Possible Bigfoot Sign Language

In my last post I discussed the possibility of bigfoot using tools. Here is an example from bfro of bigfoot using simple tools.
  I also believe that bigfoot has a sign language. It is a language that uses the whole body and not just the hands. By using the body, it can be seen at a distance, allowing bigfoots to communicate silently without being close up. Here is an example of a bigfoot trying to communicate to a human. I think what bf was trying to say was "Do not come any closer, I could easily put you down.  I am going to turn around and walk away, but not out of fear."
   Bigfoot are often reported as swaying back and forth. Could it be possible that this has meaning? Maybe it is a greeting or  a friendly response to a greeting or an indication of a willingness to communicate.
William Mayes

Foreheads and Bangs

The new header image is one that I found on one of my cds that contained some images that I had saved and forgot about. I had a problem with my computer and had lost a bunch of images. I thought this was one of them. Luckily I had saved it. It is a version of one I called "Drink This".  In fact this is the original version. The version I have on my facebook page and picasa are modifications. After I found this image, I liked it so much that I decided to use it for my header.

  The last post I did, Comparing Bigfoot and Neanderthal, I said that homo ergaster was in my opinion, the closest fossil man to bigfoot.
The more I look at Patty and other images of bigfoot that I believe are real, the more I am beginning to think that there is one even more closer to bigfoot. That is homo sapiens. Looking at Patty from the side it does not appear that she has a brow ridge like erectus and his forebears. In fact some reports have mentioned the fact that the subject (I don't like to use the word "creature" or "animal") has a forehead just like ours. One report is Tim Peelers experience. I have read the same thing in other reports. The problem is that bigfoot's forehead is usually covered with hair, often described as "bangs". These bangs sometimes look like they had been trimmed. If bigfoot trims his hair then he must be a tool user. In fact it has been pointed out that many shaped stone objects that have been found and attributed to Indians may have belonged to bigfoot. The author of this blog has some interesting material along these lines.
Just because Bigfoot is primitive does not mean that he is an animal. Due to his appearance, he is pretty much isolated from human contact. This prevents him from learning new technology from humans. Consider the case of the Tasmanians.
William Mayes

Neanderthal and Bigfoot

There was a recent report on bfro's site about an observation of a bigfoot through binoculars. One of the details of the description of the creature I found very interesting because I had been reading about the anatomical features of Neanderthals. The shape of the elbow as described by the observer is a feature of Neanderthal anatomy. This was surprising to me because I consider Neanderthals to be one of the least likely candidates for bigfoot. Neanderthals tended to be short with big noses and big long heads.They were also barrel chested and thick bodied much as has been decribed for bigfoot.In order for bigfoot to evolve from neanderthals, he would have to grow in height, his head would have to shrink and change shape. This is possible. Or he could have mixed with other types like Heidelbergensis or Cro Magnons.He might have simply evolved from the same roots that neanderthal evolved from. I think the last is most probable.

If we consider bigfoot to be a descendent of Neanderthals or even of Homo erectus, then we have a problem. These ancient men used fire and made stone tools. Bigfoot has never been seen with either fire or any kind of tool, other than a stick.

 Forty thousand years ago, or thereabouts, Cro-Magnon and Neanderthals discovered each other. We know from DNA research that they interbred. One thing that new people bring with them is their diseases. The Neanderthals got sick from a disease that Cro=Magnon had resistence to, and it wiped them out, except for a few old women and a few children. These were the Cro-Magnon women that had become the mates of the neaderthals and their half-breed children. These individuals survived because they had resistence to the disease because of their Cro-Magon genes. Knowing that the disease was acquired from the Cro-Magnons, they retreated to the mountains and wild places to avoid them. They had no tools or other technology and no knowledge of how to make them. But they managed to survive and adapted to the wilderness. They essentially went wild.The result is the creature we call "Bigfoot".

This is just a supposition but I think something like this may have happenened.

By the way, Neanderthals had huge noses and big heads. There are mythological creatures that also have huge noses and big heads. They were called "trolls".

Are trolls really a myth? I wonder if trolls were Neanderthals? Except trolls were giants. Maybe trolls were giant Neanderthals. Maybe bigfoot is a troll.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-neanderthalensis

http://www.donsmaps.com/cromagnon.html

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Sapiens_neanderthal_comparison.jpg

http://www.becominghuman.org/node/homo-heidelbergensis-essay

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_ergaster

William Mayes

I Don't Just Believe Any Old Thing

Obviously I believe in Bigfoot. In my opinion there is too much evidence for any informed and reasonable person to deny this creature's existence. There are films such as Roger Patterson's, and videos, such as Paul Freeman's, thousands of tracks, thousands of reported Bigfoot sightings, many by well known and professional people such as psychologists, nurses, forest rangers and experienced hunters. I also have the testimony of people I know personally who have had experiences with these creatures. I am by nature a very skeptical person, but I am also a reasonable person. If all this information could be proven false then I would no longer be a believer in Bigfoot. I don't believe in just any old crap. It's got to make sense.

I don't believe bigfoot is a spirit nor do I believe that he can disappear in midair.

