(12-09-2018, 04:09 PM)brotherbear Wrote: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3889292/You-ll-bear-ly-believe-Alien-hunters-claim-ve-spotted-fossilised-remains-grizzly-bear-Mars.html  
  
You'll bear-ly believe it! Alien hunters claim they've spotted the fossilised remains of a grizzly bear on Mars. 

(12-24-2018, 11:51 PM)Sully Wrote:

Bll Munns' analysis of the Patterson Gimlin film. I've been researching sasquatch a lot recenly and for me this, and Jeff Meldrum's analysis are the best and most compelling arguments for this footage. I don't know if I believe in bigfoot but I believe this isn't human at least. The argument for it being a hoax is feeble as well. Bob Heironomous' story is easily picked apart, and furthermore Patterson recycled all the money he made from this back into bigfoot research, he even followed up a hoax of a yeti in a Buddhist monastery in Thailand before he died. There is a reason this is the holy grail for bigfoot researchers.

Quote:“The unusual growl-like sounds and whistles were studied by Dr. R. Lynn Kirlin, a professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Wyoming. It was his opinion that the format frequencies found were clearly lower than for human data and their distribution does not indicate they were the product of human vocalizations and tape speed alteration.”

Quote:“Sasquatch Language is spoken approximately twice as fast as any known language in most analyzed recordings, therefore it must be slowed down to be transcribed accurately.”

Quote:“Because of what I did in the Navy, spending years and several thousand hours speeding the human voice up and slowing it down, I could just detect language in those vocalizations.”

(03-03-2019, 06:59 AM)Sully Wrote: I don't know if it necessarily is said to have the same role as a black bear. I think too little is known about the behavioural ecology of sasquatch to draw conclusions regarding its legitimacy based on that alone. The direct evidence at hand is best to analyse as there is less wiggle room. An objective conclusion is more likely to be derived. Meldrum actually makes a point in the book, just because sasquatch can't exist (secondary factors, e.g place in the ecosystem), doesn't mean they don't exist. Grover Krantz also says the idea of aasqautch is ridiculous, but the idea of hoaxing (referring to footprints as linked above) is impossible.

As for the gigantopithecus theory, I agree with you. Based on all I know about the giant ape in terms of climate and diet, I can't see it thriving outside its niche (though Meldrum made a point on analysis of gigantopithecus teeth suggesting they may not have been strictly bamboo eaters). I was watching a YouTube video where a guy asserts that dryopithecus is the best bigfoot candidate and lays out his argument. I for one believe this hypothesis to be much more likely than it being an offshoot of gigantopithecus.

(03-09-2019, 12:01 AM)Sully Wrote: @smedz ah yes the big cats of the British countryside. They pop up in the news every now and then this side of the pond. I've always been skeptical of the assertion that there is some sort of breeding population that sustains itself out there. I do think however that there are some out there, likely escaped pets or zoo animals. In fact in 1980 in Scotland if I recall correctly, a mountain lion was found in the wild, identified to be an escaped pet. There are other similar cases like this including smaller wild, foreign cats. I think when people realise how much they have on their plate raising an exotic pet they'll irresponsibly simply let them go. Regarding the picture you sent it's very hard to deny that it at least looks like a melanistic leopard, its build disproportionate to that of a house cat. Looks convincing enough to me!