Sasq-Watch Action Team   



If Bigfoot is Real, Why is Evidence so Scarce?

By: Nick Marinoff

If Sasquatch is real, why are encounters so rare?

This is a common question among skeptics. The thought of a seven-foot, bipedal ape-creature remaining hidden in today’s age is something many refuse to accept, though there are some likely explanations as to why such an animal hasn’t become America’s latest celebrity just yet.

If you’ve ever taken a stroll through the woods, you know experiences with animals can be rare. White-tailed deer, for example, common residents of America’s national forests, are often stumbled upon by chance rather than intent. These creatures exhibit a particularly shy nature; one that keeps them on high alert and out of trouble. We know they exist, but encounters are unique. Most of the time, animals keep to themselves, even more so if they have young. A snap under one’s foot or the faint trickle of voices is all an animal needs to know you’re near, triggering them to move deeper and further away. Animals can sense your presence long before you sense theirs, and they’ll hide before you can get any closer.

With so few encounters of known animals on record, why should Bigfoot be any different? If these creatures share distinct qualities with humans as some experts claim, who’s to say they wouldn’t be BETTER at hiding than other animals? If Sasquatch is anything like us, he probably has an ability to think and reason. He knows when we’re coming long before we enter his neck of the woods, and what steps to take before we can invade his well-deserved privacy.

Furthermore, if Bigfoot does share qualities with human beings, he likely understands how WE think and what our expectations are. It is possible Sasquatch has been seen more often than we realize, but his color and shape hides his form from the untrained eye. One could stare and actually see Bigfoot, but misread what they’re viewing as a dead or dying tree. The person walks on unfazed, while Sasquatch remains “undiscovered.”

Another question that many seem to ask is, “Why has no one ever found remains? Skeletons? Skin? Anything like that?” Probably the same reason that so few have come across a dead deer… The woods are full of scavengers. When a creature dies, it’s likely picked at by rodents, bugs and other creatures that consider dead flesh the equivalent of filet mignon. They move in and start chomping away, and after a week or so, whatever remained of the animal is now gone. Bones and other parts considered not edible sink into the ground and are covered with leaves and debris, eventually becoming part of the soil they once lived upon. Any trace of the animal vanishes in due time.

Wouldn’t Bigfoot be subject to the same circumstances? If a deer, wolf or bear is consumed by scavengers, surely the same would occur with a Sasquatch corpse. Considering the animal’s size, a deceased Bigfoot is likely to ring a few extra dinner bells for the scavenging community, thereby attracting MORE animals and disappearing even faster.

Here’s another idea: If Bigfoot families are anything like us, would it be so wrong to believe they bury their dead? When humans pass on, funeral processions are carried out by friends and loved ones. Granted the deceased has not chosen cremation, a proper burial is likely in order. The same might be said of Sasquatch. If these animals share our thinking patterns and genetic traits, if they’re as similar to us as some might believe, would they engage in funerals the way humans do and bury their dead to prevent corpses from being disturbed? African elephants are known to do this, so why not Bigfoot?

Questions surrounding the creature are likely to live on until an actual specimen is found, but part of the joy in believing Bigfoot’s existence is trying to answer those questions on your own, so ask yourself… What do YOU believe?

How Could Sasquatch Have Gotten to North America, or Did They Evolve Here?
By Robert Grossman

There are numerous thoughts on how  large non-human bi-peds can maintain breeding populations in North America, while escaping scientific documentation.  Most of these ideas are fraught with biological impossibilities.  However, there are a few hypotheses that may merit further examination:

1) Relict Hominids Crossing Bering Land Bridge

Sometime during the Pleistocene epoch (2.5 million to 11,000 years BP), the Bering land bridge joined what is now Siberia with what is now Alaska.  This land area was up to 1,000 miles wide at various points during the Pleistocene.  This land bridge persisted until about 11,000 years BP.

Current evidence suggests that humans took on their modern forms during the Pleistocene.  There is also evidence that Australopithecus, Paranthropus, and other human ancestors were also present during this period, but not for the entire epoch.

