Do you believe in bigfoot?

[Lark]

No

I suspect this may be because, some how, Highlander IS bigfoot!!!

 

[meowington]

Hell no

 

[Qlip]

I didn't. I don't know if this is common knowledge, but I just recently moved to a heavily forested area, redwoods to be precise. It's beautiful here and there's so much wildness and secret places that are hard to get to, I've spent a lot of time hiking and poking into things. I also forage for food. I was out on an out of the way country lane beside a creek yesterday with my SO, looking for wild onions, they're blooming this time of year and easy to recognize:

It was a very successful hunt, we got enough wild onions to put in our salsa. It's really perfect for it because it both tastes of garlic and onion at the same time. Satisfied with ourselves we got in the truck and headed home, when I glimpsed a shadowy figure off the side of the road. My SO got a quick picture of it out of her window. I really hate to speculate, but it looked like it could be big foot and I'm not sure why, but I have an intuition that there were more there. I don't know, take the evidence or leave it. You decide for yourself.

 

[PumpkinMayCare]

No. But the flying spaghetti monster.

 

[Lord Lavender]

I do as the possibility is there. There is so much in this world we have yet to discover and besides I expand on the idea of innocent until proven guilty and that until there is solid proof he doesn't exist he exists in my mind.

 

[Coriolis]

I do as the possibility is there. There is so much in this world we have yet to discover and besides I expand on the idea of innocent until proven guilty and that until there is solid proof he doesn't exist he exists in my mind.

As with god, the only logical perspective on Bigfoot (or yeti or the Loch Ness monster, etc.) is agnosticism, until and unless sufficient evidence of its existence appears to justify acceptance (not belief).

 

[Lord Lavender]

As with god, the only logical perspective on Bigfoot (or yeti or the Loch Ness monster, etc.) is agnosticism, until and unless sufficient evidence of its existence appears to justify acceptance (not belief).

There is a difference between belief and solid acceptance. Like we don't just believe in gravity or the Moon or black holes as the science world has evidence for those things.

Being logical about how feasible Bigfoot is. It would be a species of ape or homonoid and therefore would likely eat a diet of fruits,nuts and the odd bit of meat. He then would have to travel around a fair bit and that increases visabillty. He of course could live undergrouid but I doubt a large ape could live on insects plus apes tend to not be good diggers. Assuming he's not imortal he would be one of many of his species and they would have to have a number of at least a few hundred to sustain. Now the alleged habitat is the Western States in America which has a lot of room to hide and is very sparsely populated so it's logical that a small population of Bigfoots could live undetected.

 

[The Cat]

- - - Updated - - -

Why not? ^_^

 

[Coriolis]

There is a difference between belief and solid acceptance. Like we don't just believe in gravity or the Moon or black holes as the science world has evidence for those things.

My point exactly. Natural phenomena like bigfoot are to be accepted based on evidence if it can be found, not believed in.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Nope.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

I'm always fascinated by newly discovered species.
I want all of the bigfoots and Loch Ness Monsters and Chupacabras to be real, buuuut... the evidence just isn't there.

Aliens on the other hand...

 

[prplchknz]

no

though i read the title as skimming through as do you believe in blood. and yes i do there's even proof that blood exists.

 

[Frosty]

I believe in the possibility of most anything.

But yeah. Im attracted to this sort of stuff. Mystery. So I would very much like to believe its possible. I mean. There is so so much about the world that we dont know I think. Why not big foot?

 

[Smilephantomhive]

I'm always fascinated by newly discovered species.
I want all of the bigfoots and Loch Ness Monsters and Chupacabras to be real, buuuut... the evidence just isn't there.

Aliens on the other hand...

If you don't think aliens exist then you're wrong!

 

[Grand Admiral Crunch]

You comma-hating dick-fuckers. She asked about Big Foot, not all this other garbage.

 

[Population: 1]

You comma-hating dick-fuckers. She asked about Big Foot, not all this other garbage.

And do you believe Grand Admiral Crunch? In Bigfoot I mean.

It’s obvious you firmly believe in the existence of comma-hating dick-fuckers.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I don't think a species of large primates would be so unsuccesful in their proliferation that we only have probably hoax sightings of them. So no I don't think bigfoot exists, and even if it still did or got extinct recently, they must have been some really dumb primates.

I like below movie on cryptids.

 

[Maou]

I would like to believe.

If there is anything out there, maybe they are intelligent enough to avoid human detection.

 

[Tengri]

I'd like to think this was possible, especially because Bigfoot or Yeti exist in native folklore in very different places. The evidence is either patently false (like the Pangboche hand, shame) or just hearsay, eyewitness accounts, or nonexistent. If two different hominins may have coexisted with Gigantopithecus in south Asia in the distant past, and Denisovans and Neanderthals with humans much more recently, the possibility of some extant species hiding in mountains and primeval forests isn't that farfetched. The evidence just isn't there, sadly

 

[Abcdenfp]

There are several things that made me laugh in this thread.

so what happened ? we just gave up on Bigfoot, searches stopped and lochy that's all done?