Do You Believe In Monsters?

[djshadow]

There's some interesting discussion of Paulides's work, in the thread "people who just...disappear", on sub-forum "Urban Legends / Folklore" on this board -- especially approx. areas of the thread, posts #245 - #300 and #550 -#590. The putative Bigfoot connection is touched on.

While nowadays, I am unable to buy into the idea of a purely-flesh-and-blood North American Bigfoot; find the matter (B/F and / or people disappearing) interesting to muse on.

Thank you lots for pointing me in this direction - Not sure if I have seen these posts or not. I'll have a look in a short while.

Indeed yes, the whole topic of folks going missing is interesting. What I particularly like about Paulides is the matter of fact way he describes these cases - He has a great radio/podcast voice. I dont believe a hairy man-ape is stealing people from US National Parks (although anything is possible I guess) but there sure appears to be some strange cases he recounts.

I often go walking in woods on my own, but I live in the UK & it is nearly impossible to get lost in the wilderness over here - Scotland as a slight aside maybe. But the sheer scale of the parks in the US & Canada are both amazing & frightening. Especially when you start to think of what could be living or hiding out in them. I am more thinking of feral type people or mountain communities maybe.

Logically speaking though - If I was trekking alone in the boonies, either in the US or Canada the likelihood of me seeing any other human would possibly be less than the UK. Statistically speaking maybe safer in some aspects. But there is no way I would hike alone in an area that vast.

When I read of solo-hikers or huntsmen being a 4 day hike through thick forest away from the nearest road it sends shivers up my spine

 

[David Plankton]

I often go walking in woods on my own, but I live in the UK & it is nearly impossible to get lost in the wilderness over here - Scotland as a slight aside maybe. But the sheer scale of the parks in the US & Canada are both amazing & frightening.

Yup. Pennine Way - 267 miles. Appalachian Trail - 2,200 miles.

 

[djshadow]

Yup. Pennine Way - 267 miles. Appalachian Trail - 2,200 miles.

Indeed, and even when you find the road (after the 4 day hike), it does not necessarily mean any traffic will be passing through for hours!

 

[Xanatic*]

In a place like that, it seems simply falling and breaking your leg could be enough to doom you.

 

[djshadow]

In a place like that, it seems simply falling and breaking your leg could be enough to doom you.

I suppose having one of those emergency satellite beacon things would be of some comfort. At the very least I would want one of those if undertaking such solo romps into the boonies. *that last bit sounds like a strange euphemism

More on topic (Sorry) re the OP's question - I am more inclined to say a large undiscovered creature may be living in a large lake or sea. More so the latter location.

On land, nowadays? Probably not.

Still love the Bigfoot stories though, and strange tales/folklore of creatures living in cave systems. Which incidentally is the only location I could feasibly see a large bipedal ape managing to hide out in the North American wilderness.

 

[Xanatic*]

I have to agree with a previous poster about the BHH paradox. It seems odd that every corner of the globe can hold such creatures, yet we cannot find them.

 

[amyasleigh]

Thank you lots for pointing me in this direction - Not sure if I have seen these posts or not. I'll have a look in a short while.

Indeed yes, the whole topic of folks going missing is interesting. What I particularly like about Paulides is the matter of fact way he describes these cases - He has a great radio/podcast voice. I dont believe a hairy man-ape is stealing people from US National Parks (although anything is possible I guess) but there sure appears to be some strange cases he recounts.

As mentioned by me previously, I've come to the conclusion of Bigfoot's existence in North America as a purely-flesh-and-blood species, being impossible. Humans -- brave, venturesome, and not overburdened with scruples -- have been swarming all over the continent, armed to the teeth with whatever were the respective era's state-of-the-art firearms, for the past several centuries: a few Bigfoot anyway, would have been shot dead and duly identified and catalogued. All other wildlife there, has been thoroughly massacred, goodness knows.

