There are many people around the world who firmly believe that creatures such as Sasquatch or Bigfoot exist.
Although up to date there has never been proof positive such as finding a dead specimen, bones, or a good film of one, these die hard fans still maintain that it is possible for one to hide in any of the major forested areas in which they are said to live.
This creature, by whatever name you choose to call it, is reported to be 7 to 9 feet tall and weighing in at around 900 lbs. Some are reported to have dark hair, brownish, dark grey, and in case of the Himalayan variety, almost all white.
If you think about it, blending in is a trait most species of animals develop as a protective measure.; they assume the characteristics of their surrounding.
Believers often point to the fact that scientist seem to find new animal species almost every single year. That combined with their purported activity in areas such as the Canadian mountains, the Rockies, Kentucky, Florida and many other parts lends credence to their possible presence.
"Case in point was a recent discovery of a much larger type of chimpanzee in a remote part of Africa. Locals knew of its existence but scientist needed to see it and film it before its presence was confirmed to the world.; "Bili ape, also Bondo mystery ape, is the name given to a large chimpanzee that inhabits Bili Forest in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.In June 2006, British Science Weekly reported that Cleve Hicks and colleagues from the University of Amsterdam had completed a year-long hunt for these apes during which they were able to observe the creatures a total of 20 full hours. The first scientist to see the Bili apes, and also recruited by Ammann, was Shelly Williams, PhD, a specialist in primate behavior. Williams reported on her close and chilling encounter with Bili apes, "We could hear them in the trees, about 10 m away, and four suddenly came rushing through the brush towards me."Wikipedia
If a species as large as this one can remain hidden for a large number of years then why is it so hard to assume that creatures such as Bigfoot may not also exist?
A large number of "Bigfoot" foot prints have been made during the years and some have been proven to be cases of mistaken identity, yet there are quite a few to which science cannot provide a definite answer proving or disproving that it belongs to such a creature. Sure there are several video taped incidents but most are either too blurry or taken at too long a range to make definite identification possible.
There are also a large number of eyewitness who claim to have had encounters with them and have also filmed them.
One of the most famous or notorious of these films is the so called Wallace Film; "Ray Wallace, a logger in the Pacific Northwest who is credited with creating the myth of Bigfoot by using a pair of 16-foot carved wooden feet and stomping around on the ground. He kept the legend going for more than 40 years by using photos, footprints and fake sightings before his family admitted the long-running hoax shortly after his death in November 2002." By Chris Gardner, Reuters
Yes scientists have proven a large number of these video tapes, photographs foot prints and other "evidence" to be the work of hoaxers. But some have so far defied scrutiny and have not been proven false.
If you take into account the expanse of the forest that these creatures inhabit, you begin to understand the magnitude of actually coming up with substantial evidence of their existence.
Many of the lands are heavily wooded, inaccessible and offer very rough terrain and weather patterns. Most amateur organizations who are dedicated to getting definite proof only conduct their research one time, one day or very infrequently, therefore adding to the controversy.
Perhaps the best know example of a Bigfoot encounter was the Patterson film. Over time many have tried to expose it as a fake, yet the mystery remains.
"The Patterson-Gimlin film (also referred to as simply the Patterson film) is a famous short motion picture of an unidentified subject the film makers purported to be a "Bigfoot", that was supposedly filmed on October 20, 1967, by Roger Patterson (February 14, 1926 – January 15, 1972) and Robert Gimlin (October 18, 1931) on the Klamath River outside of Orleans, CA. The film has been subjected to many attempts both to debunk and authenticate it. Skeptics have judged the film a hoax with a man in an ape suit but theorists contend the film depicts a cryptid, a creature unknown to science"Wikipedia
Bottom line, if new species are regularly found, even though legends about them have existed for years, if so many people keep claiming to have seen these creatures, and some of the evidence cannot be discounted or explained, then the fact that such creatures could indeed be real is a plausible idea.
With all of this said however, a healthy dose of skepticism is warranted,
Nevertheless one should keep an open mind to the possibility that Bigfoot or Sasquatches do exist and perhaps sooner or later a sound proof piece of evidence will be brought to the limelight that once and for all will prove what many have believed for so long.
- Finding Bigfoot: Finding Bigfoot: Animal Planet
Finding Bigfoot follows four eccentric but passionate researchers and explorers investigating potential evidence of Bigfoot.
© 2012 Luis E Gonzalez
The Logician from then to now on on April 06, 2013:
You're welcome - great hubpage though. It is nice that you write objectively about it and don't fall on the side of unconfirmable "sightings".
But "One day?" That day has long passed or there would be in our hands convincing proof long before the 21st century. I do believe however that legends often have some basis in truth and who knows, maybe hundreds, maybe thousands of years ago bigfoot did exist, but he's long gone now. That "one day" will never come and frankly there is no credible reason to believe that it will.
Luis E Gonzalez (author) from Miami, Florida on April 06, 2013:
tsadjatko: thanks for your comment. Perhaps you are right and maybe one day we will really find out if these "creatures" do really exists or they are just another folk tale.
tsadjatko on April 06, 2013:
Would have, should have, could have, it is always the same old story. When will people learn tha the legend of bigfoot is just that, a legend, kept alive by promoters who will make money off it to the day the world ends, enter bfro.net, National Geographic and all the rest of the charlatans that are all too happy to tell the tale. Ask them is it real? Answer, the only real thing aboutisis our ratings even though not one iota of proof exists.
Luis E Gonzalez (author) from Miami, Florida on November 09, 2012:
tamron: very interesting. You should contact Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (www.bfro.net) and share your story. Who knows, you may come out on TV
tamron on November 09, 2012:
I seen a Bigfoot in an old grave yard up in Northern Florida. If I would have had a camera or away to take videos. I could have gotten great footage.
He never moved he just stood there watching me watching him. I am glad I was in my car because I didn't even fill safe in my car.
The only reason I felt some what safe. Is a thought I could out run him in my car.
I would have felt safer having an encounter with a Grizzly bear.
This thing looked like he could easily turn my car over. Which was a Crown Victoria.
I just drove very slowly by him and I didn't stop watching him until he was out of site and I was back on the highway.