I am 49 years old at the moment. I started reading books on Bigfoot when I was about 14...they had them back in the day! LOL!
Now days we are still stuck in the same spot asking the same questions! New generations of investigators going down the same road.....still no accepted footage/photos/dna samples/poo/body ect.
If the answers are the same now as then,and we still have nothing, maybe we should be asking new questions!
Elephant remains found in Oz (yowie related)
-
mikka
- Gold Status - Frequent Poster
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 3:53 pm
- Position: Lurker
- Location: Gold coast
[quote="ozestrange"]
the rain cleaned it up or did the witness as well.?[/quote]
Both, as was noticed at the event and the next day by family members when pressure cleaning the car.
I must appoloigise for my last cryptic post, I was half asleep and my brain was saying one thing and my fingers another
[quote]
End of the day,with yowies,sasquatch etc you have good witnesses/some bits of plaster.
thats it.[/quote]
That I agree with, aslong as you also meantion a few unknown animal samples with that list. Yes I know that unknown is just that, unknown.
[quote]There is no other monsterous "secretive" animal that pops up everywhere that leaves so little in the way of evidence.[/quote]
One could also say their is no other Yowie or sas lifeforms are known out their to compare with, that we know of all their habits. So the little evidance that we have, when the right person in the right place who actually might think yowie would think of noting and collecting, is par for the couse.
Even science says absence of evidance is not evidance of evidance.
Ive posted on this board before about species of primates that are recognised by science from only pictures and fossil records that show as little as 100,000 years ago (doesnt mean their arent still living animals or later ones wont be found at a future date) their was a 10 foot hominid roaming around a hop skip and a jump away in Asia
Oh great and wise fluffy one
[quote]Now days we are still stuck in the same spot asking the same questions! New generations of investigators going down the same road.....still no accepted footage/photos/dna samples/poo/body ect. [/quote]
Maybe we are all just nutters, and their is nothing out their
For anything to be accepted their will need to be a body first or some sort of hard evidance (that goes both ways)
PS is it just me or is the quote function broken
the rain cleaned it up or did the witness as well.?[/quote]
Both, as was noticed at the event and the next day by family members when pressure cleaning the car.
I must appoloigise for my last cryptic post, I was half asleep and my brain was saying one thing and my fingers another
[quote]
End of the day,with yowies,sasquatch etc you have good witnesses/some bits of plaster.
thats it.[/quote]
That I agree with, aslong as you also meantion a few unknown animal samples with that list. Yes I know that unknown is just that, unknown.
[quote]There is no other monsterous "secretive" animal that pops up everywhere that leaves so little in the way of evidence.[/quote]
One could also say their is no other Yowie or sas lifeforms are known out their to compare with, that we know of all their habits. So the little evidance that we have, when the right person in the right place who actually might think yowie would think of noting and collecting, is par for the couse.
Even science says absence of evidance is not evidance of evidance.
Ive posted on this board before about species of primates that are recognised by science from only pictures and fossil records that show as little as 100,000 years ago (doesnt mean their arent still living animals or later ones wont be found at a future date) their was a 10 foot hominid roaming around a hop skip and a jump away in Asia
Oh great and wise fluffy one
[quote]Now days we are still stuck in the same spot asking the same questions! New generations of investigators going down the same road.....still no accepted footage/photos/dna samples/poo/body ect. [/quote]
Maybe we are all just nutters, and their is nothing out their
For anything to be accepted their will need to be a body first or some sort of hard evidance (that goes both ways)
PS is it just me or is the quote function broken
" The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further than the crowd. The man who walks alone is likely to find himself in places no one has ever been." - Unknown
-
Jo Blose
- Gold Status - Frequent Poster
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:50 am
- Position: Lurker
- Gender: Not Telling
Occult literature & the Yowie
In occult terminologies, the Yowie could exist as a creature comprised of a mental body, astral body, and etheric body, but devoid of a physical body. The densest body of the three being the etheric body, like all etheric bodies, has shape and is electrical.
Occult literature already places the existence of faeries, pixies, and trolls on the etheric plane (the invisible portion of the physical plane.) In some occult literature, faeries are described as "large hairy hominoids".
Having an aura as all living creatures do, could still explain the feeling of "dread" felt in a hotspot. The electricality of the etheric body could be directly related to how much impact the etheric body may have on the physical environment. Meaning whether it can be seen, heard, leave foot impressions, mark it's territory, etc. This could also account for their ability to seemingly disappear at will and be unaffected by gunfire.
The heavy use of the word, "could" in this post does not invalidate this line of thought any more than other more conventional theories on the Yowie.
Occult literature already places the existence of faeries, pixies, and trolls on the etheric plane (the invisible portion of the physical plane.) In some occult literature, faeries are described as "large hairy hominoids".
