Some basic questions about Bigfoot

[Travis]

I don't really follow the Bigfoot threads so pardon me if some of these are redundant.

A Squatch (don't blame me, I didn't come up with that name) would appear to me to need upwards of 4000 calories a day to support their enormous bulk. What are they hypothesized to eat?

Are they hypothesized to live in pods/herds/clans, as monogamous couples or as independents?

How is it that they are both so rare as to be unconfirmed as an existing species but so common that they are reported in all the states excluding Hawaii?

Has anyone tried to locate them through dung research or aircraft with downward infrared equipment?

I once encountered something in the woods that let off one hell of a loud roar of a type that I had never heard before. I've always just assumed it was an existing and known animal making noises in an unfamiliar way. But someone else might have interpreted it as a Bigfoot encounter. Wouldn't it be logical to just explain away most sightings like this?

 

[manofthesea]

There's a search function on this forum. And numerous existing threads regarding bigfoot.

 

[manofthesea]

The most reasoned explanations can be found on "Bigfoot, The Definitive Guide" (or something) that's making the rounds on cable.

The scientists are even conversant in spoken English.

 

[Travis]

There's a search function on this forum. And numerous existing threads regarding bigfoot.

I'm not an idiot.

If I wanted to make use of the search function I would have. I don't feel like trawling through endless threads where ideologues trade barbs back and forth over Bigfoot culture issues.

 

[MikeG]

In answering, please be assured that I am not passing on any facts, or any special knowledge that I have, just some reported observations. The veracity of those observations is for you to judge. My judgement is that it is too early to make a judgement.

A Squatch (don't blame me, I didn't come up with that name) would appear to me to need upwards of 4000 calories a day to support their enormous bulk. What are they hypothesized to eat?

Omnivorous. Leaves, roots, small mammals, deer, pigs, fish.

Are they hypothesized to live in pods/herds/clans, as monogamous couples or as independents?

Small family groups.

How is it that they are both so rare as to be unconfirmed as an existing species but so common that they are reported in all the states excluding Hawaii?

They wouldn't have to be very rare to escape detection, just live in places where humans don't go.

Has anyone tried to locate them through dung research or aircraft with downward infrared equipment?

Reputed sasquatch scat has been collected many times, but of course can't be assigned to sasquatch. There is huge room for error in mis-identifying scat. Infra-red stuff doesn't "see" well through tree canopies.

I once encountered something in the woods that let off one hell of a loud roar of a type that I had never heard before. I've always just assumed it was an existing and known animal making noises in an unfamiliar way. But someone else might have interpreted it as a Bigfoot encounter. Wouldn't it be logical to just explain away most sightings like this?

Yes. (Or as outright hoaxes).

Although to be fair, it doesn't appear that yours was a sighting.

-

All the above offered without prejudice. I am an open-minded sceptic, curious about the phenomena, but unconvinced that there is anything of substance behind the stories. Unlike some, however, I am waiting for the publication of the DNA studies before deciding that they are a hoax or are in error, or that there is an uncatalogued primate running around in the woods.

I'm just passing on a summary of the stories, for whatever that is worth.......

Mike

 

[SezMe]

They wouldn't have to be very rare to escape detection, just live in places where humans don't go.

Can you identify places where bigfoot has been asserted to exist that humans don't go. Remember, this "place" has to be sufficiently large to support a population of large mammals.

 

[s4zando]

I don't really follow the Bigfoot threads so pardon me if some of these are redundant.

A Squatch (don't blame me, I didn't come up with that name) would appear to me to need upwards of 4000 calories a day to support their enormous bulk. What are they hypothesized to eat?

As a longtime lurker who has recently taken up posting here, I have perused about as much of the bf threads as I can take. I may have gleaned just enough to be useful on this one. As I understand, dumpster diving is a great source of caloric potential. And apparently they are capable of tossing pigs. A species that has selected for that ability should be able to eat one first, and chuck the carcass. Watch out for flying ribs.

Are they hypothesized to live in pods/herds/clans, as monogamous couples or as independents?

As a fully imaginary figment of lore, they have been hypothesized as all of the above.

How is it that they are both so rare as to be unconfirmed as an existing species but so common that they are reported in all the states excluding Hawaii?

From what I gather, wholly-invented species have the advantage of being both everywhere, and nowhere.

Has anyone tried to locate them through dung research or aircraft with downward infrared equipment?

Yes, but all dung research is foiled by the fact that for some reason, they just..can't..find any..

I have no idea about the infrared. I would assume its been tried before, since infrared images are perfectly suited to create blobs, globs, and smears. Now that's some good 'footin'! Although I have heard they may have some infrared capabilities themselves, so there may be interference there. Also good 'footin'.