In my view, if there's anything to Bigfoot at all, the paranormal is involved -- which for me, makes the notion of such entities "nabbing" humans, way-out-there scary. On the Fortean scene, though, few things are totally ruled out.

I often go walking in woods on my own, but I live in the UK & it is nearly impossible to get lost in the wilderness over here - Scotland as a slight aside maybe. But the sheer scale of the parks in the US & Canada are both amazing & frightening. Especially when you start to think of what could be living or hiding out in them. I am more thinking of feral type people or mountain communities maybe.

In the North American wilderness – agree, venturing in there (especially alone) is a prospect that would make me nervous. And as with you, djshadow -- would be less worried about the wildlife (known, or cryptid) than the humans, “feral, or mountain-isolated”. However --re the latter category, I suspect that the film Deliverance has visited a disproportionate amount of frightening, on wimpy city slickers like us (and I’m sure it is not held in high regard by the Georgia tourist board). (My brother and I have a theory that – with the fundamental contrariness of life – if we were, for some perverse reason, to wish to have a Deliverance-type experience; and chose to go hiking in the remote mountains of northern Georgia, in quest of such: so long as we didn’t cheat by actively seeking to piss the locals off, we’d get from said locals, only kindness and hospitality to the utmost degree; they’d give us a great time, in the boringly-conventional sense.)

Largely from reading “Bigfooty” stuff on the Internet, I have got the picture that in quite a lot of parts of North America’s big forests, illegal entrepreneurs are busy growing things which according to the law, they shouldn’t; and they often take proactive – sometimes horrific – measures, to stop unwanted visitors from spoiling their activities. This would be something of a worry for me, re travelling the remote backwoods. Re this – a to me utterly fascinating thing which appeared on the US site “BigfootForums”, a good many years ago. (Said site has become, in American parlance, a “train wreck” – unfortunately no way of recovering said material, which I would otherwise try to link to.)

(Crazy crossing-out happened "out of nowhere" in material which I subsequently posted -- will try to remedy same.)

 

[amyasleigh]

Emendation attempt, re continuing from the above post:


The BigfootForums tale (recounted by the poster “Bod A”, who claimed that he was friends with “Bod B”, who supposedly had heard the stuff from contacts of his – wholly anecdotal; and as ever, no certainty that some person along the chain, not lying like Ananias): aforementioned Bod B was a lawyer who (for whatever reason) sought to defend various marijuana growers, who did their stuff in the remote and mountainous far north of California (land of the Bigfoot-famed Six Rivers Forest, and the location of the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin film). Bod B had established a good relationship with his weed-growing clients, who often chatted with him about various stuff incidental to their activities. Allegedly, they mentioned in course of chat, Bigfoot being common in their growing area, and quite often closely encountered. Seemingly, this was not a very big issue: in the main, the druggies did their stuff, the Bigfoot did theirs, and the hom. sap. sap. and the cryptids were able to co-exist quite happily. The humans’ feelings about the B/Fs varied across the spectrum between fondness, and fear / abhorrence; but there basically wasn’t a problem in practical terms.

Bod B, the lawyer, was bound under the things of client privilege and its ramifications -- to keep confidential, what he was told; he broke that rule, to the extent of telling his Bigfooter friend Bod A, about the Bigfoot stuff – whence Bod A, a propos Internet anonymity, felt able to tell the tale on BigfootForums. There was no way, however, that it could go further into the public domain, without betrayal and breaking of faith all round. Very many would say here, “enormous red flags ! how convenient ! haven’t we heard this kind of thing many times before in Bigfootery?” I’d have to agree; found it nonetheless a wonderfully entertaining story, and reserve the notion that there might somehow be a very small vestige of truth in it. (OK – rational explanation no. 1 – the growers were copiously sampling their product, and “imagining what they imagined...”)

And, djshadow, I would NOT go trekking solo in North America -- would require at least one companion.