Having an aura as all living creatures do, could still explain the feeling of "dread" felt in a hotspot. The electricality of the etheric body could be directly related to how much impact the etheric body may have on the physical environment. Meaning whether it can be seen, heard, leave foot impressions, mark it's territory, etc. This could also account for their ability to seemingly disappear at will and be unaffected by gunfire.
The heavy use of the word, "could" in this post does not invalidate this line of thought any more than other more conventional theories on the Yowie.
-
dawn
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Maybe we are all just nutters, and their is nothing out their
There is something out there....just maybe not something we have had experience handling up till now!
Something so diferent its hard for us to come to grips with the concept! We're like cavemen finding a walkman......it fits the hand nicely, but brakes when we try hitting things with it!
There is something out there....just maybe not something we have had experience handling up till now!
Something so diferent its hard for us to come to grips with the concept! We're like cavemen finding a walkman......it fits the hand nicely, but brakes when we try hitting things with it!
I'm not fat.....I'm just fluffy
-
Alex
- Site Admin
- Posts: 251
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:29 pm
- Location: Redland Bay, Queensland
- Contact:
ozestrange, its more of a personal thing, the whole "so i'd hate to think something i've wanted to encounter for along time is no more than an extaggerated ghost".
I've always believed giant hominids to be, well, monsters. I know thats childish, but let me hold on to that
If all it was is an etheral being, thats still damned well amazing, but it would kill it for me a little bit. I still want, and will continue to believe that its a flesh & blood animal.
"The history of the discovery of the mountain gorilla demonstrates that a large ape can elude detection for decades, and that native tales of such creatures can be based in fact. Likewise for the Giant Panda. It took sixty-seven years from the time the Giant Panda was "discovered" by Westerners until its live capture. During this period twelve well staffed and equipped professional expeditions failed to collect a single live specimen of this large bear."
As you can see, it took people ages to find the gorilla & panda bear. Why is it so different from bigfeet/yowies/yetis? I don't think its different at all. It just takes time. That, and it's about to be the 40th anniversary of the patty footage. We've got another 27 years before we've been actively searching for giant hominids, and then we'd be spending just as much time as they did looking for the giant panda.
As so long as someone finds a hominid in my life time, i'm happy.
Found some more interesting information to support my feelings towards this:P
"Hair samples were also taken from a house located on the Lummi Indian reservation in Washington. Three more samples were retrieved from Maryland, Oregon and California. Forensic Anthropologist Dr. Ellis R. Kerley and Physical Anthropologist Dr. Stephen Rosen of the University of Maryland, as well as Tom Moore, the Supervisor of the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory, examined the hair samples and stated that all the hair samples matched in terms of belonging to a "non species specific mammal". They concurred in finding that the four sets matched each other, were similar to gorilla and human but were neither, and they did not match 84 other species of North American mammals. ("The Bigfoot Evidence", pp22-29, Frontiers of Science Magazine, Vol. III, no.3, May 1981). Blood associated with the sample from Idaho was tested by Dr. Vincent Sarich of the University of California and found to be that of an unknown higher primate. ("The Bigfoot Evidence", pp22-29, Frontiers of Science Magazine, Vol. III, no.3, May 1981)."
Yay
I've always believed giant hominids to be, well, monsters. I know thats childish, but let me hold on to that
If all it was is an etheral being, thats still damned well amazing, but it would kill it for me a little bit. I still want, and will continue to believe that its a flesh & blood animal.
"The history of the discovery of the mountain gorilla demonstrates that a large ape can elude detection for decades, and that native tales of such creatures can be based in fact. Likewise for the Giant Panda. It took sixty-seven years from the time the Giant Panda was "discovered" by Westerners until its live capture. During this period twelve well staffed and equipped professional expeditions failed to collect a single live specimen of this large bear."
As you can see, it took people ages to find the gorilla & panda bear. Why is it so different from bigfeet/yowies/yetis? I don't think its different at all. It just takes time. That, and it's about to be the 40th anniversary of the patty footage. We've got another 27 years before we've been actively searching for giant hominids, and then we'd be spending just as much time as they did looking for the giant panda.
As so long as someone finds a hominid in my life time, i'm happy.
