yowie/ the ultimate bushman

[Searcher]

Wakey wakey! Scarts is being naive if he seriously believes that Government agencies would announce the Yowie is real and there are hundreds of them hiding out in Australian bushland! Tell the people there’s a real live monster out there that we can’t control and can grow to eleven feet tall and has unbelievable strength. Yeah, right. Think it through… Rusty 2 and Ray are on the right track. There would be a media driven frenzy and mass panic in our rural communities. Hardly a kid in the country would be able to sleep nights. And that’s just the start of what would be a snowball effect. The ramifications would be huge and the situation would not end well. Best to let sleeping Yowies lay…

Scarts may well have his own encounter to draw on, but his tunnel vision completely denies the documented experiences of many hundreds of other Australians. Look at the big picture and listen to and watch all the audio and video reports on this forum alone and then tell me all of them are made up. Check how these beasts have been seen crashing through thick scrub with lots of noise. Doesn’t sound like an apparition to me. And please don’t tell me the witnesses all need help with their mental state! Remember, it takes only ONE contact out of thousands to be bona fide and we have a real live Yowie to contend with! The enigma would then be real.

As for the paranormal aspect suggested, maybe Scarts saw a Yowie ghost…something like what was in that 1930’s photograph. I’ve never seen a ghost myself, but I have a few close friends who have. It’s just something else that defies a rational explanation.

I’d also like to say I’ve really appreciated reading Neil Frost’s contributions to this forum. An amazing encounter there in the above post! Please keep up the great work so we can draw on your incredible experiences for further enlightenment.

[Scarts]

Wakey, Wakey? I'm not the one with my hand on my snakey, Searcher. You're absolutely wrong. The government is not withholding admitting the existence of seven foot tall behemoths roaming the countryside, just so our children can get a good night's sleep!

As far as apparitions not making noises, there's plenty of reports of ghosts talking, or knocking on walls. So, apparitions can make noise. Amazing isn't it? All those audio and video reports, and not one single clear photo, not one clear video recording, not one single bone, not one patch of blood from an injury, not even a single rotted out tooth. Nothing. Yet it's flesh and blood, is it? Seven feet tall, built like a brick shithouse weighing in at 150kg plus, yet is a world class expert at hide and seek? Lots and lots of reports, yet no one has ever found one. As I've detailed in the conjecture thread, one of those psychological theories dictates you don't need a mental health check-up if you've seen a yowie, it may be just an indication of a sub-clinical level of dissociation in a person that was activated. That may account for a percentage of reports.

It's certainly not flesh and blood.

And as for the "ghost" I may have seen, Dean Harrison can attest we saw the same thing on the same stretch of fire trail two weeks later in broad daylight. It wasn't a ghost.

[Dion]

Have to agree with much of what Scarts is trying to say "they aint Flesh and Blood"

Absolutely no evidence for it.

As scarts has suggested there are many things which are deemed as Paranormal or Spiritual which interact with the Physical world.

In saying that as this thread has gone a bit off topic I will move this to the controversial section.

And ask anyone to provide evidence that they are indeed Flesh and Blood and state your reasons for coming to that conclusion.

[Searcher]

Trust the resident Sigmund Freud wannabe to throw sex into a discussion on Yowies! Sounds like a bit of repression to me… Ring a bell? Once again Scarts is dismissive to others, preferring to push his own paranormal barrow through boggy ground. Listen again to the Jamison Valley encounter in the Blue Mountains where ex military man ‘P’ and two colleagues had a three day encounter with an eleven foot Yowie. The antics over that extended period strongly suggest a real creature.

Scarts claims there is no evidence. As Stanton Friedman often says, “Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence.” There is little doubt to me that the Bigfoot, Yeti, Yowie, etc, etc, phenomena are in some way intertwined.

Does Scarts view of “it’s certainly not flesh and blood” apply to all these creatures as well? I have read of DNA analysis of Bigfoot hair coming back as ‘unknown primate’. They all seem to need water and Yowies have been seen drinking from streams. They also eat… there is plenty of evidence there! I also read recently about ‘very large’ possible Yowie scat. Nests or sleeping holes are often found, not to mention huge footprints worldwide. The Shipton Yeti tracks found at 19.000’ on Mt Everest in 1951 are very impressive. Sure sounds like a real, live animal to me!