 

[amyasleigh]

Crossing-out stuff goes on happening -- "copyright" or the equivalent, or what? I'm a dinosaur, flummoxed by such doings -- mods, please do as you see as appropriate.

 

[djshadow]

Crossing-out stuff goes on happening -- "copyright" or the equivalent, or what? I'm a dinosaur, flummoxed by such doings -- mods, please do as you see as appropriate.

Lovely and in depth post. Thanks for the contribution. I know the possible paranormal aspect of Bigfoot gets a mention from time to time, but I cant help but wonder if that is the get out clause. *Nobody can find it because its an inter-dimensional traveler.

I mean if folks are going to throw that into the mix (this is not a critique of your posting btw) then why not also give credence to a theory Bigfoot is a human/ape hybrid escaped from a lab? Or rather a few of them escaped.

One guesses people might say, yeah but First Nation folks supposedly saw them many years before genetic manipulation was possible. Maybe those sightings were (really) just folklore. Now we actually do have the tech to mess around with genetics - morality of said experiments aside for one moment.

Personally I find the theory of Bigfoot being an escaped lab experiment more plausible than a hairy humanoid inter-dimensional traveler who slaps tree trunks & throws rocks at folks.

 

[Mythopoeika]

Looking up from my book a Rastafarian chap, who was smoking a joint & riding a unicycle, just slowly went by me - nodding a greeting as he passed.

The height of cool.

 

[djshadow]

As mentioned by me previously, I've come to the conclusion of Bigfoot's existence in North America as a purely-flesh-and-blood species, being impossible. Humans -- brave, venturesome, and not overburdened with scruples -- have been swarming all over the continent, armed to the teeth with whatever were the respective era's state-of-the-art firearms, for the past several centuries: a few Bigfoot anyway, would have been shot dead and duly identified and catalogued. All other wildlife there, has been thoroughly massacred, goodness knows.

In my view, if there's anything to Bigfoot at all, the paranormal is involved -- which for me, makes the notion of such entities "nabbing" humans, way-out-there scary. On the Fortean scene, though, few things are totally ruled out.



In the North American wilderness – agree, venturing in there (especially alone) is a prospect that would make me nervous. And as with you, djshadow -- would be less worried about the wildlife (known, or cryptid) than the humans, “feral, or mountain-isolated”. However --re the latter category, I suspect that the film Deliverance has visited a disproportionate amount of frightening, on wimpy city slickers like us (and I’m sure it is not held in high regard by the Georgia tourist board). (My brother and I have a theory that – with the fundamental contrariness of life – if we were, for some perverse reason, to wish to have a Deliverance-type experience; and chose to go hiking in the remote mountains of northern Georgia, in quest of such: so long as we didn’t cheat by actively seeking to piss the locals off, we’d get from said locals, only kindness and hospitality to the utmost degree; they’d give us a great time, in the boringly-conventional sense.)

Largely from reading “Bigfooty” stuff on the Internet, I have got the picture that in quite a lot of parts of North America’s big forests, illegal entrepreneurs are busy growing things which according to the law, they shouldn’t; and they often take proactive – sometimes horrific – measures, to stop unwanted visitors from spoiling their activities. This would be something of a worry for me, re travelling the remote backwoods. Re this – a to me utterly fascinating thing which appeared on the US site “BigfootForums”, a good many years ago. (Said site has become, in American parlance, a “train wreck” – unfortunately no way of recovering said material, which I would otherwise try to link to.)

(Crazy crossing-out happened "out of nowhere" in material which I subsequently posted -- will try to remedy same.)

When I said that about mountain communities I did wonder if I would be corrected slightly. Certainly did not want to cause any discord on here. I agree, the Deliverance trope is sadly overused - That is not to say there are not areas where strangers would not be welcome, but its certainly not always the case.