Found some more interesting information to support my feelings towards this:P
"Hair samples were also taken from a house located on the Lummi Indian reservation in Washington. Three more samples were retrieved from Maryland, Oregon and California. Forensic Anthropologist Dr. Ellis R. Kerley and Physical Anthropologist Dr. Stephen Rosen of the University of Maryland, as well as Tom Moore, the Supervisor of the Wyoming Game and Fish Laboratory, examined the hair samples and stated that all the hair samples matched in terms of belonging to a "non species specific mammal". They concurred in finding that the four sets matched each other, were similar to gorilla and human but were neither, and they did not match 84 other species of North American mammals. ("The Bigfoot Evidence", pp22-29, Frontiers of Science Magazine, Vol. III, no.3, May 1981). Blood associated with the sample from Idaho was tested by Dr. Vincent Sarich of the University of California and found to be that of an unknown higher primate. ("The Bigfoot Evidence", pp22-29, Frontiers of Science Magazine, Vol. III, no.3, May 1981)."
Yay
I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside. Run. He's fuzzy. Get outta here.
-
Romeo
- Silver Status
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:38 am
- Location: Ormeau
- Contact:
I know exactly where you're coming from, alex. To be honest, I feel the same way, you've summed it up nicely.
Though it is a good idea to keep an open mind. I think there are still many hours of research and on-site experience, and talking to people who know what they're on about to be done, and many more questions that need to be answered before I can even start to try to figure out what's going on.
Though it is a good idea to keep an open mind. I think there are still many hours of research and on-site experience, and talking to people who know what they're on about to be done, and many more questions that need to be answered before I can even start to try to figure out what's going on.
Sometimes, 'The Majority' only means that all the fools are on the same side.
-
Jo Blose
- Gold Status - Frequent Poster
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 11:50 am
- Position: Lurker
- Gender: Not Telling
ethereal
The American Indians refer to bigfoot as a "spirit being" in similar fashion to the Australian Aborigines referring to the Yowie as a "spirit being". Does anybody here believe it's sheer coincidence the native peoples on two separate continents share the same views of their respective, elusive hairy hominids?
From my perspective, it's not simply a ghost or spirit as such. The Yowie appears to be an actual living being that appears to reproduce, yet lives in a part of our physical world (the ethereal plane), just out of our normal everyday reach.
I see it more exciting than dealing with a flesh & blood creature as it is something I don't understand and I struggle to comprehend. Dean's expeditions have uncovered the creature's have emotions, personalities, and are territorial. I want to know the mechanics of how & why these beings function as they do.
These concepts don't mean it is any less real, or at times, physically dangerous. It means years of field work in hotspot locations broadens one's horizons.
From my perspective, it's not simply a ghost or spirit as such. The Yowie appears to be an actual living being that appears to reproduce, yet lives in a part of our physical world (the ethereal plane), just out of our normal everyday reach.
I see it more exciting than dealing with a flesh & blood creature as it is something I don't understand and I struggle to comprehend. Dean's expeditions have uncovered the creature's have emotions, personalities, and are territorial. I want to know the mechanics of how & why these beings function as they do.
These concepts don't mean it is any less real, or at times, physically dangerous. It means years of field work in hotspot locations broadens one's horizons.
-
ozestrange
- Bronze Status
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:01 pm
- Location: Blue Mountains
- Contact:
[quote]The history of the discovery of the mountain gorilla demonstrates that a large ape can elude detection for decades[/quote]
Yes...but your example supports my ideas not your own.
I am not sure where you are getting your dodgy zoological history from.
Here is the encounter.
"And so the scene was set for the historic encounter that von Beringe described in the Deutsches Kolonialblatt.From our camp we saw a herd of large black apes who were trying to climb the highest point of the volcano. We succeeded in killing two large individuals. With a great rumbling noise of falling rocks, they fell into a crater opening towards the northeast. After five hours of strenuous work we managed to get one animal up on a rope."
They eluded detection from the time it took to aim a rifle and fire the bullet.
From detection it took about 5-6 hours, and this is in a remote location.. to have the body in their hands.
Yet the same scenario has not happened in civilised countries with modern firearms after billions of man hunting hours.
There is a problem..
[quote]Likewise for the Giant Panda[/quote]
Once again, your example supports my ideas,it has been written about and kept as pet since 206 BC.
[url]http://www.giantpandabear.com/DHTML/history.html[/url]
[quote]It took sixty-seven years from the time the Giant Panda was "discovered" by Westerners until its live capture.[/quote]
The giant panda was first made known to the West in 1869 by the French missionary Armand David, who received a skin from a hunter on 11 March 1869. The first westerner known to have seen a living giant panda is the German zoologist Hugo Weigold, who purchased a cub in 1916. Kermit and Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., became the first foreigners to shoot a panda, on an expedition funded by the Field Museum of Natural History in the 1920s.
[quote]As you can see, it took people ages to find the gorilla & panda bear.[/quote]
So what..
It took white people ages to "discover" the gorilla in
in 1847 from specimens obtained in Liberia.
Its a remote location.
Thats about 160 years ago.!
The mountain gorillas were just a subspecies.
The panda..No.Its been known for a very long time.
see the url I left.
