Native American tradition of "Big Foot" is expansive. He is deep in their lore and considered kind of a "holy creature." Some of the earliest American writings on Big Foot came from mountain men and trappers in the old West. Both these oral traditions exist.
Where they talked about the Cheaha state park. I live about 30 minutes north of it. I may have to go out and look. In one of the stories they talked about a black panther. About 5 or 6 years ago, while driving home (live in the country) there was a big cat that crossed the road in front of us. It made one leap across the road and was gone. The thing looked like it weighed about 120 pounds or so. The body looked approximately 4' from head to butt, with the tail being about the same length. Scared the crap out of me. I've also had black bear in my yard too.
My wife says the only proof for big foot she needs is to look at my size 16EEEEEE shoes at the back door! LOL
But nothing since the Pleistocene, and the argument about rapid decomposition in Florida has no bearing on the Pacific Northwest.
Physical evidence was the key word in my post. I can show you oral traditions of dragons going back thousands of years.
Mice and any other rodent or lagomorph (rabbits) will chew on large bones like that partly for the minerals, partly as teeth maintenance, and partly for the joy of it. There is a whole industry for people with such things as pets: Rodent Antler Chews | Obviously most bones in the world are consumed or broken down over time, otherwise we'd be swimming in them. There are certain conditions and environments that are an exception to this, and that is why we have certain places that are bone and fossil "hotspots."
And you know very well that the fossil record lacks as much depth as it possesses in width. One of the very fundamental arguments driving speciation in regards to evolution is that even though we cannot find every "missing link" in every chain, inference can be made. This is by no means the only decomposition study ever done. Here is one, granted, from Ontario, not Bigfoot's front door step, and it is a rabbit, but at least we can move a bit further away than Florida. Rabbit decomposition (time-lapse video) - YouTube
After "kooky claims," before mentioning that many of the folks claiming sightings no full well how to take a hide. It's there.
Ah, was reading the wrong quoted post. You are correct, my bust. Again though, physical evidence is open for discussion. Whether you take the Patterson-Gimlin film as physical, hoax or otherwise is, again, open for discussion. If you need a jaw bone, well, that can't be produced. The problem with trappers in the old West, and Native Americans in the past is that they weren't out looking for bigfoot. They were surviving. They weren't collecting and cataloguing, they were surviving. In modern day, the presence of humans in the expanse between Washington and BC is limited. And I will say this, as long as I've been in the woods, I've never come across a cougar carcass, but I think they exist... Found a deer or two, a couple turtles, a rabbit and the jaw of a coyote. Never a cougar.
I have participated in hunts with dogs where we bayed up cougars in northern Idaho. We never bayed up a sasquatch. In my limited hunting experience, I have come across recent lion kills of deer, piles of bones from fawn carcasses killed by wolves (presumably), and even a seal carcass that had its head bit off by a large shark or killer whale. The stuff is out there. The evidence is out there. Not so for bigfoot.
Yes, common things are common. The concept behind a cryptid is that... they aren't common. The point you were laboring on was that those who had a desire to be in the mountains in the winter snow would have surely found and returned the skeleton of a dead Big Foot. This is not the case. They didn't. They brought stories. Simply because there isn't a skeleton on display, doesn't mean someone in the past didn't find one. The arguments against the existence of Big Foot generally fall along those lines, and I have given you and others reasons why those arguments are flawed. I'm not saying that you are not correct. I'm saying your arguments against why there can't be a Big Foot are incorrect. The best argument you can make against Big Foot is the one you have already made. We have not found one. All I am offering is reasons why one may not have been found, based on the objections given.
Those reasons ring very hollow in a modern age of fractured environments, sprawled development, and endless digital media. I grew up and lived in two of the alleged bigfoot hotspots. I'm telling you, there just is no way no physical evidence would have surfaced for anyone by now.
I disagree. There are huge tracts of land not developed, not populated and still wildly free. Population density maps of Washington State and BC show this quite plainly. If they exist, that is their best area, and would explain their no-show. People just aren't there regularly enough. You've done some hunting, so this is clear, but I'll elaborate the point. Who is the best guy to talk to about where the big deer are on a farm, the guy who came in looking for sharks' teeth for a day a few months ago, or the farmer who is there every day? When you don't have residents, there daily, you don't see what may actually be there. This is why I don't scout deer, I talk the guy who cuts the beans. Much of the uninhabited areas of Washington and BC are uninhabited for a reason. The terrain makes it difficult. But, for giggles, here are the density maps I could find. Not the most up to date, but should at least give an idea that there is still some wilderness left in the States. Less than 1 person per square mile tends to support the idea that, even in today's modern and fast paced society, there are plenty of uninhabited areas. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Washington_population_map.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/British_Columbia_2006_population_density.PNG
I've never hunted anywhere near farms. I hunted in Idaho and SE Alaska. There are no residents of any kind. There are also no sasquatches of any kind. As happens to me so often, I am forced to argue a stance for a null. Obviously, I can never completely prove something that doesn't exists really doesn't exist. But I am 100 % confident that if such a thing existed, someone would have found it by now and cashed in.