I do have experience of being told about these growing areas in the US when I was visiting a slightly remote-ish (by UK standards anyway) place in California. But I dont want to derail the thread with what the locals told me. The stuff they said about the forests surrounding the small town, 'the growers' & the DEA (not paranormal) fascinated me at the time.

 

[djshadow]

The height of cool.

I thought it was just brilliant at the time. It could not have been staged any better. Brizzle makes me laugh - One of the best cities in the UK. Possibly the best for strange & quirky.

I still have the Doppelganger story about Bristol to tell - I'll have to start a new thread for that...

 

[David Plankton]

I know the possible paranormal aspect of Bigfoot gets a mention from time to time, but I cant help but wonder if that is the get out clause. *Nobody can find it because its an inter-dimensional traveler.

There is a thread somewhere on British Hairy Hominids / Man-beasts which would seem to point in that direction, given our much smaller range of possible hiding places for such things.

 

[Ulalume]

There are some sightings of a sasquatch-like "thing" in a nearby area which is nothing like the heavy forests and mountainous areas where sightings normally occur, so it's a little out of the ordinary.
I don't want to derail this thread so I'll make another. It might be worth it anyway, since sightings seem to have picked up again in recent years.

 

[PeteByrdie]

I know the possible paranormal aspect of Bigfoot gets a mention from time to time, but I cant help but wonder if that is the get out clause. *Nobody can find it because its an inter-dimensional traveler.

I know I used to think the same way. Why throw in the possibility of the paranormal to explain experiences of creatures which either exist or don't? It seems to be be just adding layers of ambiguity to something already lacking adequate evidence. But ultimately, the first question should be whether there is a phenomenon to be investigated. To that end, I now think in terms of the similar creatures popularly said to have been experienced throughout history, and throughout folklore, the world over. Whether there really is such homogeneity in reports of humanoid primates or whether folklore and reports are fitted in to what is expected in the modern age, I'm not qualified to say. But if that consistency throughout the world exists, then an explanation is required for that. If we assume that the consistency of reports suggests people are experiencing similar creatures around the world, even in places with little wilderness relative to their human populations, then we need to ask why we lack definite evidence for their existence. Among the putative reasons for this, we can consider the possibility that they have a objective existence but not necessarily an entirely physical one, in the sense we usually understand it. The alternatives, either that humanity has been remarkably efficient at studying bugs in the Amazon, but has failed to notice populations of seven foot tall, thickset bipedal primates in the British countryside, or that hoaxes and myths around the world dating back centuries, perhaps thousands of years, have all described something that coincides rather neatly with evolutionary theory in describing coexisting human relatives, feel even more unsatisfactory.

 

[amyasleigh]

Lovely and in depth post. Thanks for the contribution. I know the possible paranormal aspect of Bigfoot gets a mention from time to time, but I cant help but wonder if that is the get out clause. *Nobody can find it because its an inter-dimensional traveler.

I mean if folks are going to throw that into the mix (this is not a critique of your posting btw) then why not also give credence to a theory Bigfoot is a human/ape hybrid escaped from a lab? Or rather a few of them escaped.

One guesses people might say, yeah but First Nation folks supposedly saw them many years before genetic manipulation was possible. Maybe those sightings were (really) just folklore. Now we actually do have the tech to mess around with genetics - morality of said experiments aside for one moment.

Personally I find the theory of Bigfoot being an escaped lab experiment more plausible than a hairy humanoid inter-dimensional traveler who slaps tree trunks & throws rocks at folks.

I feel that if Sherlock Holmes were to take any interest in cryptozoology (which one suspects he wouldn't -- the range of things which he found worth paying attention to, was famously narrow) -- he would have, on the subject, a field-day with "when you have eliminated the impossible", etc. ...

ETA: PeteByrdie, I'd have quoted your above post too; but it hit the screen while I was in the process of posting this one.

 

[Xanatic*]

Have you ever read The Adventure of The Creeping Man?

 

[amyasleigh]

Never heard of it till this moment. Can you elaborate?