[quote]Why is it so different from bigfeet/yowies/yetis?[/quote]
Easy, here is why.
Because with gorillas have been discovered since 1847 in remote locations.
And pandas have been kept as pets since 206bc.
In America/Europe/Australia and now for gods sake the UK.. monster ape like creatures are popping up.
How do you rationalise monster animals from 6-10ft weighing?? never being caught nowdays in developed countries, that leave no kills/habitation etc and cannot be photographed/videotaped/shot or captured.
And how do you rationalise the billions of man hunting hours in Europe and America and Australia where not one animal has been carried in dead.??
[quote] don't think its different at all. It just takes time. [/quote]
You have to deal with the evidence we have now.
Ask Cropper and Healy what their beliefs are then.??
[quote]then we'd be spending just as much time as they did looking for the giant panda.[/quote]
I think you better check your panda history because I think the Chinese might have a few harsh words to say about it.
[quote]As so long as someone finds a hominid in my life time, i'm happy. [/quote]
Not going to happen.
[quote]all the hair samples matched in terms of [/quote]
err..this does not support you argument either.
Notice the bit about belonging to a "non species specific mammal". Notice how it said matches a non specific species of mammal".
It is "matching" a non species.
How can you match something with a "non".
Seriously...visual examination of hairs is not science.
Thats why they use DNA.
I have sent the world leading expert on mammalian hair analysis, a pile of leopard hair and he came back and said "domestic cat".This guy wrote the "bible" on Mammalian hair that those guys would be using.
If he cannot do it, then no one can..
Its just subjective garbage..
You should read the book by veteran Sasquatch hunter Peter Guttilla "THe Big Foot Files"
Or
"Three men chasing monsters" by Nick Redfern
Yes...but your example supports my ideas not your own.
I am not sure where you are getting your dodgy zoological history from.
Here is the encounter.
"And so the scene was set for the historic encounter that von Beringe described in the Deutsches Kolonialblatt.From our camp we saw a herd of large black apes who were trying to climb the highest point of the volcano. We succeeded in killing two large individuals. With a great rumbling noise of falling rocks, they fell into a crater opening towards the northeast. After five hours of strenuous work we managed to get one animal up on a rope."
They eluded detection from the time it took to aim a rifle and fire the bullet.
From detection it took about 5-6 hours, and this is in a remote location.. to have the body in their hands.
Yet the same scenario has not happened in civilised countries with modern firearms after billions of man hunting hours.
There is a problem..
[quote]Likewise for the Giant Panda[/quote]
Once again, your example supports my ideas,it has been written about and kept as pet since 206 BC.
[url]http://www.giantpandabear.com/DHTML/history.html[/url]
[quote]It took sixty-seven years from the time the Giant Panda was "discovered" by Westerners until its live capture.[/quote]
The giant panda was first made known to the West in 1869 by the French missionary Armand David, who received a skin from a hunter on 11 March 1869. The first westerner known to have seen a living giant panda is the German zoologist Hugo Weigold, who purchased a cub in 1916. Kermit and Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., became the first foreigners to shoot a panda, on an expedition funded by the Field Museum of Natural History in the 1920s.
[quote]As you can see, it took people ages to find the gorilla & panda bear.[/quote]
So what..
It took white people ages to "discover" the gorilla in
in 1847 from specimens obtained in Liberia.
Its a remote location.
Thats about 160 years ago.!
The mountain gorillas were just a subspecies.
The panda..No.Its been known for a very long time.
see the url I left.
[quote]Why is it so different from bigfeet/yowies/yetis?[/quote]
Easy, here is why.
Because with gorillas have been discovered since 1847 in remote locations.
And pandas have been kept as pets since 206bc.
In America/Europe/Australia and now for gods sake the UK.. monster ape like creatures are popping up.
How do you rationalise monster animals from 6-10ft weighing?? never being caught nowdays in developed countries, that leave no kills/habitation etc and cannot be photographed/videotaped/shot or captured.
And how do you rationalise the billions of man hunting hours in Europe and America and Australia where not one animal has been carried in dead.??
[quote] don't think its different at all. It just takes time. [/quote]
You have to deal with the evidence we have now.
Ask Cropper and Healy what their beliefs are then.??
[quote]then we'd be spending just as much time as they did looking for the giant panda.[/quote]
I think you better check your panda history because I think the Chinese might have a few harsh words to say about it.
[quote]As so long as someone finds a hominid in my life time, i'm happy. [/quote]
Not going to happen.
[quote]all the hair samples matched in terms of [/quote]
err..this does not support you argument either.
Notice the bit about belonging to a "non species specific mammal". Notice how it said matches a non specific species of mammal".
It is "matching" a non species.
