BFRO / What's New - America and Canada / Archives / 07-25-2011 / Sasquatch Human or Ape

Topie: Sasquatch Human or Ape Page: 1 2 3 4 5
July 2nd, 2010 08:54 PM
Tom Thomas I really getting perturbed by people who say Sasquatch is just an animal.

If you listen to the Sierra sounds as much as I do there is no doubt that Sasquatch is a human. Maybe not like us but they are human. They may be a primitive human species but they are human, in my opinion. I don't know of any mammals that have this vocalization ability as the Sasquatch does. Even the pictures that have been posted on the BFRO's websight I can see the human resemblance in them.

Any comments on whether I am wrong or right?


(Edited by Tom Thomas)
July 2nd, 2010 09:26 PM
Bavarian Raven i believe that are a hominid but not of the homo genous. my 2 cents.
July 2nd, 2010 10:02 PM
Bossburg
Quote:
Tom Thomas wrote:
I really getting perturbed by people who say Sasquatch is an animal.

If you listen to the Sierra sounds as much as I do there is no doubt that Sasquatch is a human. Maybe not like us but they are human. They may be a primitive human species but they are human, in my opinion. I don't know of any mammals that have this vocalization ability as the Sasquatch does. Even the pictures that have been posted on the BFRO's websight I can see the human resemblance in them.

Any comments on whether I am wrong or right?




This is a rather 'baited' question. If it can be discussed with reasonable control, we'll let it continue. There are several threads that are similar so it's not like it's a new subject.

Tread lightly.
Thanks,
July 2nd, 2010 10:37 PM
robday Hi Tom-
I've been saying something similar for a while, but I'm making a careful distinction:
I think they are a type of people, but not quite human. Does that make sense? Plus, it helps to avoid offending some people's sensibilities.
I think you're on the right track.
July 2nd, 2010 11:12 PM
MattPruitt Humans are apes, actually. Even if sasquatches are capable of language, that capability wouldn't define them as "humans". The great apes have displayed language capabilities by utilizing American Sign Language.
Sasquatches are no more human than we (humans) are sasquatches.
July 3rd, 2010 03:20 AM
pcrane1943 I agree, humans are a great ape. I do believe sasquatches are capable of language, and feel that they are a type of ape (like us), and that they are a "wild" human. In other words, if we were allowed to grow up in the wild without modern conveniences, etc., we would be very similar.
July 3rd, 2010 08:49 AM
mark sharak This seems to be the million dollar question. Human or ape? There are many people who believe that there are actually two different types of these beings here in North America. One type being more ape-like with conical heads, and a more "human" type, that seems to be taller, with round heads. In fact Indian legends tell of the two different types fighting each other almost to the point of annihilation. I would like to share what I have observed first hand of these animals. No offense intended Tom Thomas in using the word animal, as I believe they are indeed flesh and blood animals and not spirit beings. I have been lucky enough to have heard their language first hand, and from close range. I can state
with 100% certainty that they have some sort of language. My detailed account of exactly what it sounded like is posted in the Olympic Penninsula past expedition notes under my name, for those who may be interested. Although it was indeed some form of language, my immediate, and instinctive, impression was that it wasn't a human speaking to me. So in this reguard I believe they are certainly not Homo Sapiens. I have also been lucky enough to have been present during a close range daylight sighting during an expedition into the Marble Mountains Wilderness in May. This sighting report, and subseqent video of this animal, are currently being evaluated by a BFRO investigator. My brothers detailed description of this animal seems to indicate that it has the overall form of an upright human, but displayed non-human characteristics such as a conical shaped head and a visible crest. The neck was also non-human in structure. It also displayed a running speed well in excess of anything that a human is capable of doing. So in this regard I believe that it is certaintly not Homo Sapiens, but a distinctly non-human hominid. Even if we, as Homo Sapiens, lived as they do, we would never become a sasquatch, or anything like them. It would take countless generations for us to develope the night vision capability, or structure, that a sasquatch displays. From my direct experience with these animals I believe that they are not a human as we know it, although they do indeed display "human-like" characteristics.
July 3rd, 2010 10:14 AM
toejam My initial encounter was an extremely surreal experience. I've never heard a recording like it before or since. I've heard recorded whoops but they're always from a distance. What I heard the first time was very close and articulate. It's played on my mind every day for almost 2 years now. The whoops were so pronounced that it almost sounded like it could speak english. At the same time though, it was all animal. The most effed up call I have ever experienced. The other bizarre thing was that I had an extremely strong sense of antiquity. One cannot fully comprehend unless it happens to them. I can explain it until I'm blue in the face but it has to be experienced to get a full grasp. I sensed that these creatures have been around a very very long time. I believe they've adapted to the point of perfection like crocs and sharks. They are masters of their domain. That voice left me with a big question...what the hell is it? So human sounding yet all animal at the same time. To get perturbed by people who question that is just wrong. You don't know, I don't know, nobody knows. To say that BF is human or BF is an animal is just speculation. I was left with a big question after that experience.
July 3rd, 2010 11:06 AM
CharlesL "I believe they've adapted to the point of perfection like crocs and sharks. They are masters of their domain."

