Bigfoot: Is there enough evidence?

Answer 1

Unfortunately scientist seem to want a body. There has been, in my opinion, enough evidence to lend credit to it's existence. Like I have said on here before, in 1978 I lived in Flomaton, Alabama. One night along with about 12 other people saw Bigfoot. That is one of the times in my life I was scared beyond belief!!!!! I was so scared, that I took off and left my 6 year old sister behind. In lower Alabama it is known as the Alabama Booger. And look at all the tales the Native Americans have told about it for centuries.

Answer 2

The Gorilla
The Platypuss
The Megamouth Shark
The Celocamph
The Ribbon Fish
The Giant Squid

All species found and confirmed within the last 75 years. It's a big world, with many ancient cultures. All the ancient cultures have tales of a beast within their midst that were dispelled as myth until they were confirmed by science.

There is evidence on both sides of the Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Yeti, Abonimable Snowman, Yerin, arguments. Confirmed DNA that is of an unknown primate. There is eyewitness, and photgraphic eviedence. There are plaster casts,and video tape.

There is much evidence to support the existance of a large, upright walking, primate. But until there is one in captivity, or on a disection table, there will always be the naysayer.

I for one, truly believe that there is some basis for the belief in "Bigfoot". But my belief is mostly based on the hypothesis that science, in all it's divine wisdome, does not have all the answers.

We are an evolving species, and for all of our evolution, the simple quest for the unknow is the least evolved. Close mindedness is a fault that will always come to bare.

Who would have believed 100 years ago, that we would be able to go to the moon, map the human genome, or even understand some of our most taken for granted technologies. There was once a time that the director of the US Pattent office closed it's doors saying "all that could be invented, has been invented".

Remain open minded, and you will always surprise yourself. Nothing in life is certain, and there are still things we don't know. It is quite arrogant to believe that we know everything.

ADDITIONAL....I gave a very rational explanation of my view, and some close minded fool gave me a thumbs down. This is my point. I sincerely hope that one day there is proof. Mabye when a bigfoot rips the arms of some scientist who says he doesn't exist.

Answer 3

Scientiest will want a body to look at, so to them all the evidence in the world is not enough with out that. Cryptozoologist on the other hand will always be trying to prove to science that what they have is enough proof to decalre it a real new species of animal.

This site should tell you some more answers. They are even looking for peolple to look for bigfoot.

Answer 4

There is enough evidence for me but not for most scientists. For me it is proved beyond a 99.9 per cent doubt but then again I have studied it for many years. I have gone over the Patterson film endless hours and know it pretty well. It shows a female Bigfoot that walks away from Roger Patterson and Gimlin. I realize that at first glance it appears to be a man in a suit but it is so far beyond any suit that I have ever seen. The film shows a subject that walks in an inhuman way, has inhuman features and dimensions, and shows something walking away smoothly. In spite of the extremely broad shoulders and long arms, many muscle groups can be seen upon close examination. The muscles can be seen to be rippling under her skin. Stabilized versions have shown really natural long flowing hair on her head. Her foot shows an inhuman flexibility, seen on examination of some frames, shows a double ball (we have only one), also shown on casts of the prints she made, and way too many features to describe here. This is only one bit of evidence I decided to focus on. If the skeptics would be willing to open their eyes and really look at the evidence, I believe that bigfoot would gain a lot more credibility. There is truely a mountain of evidence for it.

Answer 5

I don't see why most of us don't accept the idea that something could be under cover and undiscovered.

We've accepted evolution without demanding undeniable proof.

Others accept creationism based on faith.

Why are we unable to accept that bigfoot exists with the same level of undisputable proof that both of those ideas put forth?

Oops - that was a question... my bad :-)

Answer 6

on national geographic they showed a pic of Bigfoot to some people native to the Andie's mountains and they said they sure have seen it they called them mud people and said they stole fish from there traps..that's good enough for me..

Answer 7

until and if ever there is some definite proof, no. at this point in time I think it is very safe to assume that bigfoot/sasquatch/yeti do not exist.

Answer 8

Enough to keep folks spending money on looking for it.

Personally I'm not convinced either way, but of course I'm hopeful - same for m'kolo m'bembe. (Relic dinosaurs deep in Africa.)

Answer 9

yes there do exist and live in the earth under ground. They have proof of the yeti in Tibet. The Tibetan Lamas have known this for hundreds of years.

Answer 10

No, of course not.

I've seen pictures of giraffes and see them at the zoo, so I believe they exist. I've seen pictures of the Great Wall of China, and have never visited it, but I have never heard that the Great Wall of China was a hoax. I'm sure the Great Wall exists.

Bigfoot on the other hand is a pile of 100% steaming bullshit, until you bring me a dead one.