How can you match something with a "non".
Seriously...visual examination of hairs is not science.
Thats why they use DNA.
I have sent the world leading expert on mammalian hair analysis, a pile of leopard hair and he came back and said "domestic cat".This guy wrote the "bible" on Mammalian hair that those guys would be using.
If he cannot do it, then no one can..
Its just subjective garbage..
You should read the book by veteran Sasquatch hunter Peter Guttilla "THe Big Foot Files"
Or
"Three men chasing monsters" by Nick Redfern
Last edited by ozestrange on Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
dawn
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: Melbourne
I would suggest someone tries an experiment.
Try taking a psychic out with you on your next expedition. Go to an area where there have been sightings and sit down and wait and see if it comes to you. I think that it would be interesting to see if any activity occured.
Try taking a psychic out with you on your next expedition. Go to an area where there have been sightings and sit down and wait and see if it comes to you. I think that it would be interesting to see if any activity occured.
I'm not fat.....I'm just fluffy
-
Alex
- Site Admin
- Posts: 251
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:29 pm
- Location: Redland Bay, Queensland
- Contact:
Oh, no need to be sorry. You believe what you want, and i'll believe what I want *nods*
Each to their own, as far as i'm concerned.
Each to their own, as far as i'm concerned.
I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside. Run. He's fuzzy. Get outta here.
-
folcrom
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:39 am
- Location: Melbourne South East
Not one body.
I keep seeing this, but it is not correct.
In Canada in the 1940s (abt. 1942) a hunter shot a Sasquatch. It was bending over and he mistook it for a Moose and shot it up the quoit! Anyway, he never reported it until about 40 year later. His reason, "it looked too Human", so he left the body in the Willow forest where it fell. He thought he would be arrested for Murder.
The Minisota Ice Man. The guy who says he shot it, was also afraid he'd be arrested for murder. Again, it looked too Human. He made two exhibits, the one with the Ice Man and another with a Waxen copy. The Ice Man went on show, when-ever authorities turned up to inspect the corpse, he pulled out the wax fake. The original eventually went missing.
Zana. Was caught, trained and used as a Labourer and also interbred with local villiagers (When paraleticly drunk on wine). Was burried, however her grave is yet to be found. The grave of her Grandson Kwit was escavated, however, his Skull (recovered) has yet to be fully studied, contained feature of both modern and primitive human.
The Nazzis shot an Alma during WW II. They thought it was a spy. The interrogator correctly summised it was not fully human (calling it sub-human) and left. It was shot and killed, burial unknown.
Etc, etc, etc.
Tales of bodies turn up, but no-one seems to have bothered to present one to a zoologist, biologist etc.
Folcrom.
I keep seeing this, but it is not correct.
In Canada in the 1940s (abt. 1942) a hunter shot a Sasquatch. It was bending over and he mistook it for a Moose and shot it up the quoit! Anyway, he never reported it until about 40 year later. His reason, "it looked too Human", so he left the body in the Willow forest where it fell. He thought he would be arrested for Murder.
The Minisota Ice Man. The guy who says he shot it, was also afraid he'd be arrested for murder. Again, it looked too Human. He made two exhibits, the one with the Ice Man and another with a Waxen copy. The Ice Man went on show, when-ever authorities turned up to inspect the corpse, he pulled out the wax fake. The original eventually went missing.
Zana. Was caught, trained and used as a Labourer and also interbred with local villiagers (When paraleticly drunk on wine). Was burried, however her grave is yet to be found. The grave of her Grandson Kwit was escavated, however, his Skull (recovered) has yet to be fully studied, contained feature of both modern and primitive human.
The Nazzis shot an Alma during WW II. They thought it was a spy. The interrogator correctly summised it was not fully human (calling it sub-human) and left. It was shot and killed, burial unknown.
Etc, etc, etc.
Tales of bodies turn up, but no-one seems to have bothered to present one to a zoologist, biologist etc.
Folcrom.
-
ozestrange
- Bronze Status
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:01 pm
- Location: Blue Mountains
- Contact:
[quote]I keep seeing this, but it is not correct.[/quote]
You keep seeing it because there is NO BODY.
They are just bull%% stories by stupid bull%% artists.
[quote]The Minisota Ice Man.[/quote]
Another fake, where is it now.??
Whats scientists actually handled the body.
Thats right, instead of making millions by selling it to the Smithsonian, you wheel it around in a side show for money and then you hide it for ever.
That makes sense.
[quote]Zana. Was caught, trained and used as a Labourer and also interbred with local villiagers (When paraleticly drunk on wine). Was burried[/quote]
Of course.
Thats hard evidence, tales from drunk chinese who had sex with an ape hybrid.!