Toejam's statement above is exactly the way I feel, although he was able to put it into words better than I.

I don't know if sasquatches are more human than ape, or more ape than human. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me. To me, they simply ARE. They exist. They have been here for a long, long time. And, they are perfectly in tune with their environment. That, to me, is probably the most interesting aspect of sasquatches.

I'm content to let others who are better educated about such matters to decide where sasquatches fit as a species.
July 3rd, 2010 12:21 PM
mark sharak toejam is right I think. They are indeed masters of their enviornment, but no-one will know for a fact just what they are until one is studied up close. They appear to exhibit both human and ape characteristics.
July 3rd, 2010 02:10 PM
aypapi I think they are intelligent creatures like us humans, and if we had the chance we could teach them how to speak a language.
July 3rd, 2010 03:02 PM
toejam
Quote:
aypapi wrote:
I think they are intelligent creatures like us humans, and if we had the chance we could teach them how to speak a language.



What a fun job that would be:D
I would say a very good possibility. They've been reported calling out people's names.
July 3rd, 2010 04:50 PM
mitchw In the future when Sasquatch are studied more formally, linguists will be able to compare our human language structure to the Sasquatch. My own reading on language leads me to think that for modern linguistics, in the post Chomsky age, humans are thought to all be speaking a common language and that speech is a biological organ. That is, languages differ in their particular grammars and words, but share a universal grammar that all children are ready to learn.

So if Sasquatch can be studied appropriately, we can discover whether their language and its grammar rules are similar to our own. Answering the question of the similarity of our and Sasquatch's language will go a long way to delineating the border between our two species.

ps I learned a lot about linguistics from Steven Pinker's book, The Language Instinct.
pps Some Frankenstein type might also experiment with fertilizing an egg of one group with the sperm of the other. Or if there were enough cells of Sasquatch tissue, its chromosomes could be counted and searched for certain sequences just like any other species. (Feeling a bit queezy now)
(Edited by mitchw)
July 3rd, 2010 11:06 PM
3Raven The Sierra Sounds are very interesting, and I also do believe ..that the sounds are a language'.
I think of a Sasquatch..as a being', unlike known animals...and different then human..thus the name I give them being'.
July 4th, 2010 10:53 AM
Bill Boqs
Quote:
Tom Thomas wrote:
I really getting perturbed by people who say Sasquatch is an animal.


Tom, you say "animal" like it's a bad thing.
July 4th, 2010 11:56 AM
Tom Thomas Bill,

I didn't mean animal to be a derogatory word. People have told me its just an animal. If they would have left out the word "just" I wouldn't be so perturbed.
July 4th, 2010 05:02 PM
IH 460 If you believe the Albert Ostman story or report he stated they used a language even reporting some of the words like "ook" and "soka." Sounds much more like they are human than ape to me. (I happen to believe Ostman was truthful.) He seemed to have no reason to lie and the story is almost too unbelievable to be fabricated with all the details which have never been proven to be false.
July 4th, 2010 06:16 PM
IntriguedLimey You might find some light is shed on this very question if you go to the Talk Show radio thread in the Upcoming Television Programs section. OK, so we don't know if it's genuine yet, but if you have the time and inclination, I recommend listening to the show aired this weekend and brought to our attention by Bossburg. The way 'Mr Mike' describes the sasquatch family is fascinating: gentle, touchy-feely, concerned for each others' well-being, and spectacular are just some of the descriptions. Maybe I'm getting over excited about this witness and what he has to say, but if it's true then it's a major step forward. Fingers crossed I don't feel a fool in a few days when it's all shot to pieces.

July 5th, 2010 02:27 AM
Iamavictory I am far from being an expert but isn't commonly asked if Sasquatches are the "missing link"? With all the details described, the human qualities and the ape qualities, wouldn't it make sense that they are the "missing link"?