On the no bones question, here’s an analogy. It is well known there is a large Puma/Panther colony along the ranges of eastern Australia. There have been hundreds of sightings. I know three people, including one of my best mates, who have encountered them. Have any dead big cats turned up? No. NOTHING. The bush takes care of its own very well.

As for Governments not telling all they know to the people, does Scarts for a moment think the US are not hiding the truth about ET? If he does think they are being open and honest, then he has never put in the hard yards of decades of research. Back on topic, this thread is about whether the Yowie is the ‘ultimate bushman’. I’d agree that he is. Aboriginals have lived in Australia for at least 40,000 years. Perhaps the Yowie has been around for that long as well. That would give it ample time to evolve a lifestyle that is perfectly adapted to the rigours of survival on this wide brown land.

[googe]

Yeah I didn't start this thread to discus the real or not real aspect. But now the threads in a different area so I dunno, carry on I guess. Good points searcher!, who knows how long they've been here?!. would be good to hear some insight from an elder, probably a few decades to late though!!.

[Neil Frost]

And ask anyone to provide evidence that they are indeed Flesh and Blood and state your reasons for coming to that conclusion.

G’day Dion,

No wonder we are regarded by many as a pseudoscience!

I am waiting for an email from Sam who lives in Leura, who reported finding unusual footprints today. I know that if I take my shoes off and walk around in the mud that I will leave footprints. Similarly, in order to save time, I anticipate that you will argue that spirits, or whatever, can produce footprints too. However, this hypothesis cannot be tested and there is no credible evidence of this, whatsoever!

With respect,

Neil

[Dion]

Hey Neil, others.

All we can do really is hypothesise,

IMO it will always be a pseudoscience even though some of us might hate the tag, as long as we have no body or bones it will always be a fringe subject.

I understand some wish to go scientific with it all, how indeed is that possible without the above?

There are many in the Yowie Bigfoot community who believe them to be real creatures, (Flesh and Blood), because they have seen them with their own eyes. Having had a sighting of one myself I know they are out there but I am reluctant to say they are indeed Flesh and Blood for many reasons. Mainly issues surrounding my own sighting and experiences.

Scarts has already pointed out a few and I think the big one is the no bones issue. After all the urban development in the many years we have been here right round the world there is not one iota of a bone, grave or any other physical evidence to support such a large creature roaming the planet in any country, even if they do bury their dead bones should be found.

If they are Flesh and Blood they do a remarkable job of staying undetected. Most of us who have had a sighting or encounter with them know how intelligent they are; in fact it seems to go beyond intelligent almost into some other realm of thinking. IMO

The issue of night vision is another, the fact they are far superior to us, if they evolved from an ape why is it that they have left all other apes for dead in regards to their evolution? And the glowing eyes what’s with that?

I hear some researchers say they are everywhere this is just not possible, for the above reason of no bones or evidence to support such a creature, unless they are something else i.e. Paranormal, spiritual, etc.

The footprints issue is another for me why are they always different? 3,4,5,6,7 toes, some look human some don’t, some with claws some without? This is all akin to some sort of shape shifting, paranormal, spiritual ability.

For such a large creature what indeed do they eat to support themselves? If they are out there and everywhere, again like some researchers suggest why don’t we find more dead animals that have been totally disfigured or ripped to death, as Scarts has said they are built like a brick house they can’t just eat nuts and berries or a few leaves?

For these reasons and a few others, I find it very hard to think of them as being anything other than Paranormal or spiritual.

The sightings and encounters keep coming in though, I guess we will all have to wait a little longer to find the answers?

Much respect also

D.

[FM80]

We don't need bones or a body to approach this scientifically.

As soon as someone hypothesises that they're paranormal - welcome to pseudoscienceville.

The scientific approach is to happily say "we don't know, it's baffling why we haven't found a body or bones but we're working on solving the problem". The lazy, unjustified and ludicrous pseudoscientific approach is to say " we know why, they're spirits - case closed. We base our conclusion on no evidence or prior examples whatsoever of paranormal beings."

[Dion]

We don't need bones or a body to approach this scientifically.

Hey FM80

That’s fine if you think so but I don’t see a lot of alternative proposal from you, how would you approach it scientifically then? Other than “we don't know, it's baffling why we haven't found a body or bones but we're working on solving the problem". If their Flesh and Blood tell me why you believe that they are?

