| |
|
|
Image
© Rob Roy Menzies
|
|
|
This website attempts to provide the interested reader or research student with a general overview of the biology of the sasquatch to the same degree that one would expect from, say, a bear website. In view of the massive amount of evidence in the form of sightings, footprints, nesting sites and other artifacts, the sasquatch is viewed as a species of a very large, living, hirsute bipedal hominid. It should be noted that apes are quadrupeds, and no ape has ever evolved to walk upright as a course of normal behavior like the sasquatch does. Though I suspect the work of FFI, Chivers, Martyr, Holden and others will soon surprise us with what visually appears to be a tiny rendition of a bipedal gibbon-like species in Sumatra's Kerinci region. The truth of the orang pendek is unknown but I suspect not for long. The orang pendek is not a yeti as the British Press insists on calling it. The Himalayan yeti is descriptively divergent from the Indonesian orang pendek and both are dissimilar from the North American bigfoot, the Mongolian alma and the Chinese wildman to name a few. The only common characteristic is their pelage, bipedal ability and elusiveness. What bigfoot or the sasquatch might be is unknown. There is no significant piece of evidence to support the theory that Gigantopithecus walked upright despite pronouncements that it did or may have. Moreover, none of its descendants evolved to walk upright. Stripped of its hair, the bipedal North American sasquatch expresses many more human features than ape traits, especially the pattern of dermal ridging on its hands and the 5 toed barefoot imprint being left for us to discern. Wherever possible, I have availed myself with manuscripts, books and large databases that have accumulated over centuries both foreign and domestic and have extracted averages by statistical means. We will always try to err on the side of conservative estimates and probabilities; never losing the honor of objectivity in the face of the ape hypothesis, which has been shoved down our throats by scientists who have never seen that which they evaluate. A brazen statement likely to ruffle feathers; but wholly true. There is NO favored description originating out of the Pacific Northwest except my own. Personal experience includes the Pacific Rim countries, Mongolia, China, Tibet and random investigations in other parts of the United States. Investigators who confine their research to specific areas seem to lose a wide range of knowledge gained from witness diversities including foreign cultures, folklore, superstition and plausible creature variables.... It is assumed, in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, that the sightings in North America correspond to one species, though with possible regional variants in color, height and mass. Other bigfoot-like creatures around the world are mentioned on this website with no scientific judgment as to their specific genus, other than what is written by scientists outside the United States in articles I have included. Much of the information you will read about the sasquatch is derived from eyewitness testimony coupled with my personal experience. In some cases, fraudulent reports become obvious to the eye by long-term investigators and the seasoned tracker. Determining fraud in this field is largely a matter of the judge's opinion, always personal, arbitrary and not subject to rigorous verification. In general, eye witnesses court ridicule even from next of kin and have more to lose from going public than from keeping their own counsel. Yet many do perpetrate false information for a myriad of complicated reasons. Despite various organizational codes of belief and the idiosyncratic proclamations of many, there is no bona fide bigfoot/sasquatch "expert," - only investigators with more or less experience, patience, scholarliness, opinions or prejudices toward many things including their own points of view. I am one of them and it is impossible to know the truth in the reports posted on this site. The research of sasquatches should not develop into a closed minded belief system. But it has with some of the old school. It should be an ongoing investigation, not a belief system until such time as we have a definitive answer for whatever is leaving these enormous footprints in our wilderness areas. Investigating the sasquatch is a sure way of consuming money, not earning it. Any interest in this field motivated by the financial gain of various organizations is misplaced and always suspect. This website often inserts short eyewitness comments to enliven the discussion, but without attribution to avoid the complexities of obtaining personal permission except where noted or required by copyright or courtesies extended to the original sources. I welcome contributions of information and theory. Use this site's search
capabilities: This website came together through
the years with the help of many wonderful people including scientists,
friends, forestry, fish & game, loggers, USGS workers, Native Americans,
First Nation Canadians, the Chinese, Mongolians, Russians, Tibetans, Indonesian
scholars; trackers, guides, coolies, porters, translators and skilled
laymen. It is primarily put together for the benefit of placing easy
access information out there for those who have an interest. This
website is not here to persuade, only to place information for the
perusal of the interested. We've recently been awarded by the editorial team over at a website
called Pokerlistings. They are currently working on a campaign to
recognize websites that offer content of superb quality, freely to their
visitors. We've been selected as they feel we are the premiere resource
for Bigfoot related information and accounts of encounters.
Thanks guys!
© Support@bigfootencounters.com |
|