If Bigfoot is real then he is a flesh and blood creature. One thing I dislike is for Bigfoot to be called a 'paranormal'subject. 'Paranormal' is fantasy science based on science-fiction gimmicks. Science-fiction gimmicks are devices used to make an impossible situation appear possible. Time travel, interdimensional travel, hyperspace, warp drives, and telepathy are all standardized science-fiction gimmicks. All these things are impossible, they only exist in the imagination. These gimmicks have been around so long that there are people that will argue that they are real, but they are wrong.

Another science-fiction concept is 'Alien Lifeforms'. So far no one has been able to prove that such a thing exists. It is completely possible that life on earth is the only life that exists. If we never find any examples We may never be sure. I would expect if extraterrestrial life exists then it is very rare and extraterrestrial intelligence even rarer.

Life began on this planet one time. All life is descended from that first life form. You did not come into existence when you were conceived, the living substance in your body has been alive for about four billion years. All life on earth is descended from other life and each lifeform holds the traces of its predecessors in its DNA. The pattern of evolutionary development is reflected in the development of a fetus.

Due to the arbitrary nature of evolution, this pattern is unique. If there is life on another planet then its pattern of evolutionary development would also be unique. There would be no vertebrates or humanoids on an alien planet. These are arbitrary and unique earthly developments. A creature from another world would be stranger than we can imagine. A spider or an octopus is our brother, not so an alien lifeform.

It's even worse than that. There is absolutely no reason to believe an alien lifeform would be based on DNA. DNA is an earth solution to the problem of life. There may be many more ways of going about it. An alien life form would not likely be based on DNA and the method of genetic expression of physical traits would be based on a different mechanism.

This is what I believe and it seems reasonable to me.

 When somebody tries to imagine what an alien intelligence looks like, they start with the human form and modify it to make look'weird' usually starting with the eyes. So you can understand my frustration when someone tells tales about alien "Grays"(humanoid vertebrates) or "Reptoids"(humanoid reptiles) experimenting with human DNA or creating human clones.A real alien would look nothing like any thing you've ever seen before and would probably die if exposed to earth's environment.

William Walter Mayes

Is Bigfoot animal or human?

A possible answer is that he is both.
Bigfoot seems to be basicly a small brained, simple-minded race of people. They seem to lack the intelligence to form any civilized society so they live as wild creatures, but are generically human. In other words they are what used to be called yahoos.This presents a problem to certain people who deny that there is any possibility that all humans are not equal.
This is a political or philosophical point of view, not a scientific one. It is one that says that Bigfoot does not exist if Bigfoot is a human animal because humanity and animalness are incompatible or if Bigfoot does exist then it must be an animal and not human. Science might be able to decide if Bigfoot exists if it were allowed to, but it is not allowed to. It might come up with a politically incorrect answer.
Am I underestimating Bigfoot? just because they are primitive doesn't necessarily mean a lack of intelligence, does it? After all, Bigfoot appears to have language if we believe the sierra sounds evidence.
I don't know, but it is an indication, since they lack even the rudiments that other primitives have.
I certainly hope that I am wrong about Bigfoot.
William Mayes

A Small Voice Calls Out

On Monday, September 7, 2009, I posted an article called 'Rasa, The Old Man'. In it I mentioned that on The 'Bigfoot Sounds' CD put out by Ron Morehead and Alan Berry, I had detected a conversation in the background that seemed to be of a childlike voice calling out what appeared to be a name, to which a male adult voice responded, which I took to be "The Old Man" which was the leader of the Bigfoot clan. The name or word sounded to me like 'Rasa'.

I had a different computer and operating system at that time (Windows XP) and was able to get a copy directly from the audio stream, which I amplified and denoised slightly. Unfortunately, I had computer problems and subsequently lost this clear copy. My current computer will not allow recording directly from the stream so I have recorded it from my speakers which gives it a lower sound resolution.

There are people who claim to have inside knowledge of Bigfoot language. I don't know whether they do or not. I don't claim that I know any Bigfoot language, all I know is what I heard.

William Mayes

Courage and Bigfoot DNA

As I have hinted at before, I don't believe in anonymity. If you don't have the courage of your convictions, why should anyone believe you?

I usually don't publish first-hand reports of bigfoot encounters because this blog is not trying to prove the existence of Sasquatch. There is enough evidence already for anyone with any discernment to realize that these creatures (people) exist. I don't have time or resources to verify any sighting reports. But I will post one or two unverified reports from time to time if I feel like it. All I ask is that the reporter supply his name and email address. In this case, I let the reader decide on its veracity.
There is a lot of hogwash extant among the bigfooters. I won't even go into the subject of "paranormal phenomena" which I think is bunk. Things like saggital crests, and metatarsal breaks are theoretical artifacts of  people who are trying to push the Ape Model of bigfoot. There is no real evidence for them. I believe that Bigfoot (or whatever you want to call them) are human. By human, I mean they belong to the same genus (Homo) that we do. They are not necesarily of the same species, but they might be.
There are people who are studying Bigfoot dna and have come up with some surprising (to some) conclusions.
William Mayes