I have provided some reasons above why I believe them not to be Flesh and Blood. I am not afraid to put my beliefs and opinions out there even if the majority of people might believe them to be the opposite.

Also to say it’s lazy from those who have had Para/spiritual experiences with them (including the indigenous populations of the world) is rather closed minded.

Regards

[wellymon]

It seems to me, the more time people have been involved with the "HairyOne" that have anything to do or who run 'Yowies Hunters' are more concerned with paranormal activity of the "Hairy One", That being not flesh and Blood....?
This amazes me and I'm beginning to think this site is a Hoax.....?

The only people that really influence my own research are people like Rusty,Ray, Didgemaster, Al Pitman and a few others who I believe and have faith in.

I think the human brain can play tricks on people, especially those who have no ability to handle adrenalin.
I feel this is what is happening to some.
Like Ray said a longtime ago, why don't we see them in the shopping centres or at the movie cinema,,,,?

Respect
Welly

[Brindabella Ranger]

As a flesh and blood believer, let’s take a look at it mathematically in terms of area just in NSW QLD and VIC. Even if my numbers are slightly off, the point is made.

Total cities:
Sydney = 12,145km2
Brisbane = 5,950km2
Melbourne = 8,806km2
Canberra = 814.2km2
Cairns = 488.1km2
Townsville = 140.2km2
Accumulated towns in NSW, QLD & VIC = 15,145km2

= 43,488.5km2

Total area:
NSW = 809,444km2
QLD = 1,852,642km2
VIC = 237, 629km2

= 2,899,715.00km2

2,899,715 – 43,488 = 2,856,227km2 of rural areas, bush, rain forest, hills, mountains, valleys and plenty of cover isolated places.

Further, lets say the total Yowie population in Australia is, I don’t know, say 500. That’s 1 Yowie per 5,712.4km2… which is like trying to find 1 in an area the size of greater Brisbane. And that's if that area was covered with bush. At a guess, they would not be as widely dispersed as that (would be in groups), so the statistics would be even greater per km/sq.

Then if you add the fact they are intelligent creatures that do not want to be found, whom are masters of their domain; can run faster and hide better than plodding humans, the flesh and blood theory is completely plausible.

The ultimate bushman indeed.

[wellymon]

As a flesh and blood believer, let’s take a look at it mathematically in terms of area just in NSW QLD and VIC. Even if my numbers are slightly off, the point is made.

Total cities:
Sydney = 12,145km2
Brisbane = 5,950km2
Melbourne = 8,806km2
Canberra = 814.2km2
Cairns = 488.1km2
Townsville = 140.2km2
Accumulated towns in NSW, QLD & VIC = 15,145km2

= 43,488.5km2

Total area:
NSW = 809,444km2
QLD = 1,852,642km2
VIC = 237, 629km2

= 2,899,715.00km2

2,899,715 – 43,488 = 2,856,227km2 of rural areas, bush, rain forest, hills, mountains, valleys and plenty of cover isolated places.

Further, lets say the total Yowie population in Australia is, I don’t know, say 500. That’s 1 Yowie per 5,712.4km2… which is like trying to find 1 in an area the size of greater Brisbane. And that's if that area was covered with bush. At a guess, they would not be as widely dispersed as that (would be in groups), so the statistics would be even greater per km/sq.

Then if you add the fact they are intelligent creatures that do not want to be found, whom are masters of their domain; can run faster and hide better than plodding humans, the flesh and blood theory is completely plausible.

The ultimate bushman indeed.

Thanks Brindabella Ranger,
You put my mind at ease,
I think your right here, good statistics and thinking which I have thought many a time.
Cheers
Welly

[FM80]

Nice work Brindabella Ranger.

Are we really trying to justify this 'flesh and blood' theory and give evidence to support this 'theory' in opposition to the 'paranormal theory'?

Like creationism and evolution, the paranormal theory should never be seriously considered as a credible alternative and people should not have to defend or explain the simple and obvious idea that yowies are animals - just like the millions of other species of animals we know exist. These two ideas are not equally valid viewpoints at all.

As I mentioned in an earlier post (deleted or I didn't post it properly) the paranormal/creationism people obviously have a bar set very low when it comes to rationality or evidence.

