEY?si=NZyxHznSkJtvnJgh)
if anything, this just adds more credence to the idea that Bigfoot is some kind of spirit, entity, or inter-dimensional being 🤷🏻♀️
we don't even know of inter-dimensional spirits are real either.
The number of giant squid video is not even close to number of cameras, like that should be a horizontal line. Such a big number apart.
Clearly a joke mate lighten up
I think the Bigfoot have a vibration level we can't capture easily. Perhaps other dimensional. Seen often with orbs, or are they the orbs? 🤔
Giant Squid buy more cameras?
Yeah. The inflation of camera prices in the squid market was huge.
I’ve never seen anything more legitimate in my life than this stunning example of data science
I've never seen anything more legitimate in my life than the 5x10 pixel video of a blurry figure. This is a meme, while there's no direct sources involved in the making of this, look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear giant squid footage when it used to just be a monster told by sailors. Now look at the amount of confirmed uncontroversial, clear bigfoot footage.
Yup it sure is a meme. Stellar work, mate, very funny and informative.
Thank you! Though what's this weird flavour i feel in my mouth? It's a bit of a salty flavour...
Dunno what you got in your mouth, mate! That’s between you and your god. Best!
[удалено]
My man . . . There are trailcams that record at 4k. I've seen plenty of amazing, crystal clear footage of deer, bear, coyote, wolf, wolverine, elk, moose, etc. but somehow only people with potato quality cameras come across Bigfoot?
[удалено]
If that is the case, How do you reconcile all the sightings? Did the bigfoots who were supposedly seen by people just make a mistake? If they are hyper vigilant about people, why do so many people claim to have seen one?
Bigfoot is blurry...and to me that's extra scary.
Even eliminating smartphones, there are likely still many more high quality cameras in the forests around the world then there are in the depths of the oceans. So one would expect at least some better photos of Sasquatch.
Isn't sasquatch actually the name of a Native American folktale? I thought it was seperate from bigfoot
That might be the case but the two have been used interchangeably for long enough that I don’t see how it would be confusing or detract from the actual point of the conversation.
I'm not saying it's detracting or anything, im just genuienly asking
Ah, my bad. Sorry if I came off rude. There was a great video done by Trey the Explainer that delved into the links between Bigfoot and many native myths and lore. I’d check it out for information about that. https://youtu.be/7zJhJsdoTYQ?si=m0fx8174JB0I3DD1
I've seen that video, and i love it! This is why i was asking, im not natively english so the wording of Trey had me confused.
Gotcha, I can see how it would cause some confusion. I think by this point the term Sasquatch has been firmly integrated into the topic of Bigfoot and is now recognized as a moniker of Bigfoot. It may not be true to the actual origin of the term, but I guess it’s just an aspect of language evolving over time.
If we were to use classification terms, i guess Sasquatch would be the "junior synonym" of bigfoot
That still applies. We have clear footage of an animal that lives 2000 feet into the ocean, but nothing of a giant ape in America? No bones, no fossils, no clear footage?
Bigfoot is better at playing hide-and-seek. You try hiding in the deep with nothing within miles to hide behind.
fuck youre right....
Collation is not causation,... This graph ( as painstakingly constructed as it is) illustrates a false premise/equivalent. One can never prove a negative. For example one doesn't capture a picture of whatever in a place so one increases the number of cameras in that place, still no pictures. This only proves an increased likelihood that there isn't anything in that place not that there isn't anything anywhere else. There is a lot of space in the wilderness where humans just haven't touched grass . The assumption that because we have an area surrounded by a border that everything inside that border has been surveyed, is fairly silly. Gorillas were cryptids until the mid 19th century, so were pandas, now we have both in zoos.
Did you see my post earlier with [the map of bigfoot sightings ](https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/looking-bigfoot-follow-map-others-have-seen-em-there-4b11203811) Bigfoot aren't in the wilderness. People see them by highways, in trailer parks and by casino dumpsters. You can't use the 'untrodden wilderness ' argument to explain the lack of bigfoot evidence.
That's a REALLY good map, good job on it!
Thanks - all credit to Joshua Stevens, who created it. I just borrowed it. It is nice though. I've used it three times in your thread. It's my way of disagreeing with people who say "Of course we don't have any evidence for bigfoot. Duh! He only lives in the remote untrodden wilderness where people never go!" (They usually follow it up with "You're a stupid Brit and you don't understand our proper American wilderness and how big it is and that's why you don't believe in bigfoot because our forests are really really big" etc) Which, from the map, isn't true. He's reported everywhere, so there should be evidence everywhere.
There could be a mixture of real sightings and made up sightings. Of course, I don't believe in bigfoot due to the lack of evidence but just because some sightings are made up does not prove that all sightings are made up. When a real animal is rare and people are looking for it there are often sightings that turn out to be misidentifications.
This is such a shit take. Bigfoot is an inter-dimensional traveler. Giant Squids are not
Sarcasm... Or??
Has anyone "lived" in an area where Bigfoots are known to exist? I always imagined setting up trail cams all over the place (and not just the blurry 720p cams but 4K?). It has to be done for months. It could even be up to a year. So far I feel most explorers tend to stay for a few days and that's it.
Has anyone lived in an area where giant squids are known to exist, 6000ft underwater? No. Yet we have clear giant squid footage Still no bigfoot.