I once encountered something in the woods that let off one hell of a loud roar of a type that I had never heard before. I've always just assumed it was an existing and known animal making noises in an unfamiliar way. But someone else might have interpreted it as a Bigfoot encounter. Wouldn't it be logical to just explain away most sightings like this?

A thousand times yes. If rational and logical viewpoints explain it. Imagine being with a group on a squatch hunt. Or even camping with some friends, and the most colorful personality in the bunch just happens to be a believer.

 

[captain koolaid]

I don't really follow the Bigfoot threads so pardon me if some of these are redundant.

A Squatch (don't blame me, I didn't come up with that name) would appear to me to need upwards of 4000 calories a day to support their enormous bulk. What are they hypothesized to eat?

Pancakes. Pork and beans. Zagnut bars. Skittles. Apples. Pigs (sometimes two at a time). Deer. Leaves. Berries. Fish. Bacon. Eggs... Well, supposedly anyway.

I think it's a bunch of hooey. What they really eat, is people.

Are they hypothesized to live in pods/herds/clans, as monogamous couples or as independents?

All of the above. But they are, by nature, perverts. Squatches engage in depraved tickle fights and orgies. Bigfoot disgusts me.

How is it that they are both so rare as to be unconfirmed as an existing species but so common that they are reported in all the states excluding Hawaii?

Either interdimensional travel via quanta energy field loops, or ninja hobo skills. I suspect both.

Has anyone tried to locate them through dung research or aircraft with downward infrared equipment?

Yes, but they bury their business, do it in the river, or, only poop in barns. The infrared thing won't work. Bigfoot is hep to all that technical stuff. He can detect cameras, IR doohickeys and whatnot with his interdimensional mind rays. Bigfoot is like "Predator", but perverted. You can't see him, unless he decloaks and will do unspeakable things to your body.

I once encountered something in the woods that let off one hell of a loud roar of a type that I had never heard before. I've always just assumed it was an existing and known animal making noises in an unfamiliar way. But someone else might have interpreted it as a Bigfoot encounter. Wouldn't it be logical to just explain away most sightings like this?

Yeah, Bigfoot is a bit of a stretch. Dinosaur, I reckon. Definitely a dinosaur.

 

[Travis]

Assuming they are omnivores....is there really enough food available in the remote areas of the Pacific northwest to support them?

And if they go dumpster diving I would think we'd have some conclusive video evidence of them by now.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.bfro.net/gdb/show_FAQ.asp?id=584

 

[s4zando]

Assuming they are omnivores....is there really enough food available in the remote areas of the Pacific northwest to support them?

And if they go dumpster diving I would think we'd have some conclusive video evidence of them by now.

Bolding, mine, sums up the problem of *all* BF hypotheses up to this point.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Bolding, mine, sums up the problem of *all* BF hypotheses up to this point.

If only someone would invent some sort of compact video camera that people could carry around with them at all times...then we would get LOADS of videos!

Unfortunately, this isn't "The Jetsons".

 

[Old man]

A Squatch (don't blame me, I didn't come up with that name) would appear to me to need upwards of 4000 calories a day to support their enormous bulk.

Uhm, I think your calorie requirements are a little off. According to this calculator http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html I need more than that.

A 7 foot, 400 lb Squatch (who only has to work as hard as I do) would need more than 7500. A more realistic number would be 9,000 to 10,000.

 

[Travis]

Well I was trying to be generous with calorie requirements. Heck I get by with less than 2000 a day.

 

[Resume]

Well I was trying to be generous with calorie requirements. Heck I get by with less than 2000 a day.

Me too!

And it sucks.

 

[autumn1971]

They wouldn't have to be very rare to escape detection, just live in places where humans don't go.

In the contiguous united states, there arent any of those.

 

[Drewbot]

Certain parts of Detroit are far more difficult to survive hiking through than the most remote valley in the Rocky Mountains

 

[xtifr]

In the contiguous united states, there arent any of those.

Well, yes, but if you just ignore the millions of people who regularly visit our national parks and wilderness areas, then there's nobody there.

 

[LAL]

Can you identify places where bigfoot has been asserted to exist that humans don't go. Remember, this "place" has to be sufficiently large to support a population of large mammals.

Skamania County, Washington, home of Mt. St. Helens. People tend to stick to roads, trails, campsites and logging operations when out in the "wilderness".

Last I saw the human population was around 10,000, mostly along the Columbia, and they'd put in a second traffic light.

There's plenty of food, especially if you relish inner bark on trees and grubs. I had friends who went siwash on cross country skiing trips.

The sighting that really got me interested was 1/2 mile east of Beacon Rock State Park. There was track evidence and an investigation by local law enforcement. Sheriff Closner's comment was "I guess I'll have to stop laughing."

 

[The Shrike]

I'm not sure that Mt. St. Helens is a good example of a wild place where people don't go. I'd also question whether the hundreds of geologists and biologists who've been combing that place for the last 40 years would be listed as residents of Skamania County.