As far as indigenous cultures go, they have many mythical stories so they shouldn't be used to back up the paranormal thing. We don't really think the rainbow serpent created the rivers or that lightning is made from a spirit banging sticks together (can't remember the exact story - you get the idea though) do we?

It's a very poor theory when you consider that the less evidence the 'paranormal' people have, the stronger they think their case is.

[Neil Frost]

G’day Dion and FM80,

Clearly, there are two approaches to our perspectives. One scientific and the other paranormal. Science uses a logical methodology to understand the universe, whereas the paranormal approach does not require a formal examination of the situation – anything goes! Paranormal interpretations seem to have more in common with religion, where belief alone is considered to be sufficient, with no further discussion being required. The difference of opinion is tolerated, with an implicit understanding that it never will be resolved rationally!

Hypothesising is good but there is a need for testing. However, I don’t think that there is a need to fixate on the existence of bones for proof, nice though it would be to have some. Until then, the absence of this type of evidence should not be used to support a negative argument, for example, yowies have bones, no bones have been found, therefore, yowies don’t (physically) exist.

Apart from DNA, other clues can be used to support the existence of a corporeal animal. Footprints are a good start. I have only seen legitimate three and four toed prints and some small five toed, nothing else. All that this suggests is that there are multiple species or genus. Claws are not indicative of something transdimensional , rather an indigenous Australian marsupial. Similarly, their reflective tapetum lucidum is not demonic, rather, a clue of their superior night vision abilities. As opportunistic omnivores, there have been numerous examples of their predation. Big animals need plenty of food. Additionally, there is a long list of behaviours that betray the physical nature of the animal.

In conclusion, they remain invisible to the general public because they are so good at what they do! Some of us have had them roar in our faces. One has been physically tossed about, with photographs of bruising to prove it!

In other words, the yowie is the ultimate bushman!

Neil

[Gavin]

Well done BR. I agree. The ultimate bushman.

[Wayne888]

FYI - to whoever asked or suggested...

Humans are the only primate / ape that has sweat glands and sweats

Kind Regards,

Stu

G’day NotSoBigFoot,

As with many observed traits, sweating or otherwise tells you something about the animal. On one rare occasion, when Robert and I cornered Fatfoot (or, more probably one of the others) in the swamp, it began to pant heavily and fast, very much like a dog. It was highly stressed, either by the earlier physical exertion or, most likely because of it’s impending discovery. It was not a slow, out of breath pant, like a person. It was not a swamp wallaby. From my early transcript of events below, it was clearly not a Homo characteristic, for obvious reasons! It is not another great ape either.


Neil

G'day Neil,

It sounds as though she was enjoying that particular game of cat and mouse and was communicating that
to you by means of laughter.

From wiki;
Laughter in animals

Non-human primates
Chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos and orangutans show laughter-like vocalizations in response to physical contact, such as wrestling, play chasing, or tickling. This is documented in wild and captive chimpanzees. Chimpanzee laughter is not readily recognizable to humans as such, because it is generated by alternating inhalations and exhalations that sound more like breathing and panting. It sounds similar to screeching. The differences between chimpanzee and human laughter may be the result of adaptations that have evolved to enable human speech. It is hard to tell, though, whether or not the chimpanzee is expressing joy. There are instances in which non-human primates have been reported to have expressed joy. One study analyzed and recorded sounds made by human babies and bonobos (also known as pygmy chimpanzees) when tickled. It found that although the bonobo’s laugh was a higher frequency, the laugh followed the same spectrographic pattern of human babies to include as similar facial expressions. Humans and chimpanzees share similar ticklish areas of the body such as the armpits and belly. The enjoyment of tickling in chimpanzees does not diminish with age.

Research has noted the similarity in forms of laughter among humans and apes (chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans) when tickled, suggesting that laughter derived from a common origin among primate species, and has subsequently evolved prior to the origin of humans.

[Scarts]

The neverending search, ay searcher? My view it's certainly not flesh and blood indeed applies to bigfoot, yeti, and sasquatch! Oh, they're intertwined alright! They have anecdotally been seen drinking from streams and eating. As for the puma sightings, the bulk of them are also not of a flesh and blood animal. The bush takes care of it's own cliche, is laughable c**p! You do need bones or a body to study this scientifically.

