The Creature know as Sasquatch is Without a doubt real.
What it is? well that's an entirely different conversation all together.
Humans dressed in costumes for the purpose of abducting people for mind control and medical experiments whilst deflecting blame onto non-existent creatures. Similar to alien abductions, but less tech. Probably underground bases under national parks.
If bigfoot was real we would find bones. Humans love believing exciting myths though, therefore the cover story works.
Proofs? what gave you that idea?
My research specialisation is UFOs. By looking at UFO history you can easily see that "aliens" were most likely humans in costumes. The historical aliens are laughably absurd by today's more sophisticated Hollywood standards. See pics.
Normally the debate about a person encountering the strange revolves around either; 1) the witness lied or 2) the witness did not lie. No one ever asks, did the"alien"/"bigfoot" lie?
If "aliens" are humans pretending, as UFO history seems to show, how much easier to pretend to be a ape while wearing a fairly simple costume?
The next question is why? The answer is to deflect blame for abductions into research that wastes time and misdirects efforts. It is a variation of a false flag.
But why? Illegal human experimentation. Evidence? Alien abduction reports report often the medical table, medical procedure type scenarios. If we then add they are actually humans. Then human illegal classified medical experiments is the answer. We know this is possible because of MKULTRA being exposed. You might recall that most of MKULTRA documents were destroyed. Therefore we know a small fraction of the total abuses.
Now add in that MKULTRA experiencer Cathie O'Brien and US politicion John DeCamp both mention alien abductions as a trauma base for MKULTRA. See pic5 it has a link to references at the bottom.
Putting this all together it is more likely humans act as mythological creatures to abuse other humans.
If bigfoot was real we would find bigfoot bones. People prefer to believe a titillating fantasy rather than sinister truth. This misdirection has probably happened for thousands of years.
OK thats all well and good(not the mk ultra abuse shit,that's real and fucked). but the savages of north america as well as Various "peoples" throughout the world reported the same phenomenon. and they have been for centuries.
That's a good point. But even if a few big foots were around you can use that as cover for human derived abductions. A small percentage could be real and a large percentage could be human abductors dressed up.
Alternatively wild humans rugged up in animal skins could have caused historical myths that are leveraged today as a cover story.
There is still the problem of no bones.
I have been investigating the cause of the 1946/7 UFOs and it is becoming obvious that the initial UFOs were natural phenomena which the science of the time could not explain. This lead to a de facto explanation, in 1950 by the civilian research groups, of extra-terrestrials. Then from 1952 onwards this was leveraged by sinister deceptive humans.
So there are 2 causes to the phenomena; nature then human deception.
If I apply this concept to bigfoot:
followed by human deception as stated above.
>The Historical Bigfoot: A Book Reviewed>I have received in the mail a book that I think most people with an interest in Cryptozoology in general, and the Bigfoot controversy in particular, will sit up and take notice of. Its title is The Historical Bigfoot and it’s put together by Chad Arment. As for the subtitle, it’s Early Reports of Wild Men, Hairy Giants, and Wandering Gorillas in North America. This book is almost unique in terms of Bigfoot publications, because it runs to in excess of 1,000 pages. Yes, you did read that right: one thousand. I say “almost unique” because, amazingly, there is one book that even exceeds the page-count of this book. Its title is Far Out, Shaggy, Funky Monsters, which is 1,181 pages in length. It’s written by Daniel S. Green, focuses on Bigfoot in the 1970s, and is enormous. I’m actually still reading that one, and I’ll give it a review when I have finally finished it. Both books are published by Coachwip Publications of Greenville, Ohio. As for The Historical Bigfoot, the copy that I have is the newly-published second edition; the first edition came out in 2006. Both books sit well next to each other.
...>It’s a valuable book, as it is unlikely you’ll ever find anything else like it. To give you an idea of the content, here are two examples from its many pages. We’ll begin with an extract from the October 12, 1935 edition of the Wisconsin-based Leader. The headline is “Reports tell of Canadian Monster Men.” In part, it states: “Sasquatch men, remnants of a lost race of ‘wild men’ who inhabited the rocky regions of British Columbia centuries ago, are reported roaming the province again.”>Then, we have a story titled “Wild Man Seen Again.” It appeared in the Daily Iowa Capital on September 28, 1899. The opening words to the article go as follows: “The wild man is in this vicinity, or at least was at an early hour Wednesday morning. He was seen by a hired man employed by Capt. Garker while he was in the Grand river timber looking for some stray stock.” Of the wild man, we’re told that he was “like a gorilla or large ape” and was “of gigantic stature.” And the collection of news stories go on and on.>Although I mentioned that the book is the perfect resource item for early sightings of Bigfoot (it places everything in a handy state-by-state fashion) , I would prefer something somewhat different in style. Namely, to see the author rewrite the articles in his very own words. Chad is a good writer and – in light of that – I think something that told the story of each and every case, with all the data included, but with Chad at the helm, would be a far better approach than just sharing hundreds and hundreds of media-based stories in verbatim style.https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2019/10/the-historical-bigfoot-a-book-reviewed/
These books might be a good source to counter my perspective. I note with interest that the term "big foot" started in 1950s, same as the alien assumption. Interesting we had an increase in superstition as MKUltra ramps up.
I disagree with the article wishing the author restated the news paper reports in his own words. I think researches should be as close to the source as possible.
Will you read the book(s) OP?
I just realized something. I don't think, i've ever heard about a sasquatch in Europe. Can any eurofags confirm?
i don't think i have heard of any believable stories from Europe but in the past there were things called 'wild men' but i believe they were just people that lived in the forest because they wouldn't be called men if they looked and sounded like apes
Odd. There are cases from most of not all continents, that humans inhabit. I wonder if they were wiped out by our ancestors in Europe?