Forums → The Tavern → Bigfoot, Sasquatch and others
| 71 | 8432 |
- 71 Replies
I'm willing to accept that some sightings are misidentification, but there are some that simply can't be explained away with bears or chimps.
There are other ways to 'antropomorphise' things on pictures for example.. I admit that if someone says he saw something like a big ape, it's hard to say if he's making it up or not. But some people see for example pictures of the surface of mars and see a face on it. or this picture here is supposed to show the Yeti:
We tend to recognize familiar shapes in specks or formations that could be it, it lies in many animals nature.
The planet is so huge and there is so little of it that we have actually explored. Scientists are discovering new plants and animals all the time, so the possibilities are definitely out there.
The surface isn't a closed book anymore, we know almost nothing about the deep sea but we know quite a lot about our own habitate.
Of course we haven't discovered everything, but there are a few factors that make big humanoid existences pretty improbable:
- they're big
- they would leave quite a lot of traces, feces, their impact on local wildlife should be recordable (if they hunt for example)
- the population size; to live secretely, they should be restricted to a few families spread over the world, but it is completely impossible for a group of a size of even a few hundreds to subside over time. To survive, they should be much more, and then we definitely would know them
- the fact tales about bigfoots and yetis are known worldwide, but if it was so widely spread, like stated above, we probably would have discovered at least one population.
- primates are primarily social animals, most sightings however describe a single individuum aimlessly walking around
jayjay9 stated to have seen something big and hairy walking up a hill in Switzerland. Our country is so densely populated however that I can safely state, it is impossible that it was a bigfoot.
@CommanderPaladin
Did you know that monks in Tibet present a few yeti scalps? 
Well guess what, they're made of goat fur.
Some also had a few hairs that they attributed to the yeti, and effectively, microscopic analysis couldn't attribute the hair to any known primate. Finally however, they made a DNA analysis and found out those were hair of a rare, but already documented mountain goat.
All I'm saying is, I won't completely set aside the existence of cryptids, since some have been found to be regular animals in the local wildlife, like the tasmanian wolf (now extinct). But I will keep a very strong skepticism about any sort of 'evidence' as long as it hasn't been clearly identified. I also hold on to the few points I made about the improbability of any kind of bigger cryptid existing without having been found.