Bigfoot | Fact or Fiction?

[Willamena]

Sorry, but no.



Incorrect. We have been through all the possible areas enough to know that some community of human/ape-like creatures aren't living there. This isn't 100 or 200 years ago, when great expanses of America, Canada and South America were yet to be settled or explored.

If we were talking about some small animal, like a mouse or something, then it might be possible. But not something the size of humans.



How exactly do you prove something isn't? How do you want me to prove to you that Bigfoot isn't? People have been searching for it with cameras and video-cameras for decades now. It's been a legend for well over a hundred years. No one yet has come up with any concrete evidence. All we have are some random, blurry camera shots and video that could easily be faked. In all of the research done, amazingly no one has every found any real evidence, like bones, a full body, feces, hair, etc. Nothing.

Do you want me to disprove leprechauns to you to? How about unicorns? I mean, hey, it's possible unicorns exist, and we just haven't seen them, right?

There's nothing left to do but laugh at the notion of a Bigfoot existing.

Who says they're communal?

 

[Viker]

Fact or fiction? I'm going with silliness.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

How about unicorns? I mean, hey, it's possible unicorns exist, and we just haven't seen them, right?

Unicorn's don't exist? I beg to differ. There is a lot more evidence of unicorns than there is of Bigfoot.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

No, those are stalactites. A unicorns horn would be perfect, because they're so magical. Those are all wavy.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

No, those are stalactites. A unicorns horn would be perfect, because they're so magical. Those are all wavy.

Not Stalactites. Unicorn horns have always been portrayed as wavy.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Oh really? I was unaware of that. I was just being funny, or making a poor attempt at it.

 

[Willamena]

I always wondered how narwhals can swim in pods and not poke each other.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Oh really? I was unaware of that. I was just being funny, or making a poor attempt at it.

Don't mess with the unicorns! Those are real horns from a single horned animal, care to guess what it is?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I always wondered how narwhals can swim in pods and not poke each other.

Aw, you gave it away.

 

[Viker]

I always wondered how narwhals can swim in pods and not poke each other.

They probably use a safe approach method. Like with horses it's never a good idea to approach them from the rear or with bulls it's never a good idea to approach them face to face. They might have a sonar thing and just know to stop and then cautiously approach to parallel swim with each other.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Don't mess with the unicorns! Those are real horns from a single horned animal, care to guess what it is?

Rhinoceros? From what I've read, sometimes they have a genetic disorder, or something, where they only grow one horn.

 

[Nepenthe]

First, the reports. When they came across farms where chupacabra sightings were, they noticed the dead animals were partly drained of blood, but no meat was torn from the bones. Then, they started finding dead ones. After that, they began to be able to view them in the wild, alive, and noticed their eating habits.

Nope. There aren't any actual reports confirming chupacabra eating habits save for anecdotes from eyewitnesses. The assumption of blood consumption is based on the fact that people are for the most part ignorant about the physical signs of decomposition and scavenging. First, it often appears that "no meat was torn from the bones" because the pelt is often left behind as scavengers usually focus on and eat a dead animal's eyes, genitalia and the viscera through any available opening. Also, blood coagulates and dries so after a short period of time the carcass appears to have no blood though it's all there just no longer a liquid. It appears as if the animal has been bled dry and untouched when in actuality they have been thoroughly consumed. (see the well known cattle mutilation investigation conducted by FBI agent Ken Rommel in 1979).

The few chupacabra remains that have been recovered and tested are clearly dogs and coyotes. Not mutated dogs or coyotes much less a new species, just plain ol' feral dogs and coyotes with mange (though other genetic diseases have been proposed as well). There's this famous example of a chupacabra struck by a car in Texas in 2007:

It was tested at Texas State and found to be a coyote. not a hybrid mutant chupacabra alien or anything else.

Just a plain ol' coyote. And that's what has turned up again and again with tests on these particular cryptids. nothing exotic, just dogs and coyotes mixed with a lot of mystery mongering and hyperbole.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Rhinoceros? From what I've read, sometimes they have a genetic disorder, or something, where they only grow one horn.

No, the other posters are correct. It's a Narwhal horn.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Nope. There aren't any actual reports confirming chupacabra eating habits save for anecdotes from eyewitnesses. The assumption of blood consumption is based on the fact that people are for the most part ignorant about the physical signs of decomposition and scavenging. First, it often appears that "no meat was torn from the bones" because the pelt is often left behind as scavengers usually focus on and eat a dead animal's eyes, genitalia and the viscera through any available opening. Also, blood coagulates and dries so after a short period of time the carcass appears to have no blood though it's all there just no longer a liquid. It appears as if the animal has been bled dry and untouched when in actuality they have been thoroughly consumed. (see the well known cattle mutilation investigation conducted by FBI agent Ken Rommel in 1979).

The few chupacabra remains that have been recovered and tested are clearly dogs and coyotes. Not mutated dogs or coyotes much less a new species, just plain ol' feral dogs and coyotes with mange (though other genetic diseases have been proposed as well). There's this famous example of a chupacabra struck by a car in Texas in 2007:

It was tested at Texas State and found to be a coyote. not a hybrid mutant chupacabra alien or anything else.

Just a plain ol' coyote. And that's what has turned up again and again with tests on these particular cryptids. nothing exotic, just dogs and coyotes mixed with a lot of mystery mongering and hyperbole.

I never thought they were exotic or supernatural, or even a new species. I had read somewhere that the mutation theory was the most likely, but that could have been wrong. Or maybe me hoping it was more than diseased canines, although I find it odd that there are so many of them running around.

 

[Magic Man]

Who says they're communal?

No one.

 

[Valjean]

I always wondered how narwhals can swim in pods and not poke each other.

Probably the same way porcupines make love -- very carefully.

 

[Valjean]

Don't mess with the unicorns! Those are real horns from a single horned animal, care to guess what it is?

Not actually horns, though --teeth.

 

[connermt]

Sorry, but no.



Incorrect. We have been through all the possible areas enough to know that some community of human/ape-like creatures aren't living there. This isn't 100 or 200 years ago, when great expanses of America, Canada and South America were yet to be settled or explored.

If we were talking about some small animal, like a mouse or something, then it might be possible. But not something the size of humans.



How exactly do you prove something isn't? How do you want me to prove to you that Bigfoot isn't? People have been searching for it with cameras and video-cameras for decades now. It's been a legend for well over a hundred years. No one yet has come up with any concrete evidence. All we have are some random, blurry camera shots and video that could easily be faked. In all of the research done, amazingly no one has every found any real evidence, like bones, a full body, feces, hair, etc. Nothing.

Do you want me to disprove leprechauns to you to? How about unicorns? I mean, hey, it's possible unicorns exist, and we just haven't seen them, right?

There's nothing left to do but laugh at the notion of a Bigfoot existing.

You are arrogant in your words.
What you are saying is not based on reality. There have been scientific evidence found that points to the possibility of an ape species in some places of the world.
Educate yourself.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Not actually horns, though --teeth.

Tusks actually.

 

[Magic Man]

You are arrogant in your words.

Incorrect.

What you are saying is not based on reality. There have been scientific evidence found that points to the possibility of an ape species in some places of the world.

Like what?

Educate yourself.

I have, which is how I came to the conclusion that Bigfoot is a legend and nothing more, and that once you think about it for a few minutes, it would be silly to still believe such a thing exists.