Humans and other hominids were widely dispersed throughout Africa, Europe, and Asia during the Pleistocene. 

Evidence identifies the Bering land bridge as the pathway modern humans used to reach the North American continent, and eventually populate it from coast to coast.

Could the Bering land bridge also have been used by the evolutionary remnants of australopithecines, Paranthropus, gigantopithecus, or other relict hominids, as a vector for movement into North America?

Early hominid fossil. USGS photo.

2) Convergent Evolution of Hominids

Since the Pleistocene was populated, over time, with many forms of hominids, could one of the now evidently extinct forms have co-evolved into forms which closely approach that of modern humans?  If so, could those other hominids have moved over the Bering land bridge along with modern humans into the North American continent?

The eyewitness account above, if it is believed, would point to several anatomical features which could support the notion of a relict hominid form moving over the Bering land bridge.

Hominid fossils.  USGS photo.

3) Evolutionary Divergent Modern Human Tribes already extant in North America.

Assuming that anatomically modern humans, as a single species, did in fact move from Eurasia into North America via the Bering land bridge, once established in North America, could one or more of those tribes have broken off and evolved anatomical features favoring a particular ecological niche? 

Under this hypothesis, as one particular group (tribe) of humans moved southward after crossing the Bering land bridge, they started adapting to exploit new resources not already exploited by other human tribes.  This would have allowed the tribe to thrive without competing for already contested resources.  Successful exploitation of these new resources could have demanded new behaviors, and favored certain physical characteristics.  The selective reproduction process, physical and behavioral adaptations, and cultural bias would have favored offspring best suited for these environments.  After 10 or 12 thousand years of adaptation and reproduction within a particular lifestyle, members of this particular tribe ended up looking and behaving very differently from their predecessor tribes that originally moved over the Bering land bridge.

Successfully exploiting this uncontested ecological niche might have favored a vegetarian diet, low reproductive rate, no need for tools, secretive habits, nocturnal behavior, and/or the increased need for insulating and camouflaging hair.

Eastern hardwood Sasquatch habitat.  Robert Scott Film photo.

The lack of physical evidence or of high quality photographs or video supporting the existence of living relict hominids in North America could be explained if most or all of the following are true:
1)    Their ecological niche favors a secretive lifestyle.
2)    They have very low population density.
3)    They live in areas with very low human population densities.
4)    They have cultural practices demanding burial or concealment of their dead.
5)    They care for, transport, or conceal their sick or injured family members.
6)    They do not kill or wage war on other members of their race or species, or if they do, they bury or conceal the dead.
7)    They do not prey on animals, or if they do, they bury or conceal carcasses.
8)    They do not make or use tools, or if they do, they bury or conceal them.
9)    They do not make or use fire, nor cook their food.
10)  They bury or conceal their feces.
11)  Their infants and children remain very quiet.
12)  They communicate quietly, or with sounds uninterpretable by humans.
13)  They are nocturnal, or, if diurnal, carefully avoid contact with humans.
14)  They retreat to concealed locations while inactive.
15)  They are intelligent, and are aware of the dangers that humans present.
16)  They are aware of the dangers of firearms, and stay well clear of any humans carrying firearms.
17)  They recognize human technology such as camouflaged game trail cameras, video equipment, vehicles, and aircraft, and they avoid contact, avoid movement, or try to conceal themselves when around such technology.

We at the Sasq-Watch Action Team agree that, although improbable for these criteria to be met by any wild mammal, it may be possible for an intelligent hominid species.  There are several modern day examples of newly discovered large fauna, and numerous examples of newly discovered small fauna, inhabiting populated areas of Southeast Asia, Africa, and elsewhere.  Some of these animals, although secretive in nature, would unlikely have the intelligence (or culture) to actively conceal themselves from humans, yet they have avoided detection and scientific description until now.

Northern Sierra Sasquatch habitat.  Robert Scott Film photo.

Sasq-Watch Action Team presents and evaluates evidence of relict hominids, Bigfoot or Sasquatch, living in North America, using empirical & physical evidence.
Website Builder