Forums → The Tavern → Bigfoot

Yeah, I saw the show too. It was strange.... They saw a video of a "Bigfoot" running across a road. I don't think it's real, I mean the thing is supposed to be about the size of a human, humans are all over north America, and a species with such small numbers would die out very fast.

I think the sasquatches are VERY real, because I live in florida and there is a legend (or truth?) about a skunk ape whitch is a smaller version of bigfoot. (very smelly too...)

They already proved that skunk apes were escaped orangutans

yer right thta was a good comparison between the bigfoot thing and a bear

Meh, maybe in other places in the world like with the yeti, bu probably not in North America. Fingers crossed though.

To me, my theory about Bigfoot is that it does exist, but it probably is a monkey or person with a genetic mutation.

The most interesting story about BigFoot is that nobody has managed to recreate the Patterson-Gimlin film of '67, despite the special effects we now have being far more advanced.

The BBC tried a few years ago and failed, not just a little fail, but a total fail.

If Patterson-Gimlin's film is a fake (which I believe it to be) why has no-one been able to recreate the bigfoot they claimed to have filmed?

Where is the original suit, if that is what it is?

And when you look at detailed footage, you see muscle movement on the suit. How was that muscle movement created? And remember, it was '67, think about the films at the time and the low tech special effects.

Patterson in particular had already written books less than a decade earlier about a female bigfoot, with artwork copied from magazines, pictures recreated from so-called eye witness accounts, so he had form. For him to just happen to catch a female bigfoot on camera is stretching belief, but how did they manage it? And if it was a man in a suit, who was it? It couldn't have been Gimlin or Patterson for obvious reasons.

there is massive areas of the world unexplored so it's hard to prove anything that is relatively realistic as such doesn't exist just look at the coelacanth people thought it was extinct for thousands of years and it was relatively recently found to be living deep in the ocean pretty much unchanged.

Funny enough I was watching a couple of Bigfoot shows just a couple of days ago. Most of the time the team hunting bigfoot discounted stories and accounts by the witnesses but this video had everyone confused. The only thing they could agree was it was some sort of ape. Bigfoot baby or escaped pet ape? The world may never know.

behemoth

And when you look at detailed footage, you see muscle movement on the suit. How was that muscle movement created? And remember, it was '67, think about the films at the time and the low tech special effects.

there is massive areas of the world unexplored so it's hard to prove anything that is relatively realistic as such doesn't exist just look at the coelacanth people thought it was extinct for thousands of years and it was relatively recently found to be living deep in the ocean pretty much unchanged.

Isn't that a dinosaur?

Job 40:15-24
New International Version (NIV)


15 âLook at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
17 Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
18 Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron.
19 It ranks first among the works of God,
yet its Maker can approach it with his sword.
20 The hills bring it their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants it lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal it in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround it.
23 A raging river does not alarm it;
it is secure, though the Jordan should surge against its mouth.

i]

The leviathan, a brontosaur? Let's see...

Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you

and which feeds on grass like an ox.
A brontosaurus is an herbavore.

What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
a brontosaurus is strong.

The hills bring it their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby
the brontosaurus eats the leaves off trees on the hills; and it was a peaceful creature, and was not threatening to other animals as it did not eat meat.

21 Under the lotus plants it lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal it in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround it.
The brontosaurus was able towalk into lakes and rivers. because its neck was so long, it could keep its head above water, yet be completely submerged and consealed in a swamp.

A raging river does not alarm it;
it is secure, though the Jordan should surge against its mouth.
a brontosaurus was strong enough and tall enough that it could cross the jordan river during flood season, if the need arose.

Since the 17th century CE there have been many attempts to identify Behemoth. Some scholars have seen him as a real creature, usually the hippopotamus, although occasionally as the elephant, crocodile, water buffalo or for some creationists, a dinosaur. The reference to Behemoth's "tail" that "moves like a cedar" (40:17), is a problem for most of these theories, since it cannot easily be identified with the tail of any animal. Some have identified it as the elephant's trunk, but it might instead refer to Behemoth's penis based on another meaning of the Hebrew word "move" which means "extend" and on the second last part of verse 17 describing the sinew around its "stones"â"not, as in the translation above, his thighs. The Vulgate, recognising this, uses the word "testiculorum". A second opinion is that Behemoth is a product of the imagination of the author of Job, a symbol of God's power (and indeed, in verse 24 he is described as having a ring ("snare&quot through his nose, a sign that he has been tamed by Yahweh).

anyway, i extremly doubt that the bible is referencing bigfoot here.

The leviathan, a brontosaur? Let's see...