Brindabella Ranger, your estimate of "That’s 1 Yowie per 5,712.4km2…", would be great if the creatures weren't social, had families, and weren't propagating. If they are flesh and blood, then they have to be reproducing, and likely hunting in groups considering they don't use spears or rifles. They can't do that if they wander aimlessly around all day in their own 5,712.4km patch. No species of anything could possibly survive that way. Also, what do they eat to maintain their size? Also, with no interacvtion with peers, at least one would have to forget the rules occassionally and get fatally wounded by a hunter or killed in some other unforeseen circumstance for a human to find.

These are not reports of little animals. These are reports of giant animals. Being humanistic, you would also have to surmise they need healthy doses of Vitamin D, which would require them spending lengthy periods of time in broad daylight. More time in sunlight equals more opportunity to be photographed, which they haven't been!

If I did up a list, the negatives for the flesh and blood argument would far surpass the pros.

[Brindabella Ranger]

Hi Scarts, but that’s what I meant by they wouldn’t be ‘as widely dispersed as that (would be in groups)’ which would mean, for example, if you had 3 yowies equaling 17,137.2km2 (5,712.4 x 3) but they worked in as a single unit as I said, the probability of finding them would be of greater odds over that area than if they were equally separated in 3’s…

The elephant is the largest land animal in the world, but is a herbivore. As a closer example, gorillas are primarily herbivorous. Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think there are plenty of green things out in the bush to eat. Add the odd snake, lizard, wallaby or kangaroo to round off a similar diet as the powerful gorillas.

I think one of the initial miscalculations would be to presume they share the same needs and weaknesses as we humans. It is my belief they have the strength, stamina, endurance and fortitude than the toughest ‘animal’ out there. The only difference is they have a much deeper consciousness and awareness than the average animal, making them the true masters of the bush.

Don't get me wrong, I'd call myself spiritual and have seen my share of ghosts and spirits, and I believe in other dimensions in connection with our reality. I just don't think the Yowie have anything to do with that. Each to his own re this discussion.

Sorry Googe, this threads sprung new debates I keep trying to tie it back...

[googe]

All good br, some good reading here!!. I never thought about the humorous side to them, they seem intelligent so makes sense. I'm glad some have got a open mind on both sides and not saying something is c**p because they don't believe it, its not hard to be open minded!. Great points on other large animals surviving on bush food, and you don't need tools to catch food either maybe they do use tools?, no wait, no ones found any it cant be possible. they use sticks to belt trees don't they?, rocks.. if they are not flesh, why do we see reports that sound like there being territorial?. Why would a spirit need a territory?. If they are not spirit, why do people get a sense of doom from them?.

[wellymon]

It seems to me, the more time people have been involved with the "HairyOne" that have anything to do or who run 'Yowies Hunters' are more concerned with paranormal activity of the "Hairy One", That being not flesh and Blood....?
This amazes me and I'm beginning to think this site is a Hoax.....?

The only people that really influence my own research are people like Rusty,Ray, Didgemaster, Al Pitman and a few others who I believe and have faith in.

I think the human brain can play tricks on people, especially those who have no ability to handle adrenalin.
I feel this is what is happening to some.
Like Ray said a longtime ago, why don't we see them in the shopping centres or at the movie cinema,,,,?

Respect
Welly

I'm sorry to not have mentioned yourself Neil,
Much respect and thankyou for your level headed insight.

Cheers Welly

[Brindabella Ranger]

Thanks Welly, FM80, Gavin and Googe. I'm out in the Aussie bush a lot and you really can't underestimate just how expansive it is ...

http://dieselst1300.blogspot.com.au/201 ... iders.html

[Scarts]

Googe, the ultimate bushman title inherently assumes the yowie is flesh and blood. You blokes can high five each other til the cows come home as to what you all think makes such an idea plausible, but it doesn't change the fact it's simply not plausible.

Eyewitness testimony and footprints are not good data. They're bad data. Additionally, there has been no verified hairs or DNA obtained. Melba Ketchum's DNA evidence was rejected by mainstream scientific journals as most likely contaminated human DNA. What a surprise! People make up stories and make mistakes. Mental stress, exhaustion, drugs, and alcohol, can all affect a person's judgement.