So wouldn't it be common sense that they have both "human" characteristics and also "ape" characterristics?
July 5th, 2010 10:27 AM
mitchw If the species can interbreed, there won't be much more debate. Sometimes Bossburg intimates that BF is interested in human females for a very basic reason, so....
July 5th, 2010 11:08 AM
Bossburg
Quote:
mitchw wrote:
If the species can interbreed, there won't be much more debate. Sometimes Bossburg intimates that BF is interested in human females for a very basic reason, so....


Someone may have intimated that, but it wasn't me.
July 5th, 2010 02:45 PM
mitchw I stand corrected Boss, but I recall it was one of the admins, plus some others. I come across this idea a bit.
July 5th, 2010 05:36 PM
Leatherneck Sasquatch can not be the missing link. They are alive now.

Although, I do not believe in evolution, I think they bridge the animal/human line in the sand. Words that I have may not do justice to what they are.

They seem to have everything they need on their backs. Like a dog does not need to pack to go to the field, Sasquatch is built to exist in the field.

My hand bleeds when I sometimes pick blackberrys, and even when wearing BDU's I always get scratched, or cut by thorns. Does Sasquatch have this happen to them?

To me, they are outside the human model. On average, they are much bigger, stronger, longer hair over their bodies, bigger teeth, and with better night vision. Perhaps, soon we will classify them as being closer to us than Chimps.

Mark

July 5th, 2010 06:04 PM
Remedylane
Quote:
Leatherneck wrote:
Sasquatch can not be the missing link. They are alive now.

Although, I do not believe in evolution, I think they bridge the animal/human line in the sand. Words that I have may not do justice to what they are.

They seem to have everything they need on their backs. Like a dog does not need to pack to go to the field, Sasquatch is built to exist in the field.

My hand bleeds when I sometimes pick blackberrys, and even when wearing BDU's I always get scratched, or cut by thorns. Does Sasquatch have this happen to them?

To me, they are outside the human model. On average, they are much bigger, stronger, longer hair over their bodies, bigger teeth, and with better night vision. Perhaps, soon we will classify them as being closer to us than Chimps.

Mark





Best response ive read yet.. And with that said, until we are able to study them close we truly will not know exactly what they are. Or whats in their DNA. But we may never be able to study them that closely.

Matt
July 5th, 2010 07:41 PM
ApesAmongUs What I admire most about this being is It's tolerance and gentle nature. I think they possess a quality that most humans do not. I think their species is superior to our species in many ways, the most impressive being their tolerance of us, and despite their obvious size and strength they are these benevolent, though curious creatures.
July 5th, 2010 08:29 PM
mitchw ?
July 5th, 2010 09:43 PM
ApesAmongUs Sorry Mitch, I should clarify my post and how it relates to Human vs. Ape thread.

I find it amazing that for all these years of recorded interaction with Sasquatch that a person has never been harmed physically. I think it's due to more so to their intelligence, and nature, than their fear of us.

When we venture into their domain, they could easily take advantage of their superiority in the forest, yet they do not. This after witnessing over a hundred years of destruction of habitat, pollution of streams, rivers, and competition for their prey species through hunting.

I'm not a species hater. lol I think we've done a great deal to better this world we live on, and you can't stop progress that's for certain. But I admire the benevolence and restraint shown by this amazing creature, and I ask you guys:

Could we claim the same benevolent, restrained nature if a Sasquatch strolled into an urban center and started wood knocking on a telephone pole?
July 5th, 2010 09:45 PM
narrowfoot It seems clear from archaeology that there have been various hominids in the past. There are several in the present - humans, gorillas (two species), chimps and bonobos, orangutans (two species) - and the still unrecognized Sasquatch. I hope we soon will know where Sasquatch fits into the hominid family.
July 6th, 2010 08:41 AM
Bill Boqs ApesAmongUs: while I share your view that squatches are smart enough to avoid confrontations with humans, benignly curious and, on occasion, may even offer us gifts and/or assistance, we should never forget that they can be extremely territorial and (I suspect) very protective of their young. TR's famous fireside tale and the "Ape Canyon Incident" both suggest that squatches are capable of responding to human intrusion with lethality.
July 6th, 2010 09:16 AM
Tom Thomas The Sasquatch may have learned to be territorial and protect their domain like the native americans had to when man moved into their territory. The native americans also gave gifts and traded with the mountain men. I hope we don't do to the Sasquatch what we did to the native americans.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5