[quote]The Nazzis shot an Alma during WW II. They thought it was a spy. The interrogator correctly summised it was not fully human (calling it sub-human) and left. It was shot and killed, burial unknown.[/quote]
And the evidence for that dodgy x files like fantasy is what.
[quote]Etc, etc, etc.[/quote]
Exactly.
[quote]Tales of bodies turn up, but no-one seems to have bothered to present one to a zoologist, biologist etc.[/quote]
And the simple reason is..you cannot bring a "tale"/story to a zoologist.
You would take it to a sociologist.
No one seems to have bothered....
Now I wonder why that is.
BECAUSE THEY DIDNT HAVE A BODY.
Forget the fame and money and just "not bother".
Makes sense..
You keep seeing it because there is NO BODY.
They are just bull%% stories by stupid bull%% artists.
[quote]The Minisota Ice Man.[/quote]
Another fake, where is it now.??
Whats scientists actually handled the body.
Thats right, instead of making millions by selling it to the Smithsonian, you wheel it around in a side show for money and then you hide it for ever.
That makes sense.
[quote]Zana. Was caught, trained and used as a Labourer and also interbred with local villiagers (When paraleticly drunk on wine). Was burried[/quote]
Of course.
Thats hard evidence, tales from drunk chinese who had sex with an ape hybrid.!
[quote]The Nazzis shot an Alma during WW II. They thought it was a spy. The interrogator correctly summised it was not fully human (calling it sub-human) and left. It was shot and killed, burial unknown.[/quote]
And the evidence for that dodgy x files like fantasy is what.
[quote]Etc, etc, etc.[/quote]
Exactly.
[quote]Tales of bodies turn up, but no-one seems to have bothered to present one to a zoologist, biologist etc.[/quote]
And the simple reason is..you cannot bring a "tale"/story to a zoologist.
You would take it to a sociologist.
No one seems to have bothered....
Now I wonder why that is.
BECAUSE THEY DIDNT HAVE A BODY.
Forget the fame and money and just "not bother".
Makes sense..
-
Alex
- Site Admin
- Posts: 251
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:29 pm
- Location: Redland Bay, Queensland
- Contact:
I don't mean to start an argument here mate, but i think its fair to say, yes, we know you don't think they'll find anything.
But you know, stranger things have happend, right? Given the right amount of money/etc I reckon someone could find one. Find it & capture it as well.
A thought: going along your line of thought, would this mean that all other cryptids are, well, ghostly or whatever? Spritual? Loch Ness Monster for example. My father saw something when he went to visit loch ness, as did a good friend of mine.
Believe what you will, I believe them.
But you know, stranger things have happend, right? Given the right amount of money/etc I reckon someone could find one. Find it & capture it as well.
A thought: going along your line of thought, would this mean that all other cryptids are, well, ghostly or whatever? Spritual? Loch Ness Monster for example. My father saw something when he went to visit loch ness, as did a good friend of mine.
Believe what you will, I believe them.
I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside. Run. He's fuzzy. Get outta here.
-
dawn
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: Melbourne
The exsistance of an Alma dosen't proove the exsistance of a Bigfoot.....I don't think they are not the same thing. The description of an Alma sounds more like a neanderthal than a bigfoot. I Have read a n interesting report on the wounding of an Alma during the Chinese/Russian? skirmish, where a Russian doctor was brought in to see to a 'captive' alma that had been shot and was confined in a barn.
Please overlook my spelling mistakes! LOL
Please overlook my spelling mistakes! LOL
I'm not fat.....I'm just fluffy
-
dawn
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: Melbourne
it is such an interesting subject Alex. I just saw a show today discussing Lake monster in China. Witnesses include an engineer and a nuclear physist. All believe that they saw a monster. The problem being that the lake the saw the monster in is high in the mountains in what was a volcanic crater which has filled with water and become a lake since it last errupted in 1702. There is almost no life in the water. Many sightings from there, but same as Loch Ness, what do they live on? I think my theory works for this creature also!
I'm not fat.....I'm just fluffy
-
Alex
- Site Admin
- Posts: 251
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:29 pm
- Location: Redland Bay, Queensland
- Contact:
Dawn, are you talking about this?