As for the vastness of our continent, Brindabella Ranger, it had might as well be the vastness of outer space. There simply is not the vegetation or food supply available to support such a race of flesh and blood creatures. I know because, I too have worked for National Parks and Wildlife.

[googe]

I'm a calm person and will always try to be nice to people, but sometimes I wonder why . Please enlighten us on full stats, why your one sided thinking is so correct. Just because you encountered one floating around does not mean every one's opinion doesn't count. To have a belief that strong you must have some very very strong data?.

[Dion]

It seems to me, the more time people have been involved with the "HairyOne" that have anything to do or who run 'Yowies Hunters' are more concerned with paranormal activity of the "Hairy One", That being not flesh and Blood....?
This amazes me and I'm beginning to think this site is a Hoax.....?

Welly you may think what you will, seeing as quite a few people are or have been involved in Yowie Research for many years have come to a similar conclusion must say something, however there are many still who have been researching Yowies for many years who do not come to the same conclusion, its just a matter of personal opinion and experience, some have had what they would consider to be a Flesh and Blood sighting/encounter, others have had opposite.

To say that this site is a hoax because some of us believe in a Para/spiritual point of view doesnt make it so, its quite obvious that the majority of people lean to Flesh and Blood nothing wrong with that.

Are we really trying to justify this 'flesh and blood' theory and give evidence to support this 'theory' in opposition to the 'paranormal theory'?

Why not? the Flesh and Blood believers seem to take this as face value that the are F&B without having any evidence to support it?

.....the paranormal theory should never be seriously considered as a credible alternative and people should not have to defend or explain the simple and obvious idea that yowies are animals - just like the millions of other species of animals we know exist.

If they are "Animals" and very big animals at that why havnt they been discovered? Why shouldnt those who believe them to be F&B provide some insight as to why the are? Again this taking it at face value thing without any evidence provided for a F&B theory is just as much nonesense as you making out that people who believe in the paranormal is. This is only a discussion and I hope no one is taking too much offense to it.

As I mentioned in an earlier post (deleted or I didn't post it properly) the paranormal/creationism people obviously have a bar set very low when it comes to rationality or evidence.

Firstly none of your posts where deleted, secondly because a person believes in a Paranormal, Supernatural or spiritual existence doesnt make that person of a low rationality, where is the F&B evidence?

It's a very poor theory when you consider that the less evidence the 'paranormal' people have, the stronger they think their case is.

No this is about the absense of F&B evidence.


Respect and regards to all.

[FM80]

Why not? the Flesh and Blood believers seem to take this as face value that the are F&B without having any evidence to support it?

If people believe in ghosts/demons/god etc. they're probably going to miss the point of what I was saying.

Evidence for yowies being animals:

The fact that animals exist and many animals once thought to be myths have been discovered.
The fact that yowies seem to have a preference for habitats where real animals live (the bush).
The evidence that they physically interact with the environment (throwing rocks, breaking branches etc).

Also there's the logical conclusion that there isn't a shred of evidence of the 'paranormal' ANYWHERE, not just relating to yowies. Where is there one precedent where the option of something being 'paranormal' has been the right option?

[Searcher]

I find it incredulous what I’ve been reading in this thread. How can it be claimed that the Yowie and others are definitely some type of entity with out so much as a shred of real evidence? It is bizarre and simply defies logic.

I’ll bet seasoned Bigfoot researchers are shaking their heads in dismay when reading this gobbledygook. There are so many very well documented close up encounters around the world that all show this critter and his cousins being one huge and very real animal. To put that to one side in this argument is just plain ridiculous and flies in the face of common sense.

This whole paranormal thing is just a cop out in my books… It sounds like a High School debate where one side has to take the negative. The reality is the big fella is just too shrewd to be caught! He really has evolved into the Ultimate Bushman. Get over it and give credit where it’s due.

And stop denying there is no physical evidence. Bigfoot nests have been found. That’s evidence. Google it and you get 462,000 results. Oh yeah…I forgot. Some of you are in denial so every single one must be a fraud.

Want some science? How about the DNA sampling recently conducted by Oxford University genetics professor Bryan Sykes. His Yeti hair sample proved to be a 100% match with a sample from an ancient polar bear jawbone found in Svalbard, Norway, that dates back at least 40,000 years - and probably around 120,000 years - a time when the polar bear and closely related brown bear were separating as different species. The professor said: "This is an exciting and completely unexpected result that gave us all a surprise”. It may mean that the Yeti has a bear among its ancestors. And a bear is a REAL animal.

[wellymon]

It seems to me, the more time people have been involved with the "HairyOne" that have anything to do or who run 'Yowies Hunters' are more concerned with paranormal activity of the "Hairy One", That being not flesh and Blood....?
This amazes me and I'm beginning to think this site is a Hoax.....?

Welly you may think what you will, seeing as quite a few people are or have been involved in Yowie Research for many years have come to a similar conclusion must say something, however there are many still who have been researching Yowies for many years who do not come to the same conclusion, its just a matter of personal opinion and experience, some have had what they would consider to be a Flesh and Blood sighting/encounter, others have had opposite.

To say that this site is a hoax because some of us believe in a Para/spiritual point of view doesnt make it so, its quite obvious that the majority of people lean to Flesh and Blood nothing wrong with that.

.

Yes I agree Dion, with the upmost respect.
People see what they want to see.....?
What I said before was about adrenalin, based around sights.... I believe that a few people here that are debating the F&B topic, have not been exposed to adrenalin and maybe this why they experience their own visualizations when it comes to fear......? Hey how do we know about this concept..?
We all know how much little, we use with regards our brains huge expanse of power. I have witnessed this before due to stress and sleep deprivation..? The things I saw were unbelievable and had nothing to do with drugs that create hallucinogenic visualisations.

I have experienced myself over the years, adrenalin, I confess I'm an adrenalin junkie, absolutely love it, whether it be climbing alpine peaks, snowboarding off them or surfing intense waves. I have been through various adrenalin situations, where other people can not handle, but they are with me in the same situation. I have seen many a people turn scared and afraid, where they have one focus and it is not the focus of the right now... If you know what I mean....? People change, people's mind thought's change... I know.

This is what I was trying to explain, about adrenalin, fear etc. I know Yowie Hunters is not a hoax and I love reading everyones thoughts upon this subject, I was only getting a dig which I did

The little give aways I see and hear for myself in my backyard, are total evidence with them being F&B.
This is my opinion.

Much respect Dion
Cheers
Welly

[Gavin]

I don't see why it's such an issue. Paranormal means " outside scientific understanding". The hairyman most definitely is outside scientific understanding. Whether it's flesh and blood, (please apply Occam's Razor), or some sort of massless nature spirit or a type of interdimensional creature of faerie, it is unknown to science therefore paranormal.
Whatever it is, it is the ultimate bushman.
Happy Friday.

[Scarts]

Thanks Gavin, I think you're on the right track!

Treating bigfoot or yowie as flesh and blood has not assisted any researcher explaining reports. Unfortunately to get to the truth of what it is, we have to start with what it isn't.

Searcher, I don't give a rats what seasoned bigfoot researchers might think of this discussion, and there is no such thing as a bigfoot nest. No bigfoot has ever been photographed or studied in such a nest. Absolute bunkum! Too shrewd to be caught on film by anyone who doesn't have a history of fraud the length of my arm and too shrewd for even it's bones to be discovered after they die and far too shrewd for their bones to even show up on the fossil record? I have no idea what bear DNA has to do with this argument, and speaking of bears, it is well documented that bear bones are occassionally found by people in the woods. Bigfoot, sasquatch, and yowie bones, have never ever been found! Most mythical animals are still mythical animals, real animals live in cities not just bush landscapes, and the sound of a breaking branch or what could be a rock thrown is not necessarily evidence a bigfoot caused it

If paranormal is a viable explanation, then what is paranormal and what is spiritual must be examined. Spiritual is subjective and one's beliefs, while paranormal treads closely alongside spiritual....

[FM80]

I don't see why it's such an issue. Paranormal means " outside scientific understanding". The hairyman most definitely is outside scientific understanding. Whether it's flesh and blood, (please apply Occam's Razor), or some sort of massless nature spirit or a type of interdimensional creature of faerie, it is unknown to science therefore paranormal.

Wollemi Pines were unknown to science until quite recently - they're not paranormal.

and far too shrewd for their bones to even show up on the fossil record?

Fossilisation is a rare event.

A) Not all animals are fossilised
B) We haven't found every fossil that exists