"In 1941, V. S. Karapetyan, a lieutenant colonel of the medical service of the Soviet army, performed a direct physical examination of a living wildman captured in the Dagestan autonomous republic, just north of the Caucasus mountains. Karapetyan said: "I entered a shed with two members of the local authorities. When I asked why I had to examine the man in a cold shed and not in a warm room, I was told that the prisoner could not be kept in a warm room. He had sweated in the house so profusely that they had had to keep him in the shed. I can still see the creature as it stood before me, a male, naked and barefooted. And it was doubtlessly a man, because its entire shape was human. The chest, back, and shoulders, however, were covered with shaggy hair of a dark brown colour. This fur of his was much like that of a bear, and 2 to 3 centimeters [1 inch] long. The fur was thinner and softer below the chest. His wrists were crude and sparsely covered with hair. The palms of his hands and soles of his feet were free of hair. But the hair on his head reached to his shoulders partly covering his forehead. The hair on his head, moreover, felt very rough to the hand. He had no beard or moustache, though his face was completely covered with a light growth of hair. The hair around his mouth was also short and sparse. The man stood absolutely straight with his arms hanging, and his height was above the average — about 180 cm [almost 5 feet 11 inches]. He stood before me like a giant, his mighty chest thrust forward. His fingers were thick, strong and exceptionally large. On the whole, he was considerably bigger than any of the local inhabitants. His eyes told me nothing. They were dull and empty — the eyes of an animal. And he seemed to me like an animal and nothing more" (Sanderson 1961, pp. 295-296). Significantly, the creature had lice of a kind different from those that infect humans. It is reports like this that have led scientists such as British anthropologist Myra Shackley and Soviet anatomist Dr. Zh. I. Kofman to conclude that the Almas may represent a relict population of Neanderthals or perhaps even Homo erectus (Shackley 1983, p. 114). What happened to the wildman of Dagestan? According to published accounts, he was shot by his Soviet military captors as they retreated before the advancing German army."
"In 1941, V. S. Karapetyan, a lieutenant colonel of the medical service of the Soviet army, performed a direct physical examination of a living wildman captured in the Dagestan autonomous republic, just north of the Caucasus mountains. Karapetyan said: "I entered a shed with two members of the local authorities. When I asked why I had to examine the man in a cold shed and not in a warm room, I was told that the prisoner could not be kept in a warm room. He had sweated in the house so profusely that they had had to keep him in the shed. I can still see the creature as it stood before me, a male, naked and barefooted. And it was doubtlessly a man, because its entire shape was human. The chest, back, and shoulders, however, were covered with shaggy hair of a dark brown colour. This fur of his was much like that of a bear, and 2 to 3 centimeters [1 inch] long. The fur was thinner and softer below the chest. His wrists were crude and sparsely covered with hair. The palms of his hands and soles of his feet were free of hair. But the hair on his head reached to his shoulders partly covering his forehead. The hair on his head, moreover, felt very rough to the hand. He had no beard or moustache, though his face was completely covered with a light growth of hair. The hair around his mouth was also short and sparse. The man stood absolutely straight with his arms hanging, and his height was above the average — about 180 cm [almost 5 feet 11 inches]. He stood before me like a giant, his mighty chest thrust forward. His fingers were thick, strong and exceptionally large. On the whole, he was considerably bigger than any of the local inhabitants. His eyes told me nothing. They were dull and empty — the eyes of an animal. And he seemed to me like an animal and nothing more" (Sanderson 1961, pp. 295-296). Significantly, the creature had lice of a kind different from those that infect humans. It is reports like this that have led scientists such as British anthropologist Myra Shackley and Soviet anatomist Dr. Zh. I. Kofman to conclude that the Almas may represent a relict population of Neanderthals or perhaps even Homo erectus (Shackley 1983, p. 114). What happened to the wildman of Dagestan? According to published accounts, he was shot by his Soviet military captors as they retreated before the advancing German army."
I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside. Run. He's fuzzy. Get outta here.
-
folcrom
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:39 am
- Location: Melbourne South East
Hmm
"Of course.
Thats hard evidence, tales from drunk chinese who had sex with an ape hybrid.!"
Not quite.
The locals were from a ex-Soviet Republic, not Chinese.
The locals weren't drunk! Zana was.
Not an Ape hybrid, but more likely a pre-Sapien human, perhaps a Neandertal or even more pimative.
Well documented in the late 1800s.
Russian researchers have Kwit's (The Grandsons) Skull.
Better yet, Zana apparently has living descendants.
This is something that Russian Researcher should be working on.
Folcrom.
PS
Dawn. The Alma caught in the Russian/Chinese skirmish. It was in the region of the Amur River. There were two, one was killed, the other captured. Story ends. That's just another where there's a body and it goes missing. The chinese are also said to have shot a "Yeti" in Tibet back in the 1950's as well. Again no corpse.
"Of course.
Thats hard evidence, tales from drunk chinese who had sex with an ape hybrid.!"
Not quite.
The locals were from a ex-Soviet Republic, not Chinese.
The locals weren't drunk! Zana was.
Not an Ape hybrid, but more likely a pre-Sapien human, perhaps a Neandertal or even more pimative.
Well documented in the late 1800s.
Russian researchers have Kwit's (The Grandsons) Skull.
Better yet, Zana apparently has living descendants.
This is something that Russian Researcher should be working on.
Folcrom.
PS
Dawn. The Alma caught in the Russian/Chinese skirmish. It was in the region of the Amur River. There were two, one was killed, the other captured. Story ends. That's just another where there's a body and it goes missing. The chinese are also said to have shot a "Yeti" in Tibet back in the 1950's as well. Again no corpse.
-
ozestrange
- Bronze Status
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:01 pm
- Location: Blue Mountains
- Contact:
[quote]perhaps a Neandertal or even more pimative.
Well documented in the late 1800s.[/quote]
Why could it not have been just a rare genetic mutation.
It doesnt appear to have diddly squat to do with yowies/sasquatch anyway.
[quote]Not an Ape hybrid, but more likely a pre-Sapien human, perhaps a Neandertal or even more primative.[/quote]
Which anthropologist stated that from looking at the body.
[quote]This is something that Russian Researcher should be working on.[/quote]
If the story is real then the silence would mean they have and there was nothing to it in relation to sasquatch/yowies etc.
[quote]There were two, one was killed, the other captured. Story ends. That's just another where there's a body and it goes missing. The chinese are also said to have shot a "Yeti" in Tibet back in the 1950's as well. Again no corpse.[/quote]
sigh...they are just stories.
Well documented in the late 1800s.[/quote]
Why could it not have been just a rare genetic mutation.
It doesnt appear to have diddly squat to do with yowies/sasquatch anyway.
[quote]Not an Ape hybrid, but more likely a pre-Sapien human, perhaps a Neandertal or even more primative.[/quote]
Which anthropologist stated that from looking at the body.
[quote]This is something that Russian Researcher should be working on.[/quote]
If the story is real then the silence would mean they have and there was nothing to it in relation to sasquatch/yowies etc.
[quote]There were two, one was killed, the other captured. Story ends. That's just another where there's a body and it goes missing. The chinese are also said to have shot a "Yeti" in Tibet back in the 1950's as well. Again no corpse.[/quote]
sigh...they are just stories.
-
dawn
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Yep Myra Shackley was the author, I couldn't remember the name, it was a great book!
I would call what they found definately an ancient human remnant like a neanderthal, if in fact the event did happen. They describe an individual with dull animal eyes. Do you really think that fits the description of a yowie? An animal/humanoid capable of out smarting hunters, cunning enough to avoid camera and bait traps, able to negotiate major highways ect without being seen. According to some opening and closing doors ect...you know how intelligent our guys are, he is not a dumb animal. The alma sounded like he was little less advanced than a chimp. So I go with A sub-human on that one if in fact it is true! I'm inclined to think it is as I believe Myra Shackley is nobodies fool!
I would call what they found definately an ancient human remnant like a neanderthal, if in fact the event did happen. They describe an individual with dull animal eyes. Do you really think that fits the description of a yowie? An animal/humanoid capable of out smarting hunters, cunning enough to avoid camera and bait traps, able to negotiate major highways ect without being seen. According to some opening and closing doors ect...you know how intelligent our guys are, he is not a dumb animal. The alma sounded like he was little less advanced than a chimp. So I go with A sub-human on that one if in fact it is true! I'm inclined to think it is as I believe Myra Shackley is nobodies fool!
I'm not fat.....I'm just fluffy
-
folcrom
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:39 am
- Location: Melbourne South East
Zana is supposed to have produced Offspring with the male human locals and these offspring were fertile.
For this to be true, Zana would have had to be very close to Human genetically. Otherwise the "coupling" would have resulted in zero offspring/still born offspring and/or sterile offspring.
The Russians have Kwit's skull, but there researchers lack the funds necessary to send the Skull to the US to be properly studied/tested etc. They're also worried that once it does go to the US, they will lose control of it.
They were also unable to trace Zana's surviving offspring, but this was due to the usuall Human persuits of warfare/genocide etc having made tracing families in that part of the world difficult. "Ethnic cleansing" being a fact of life in some ex-soviet republics as recently as the 1980s and 1990s.
Folcrom.
For this to be true, Zana would have had to be very close to Human genetically. Otherwise the "coupling" would have resulted in zero offspring/still born offspring and/or sterile offspring.
The Russians have Kwit's skull, but there researchers lack the funds necessary to send the Skull to the US to be properly studied/tested etc. They're also worried that once it does go to the US, they will lose control of it.
They were also unable to trace Zana's surviving offspring, but this was due to the usuall Human persuits of warfare/genocide etc having made tracing families in that part of the world difficult. "Ethnic cleansing" being a fact of life in some ex-soviet republics as recently as the 1980s and 1990s.
Folcrom.