 

[Xanatic*]

It's a Sherlock Holmes story, that gets a bit paranormal.

I think it might also be Conan Doyle who wrote a story about someone encountering blind cave dwelling BHH. Or possibly H. G. Wells. Not the morlocks obviously.

 

[amyasleigh]

It's a Sherlock Holmes story, that gets a bit paranormal.

I think it might also be Conan Doyle who wrote a story about someone encountering blind cave dwelling BHH. Or possibly H. G. Wells. Not the morlocks obviously.

Thanks ! I'll try and seek out out TAOTCM.

No idea on the blind-cave-dwellers story, I'm afraid.

 

[Xanatic*]

I think it might be from Conan Doyle's badly named horror collection Tales of the Unexpected. Which makes me think less of ghosts and ghouls, more of coming home to find out you are out of milk in the fridge.

 

[djshadow]

Int

I know I used to think the same way. Why throw in the possibility of the paranormal to explain experiences of creatures which either exist or don't? It seems to be be just adding layers of ambiguity to something already lacking adequate evidence. But ultimately, the first question should be whether there is a phenomenon to be investigated. To that end, I now think in terms of the similar creatures popularly said to have been experienced throughout history, and throughout folklore, the world over. Whether there really is such homogeneity in reports of humanoid primates or whether folklore and reports are fitted in to what is expected in the modern age, I'm not qualified to say. But if that consistency throughout the world exists, then an explanation is required for that. If we assume that the consistency of reports suggests people are experiencing similar creatures around the world, even in places with little wilderness relative to their human populations, then we need to ask why we lack definite evidence for their existence. Among the putative reasons for this, we can consider the possibility that they have a objective existence but not necessarily an entirely physical one, in the sense we usually understand it. The alternatives, either that humanity has been remarkably efficient at studying bugs in the Amazon, but has failed to notice populations of seven foot tall, thickset bipedal primates in the British countryside, or that hoaxes and myths around the world dating back centuries, perhaps thousands of years, have all described something that coincides rather neatly with evolutionary theory in describing coexisting human relatives, feel even more unsatisfactory.

Interesting post & I think along the same lines as you, in parts at least. But two things stand out for me.

The first being that aside from some variants in colour & slight facial differences, the epicanthal fold being one, humans look very similar. In my view its not a long stretch of the imagination to believe that cultures all over the world & for many hundreds of years, thousands maybe have managed to 'create - aka folklore' humanoid looking creatures that nearly look human but not quite.

In a folklore sense one suspects that tales of old which mentioned these things were particularly 'jarring' for people. Point being they 'almost look' like us, but do not. It makes me think of the 'Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' - whereby robots or androids made to look humanoid, sometimes can elicit disgust or fear in people when the robot nearly looks human.

Secondly - If these creatures are coming in and out of a dimension (or whatever) why are they not popping up on a housing estate somewhere, or in the middle of a city? With 200 witnesses & CCTV?

I suppose some might say maybe they are too intelligent to do that & break their cover - Well, if that is the case they never seem to show much intelligence apart from lobbing rocks at people & breaking a few trees down.

Bigfoot is a fascinating topic, but the paranormal aspect to it/them seems somewhat incredulous to me.

 

[PeteByrdie]

...aside from some variants in colour & slight facial differences, the epicanthal fold being one, humans look very similar. In my view its not a long stretch of the imagination to believe that cultures all over the world & for many hundreds of years, thousands maybe have managed to 'create - aka folklore' humanoid looking creatures that nearly look human but not quite.

In a folklore sense one suspects that tales of old which mentioned these things were particularly 'jarring' for people. Point being they 'almost look' like us, but do not. It makes me think of the 'Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' - whereby robots or androids made to look humanoid, sometimes can elicit disgust or fear in people when the robot nearly looks human.

A kind of primitive, folkloric body horror! I'm certainly not averse to the idea that humanity is just inclined to populate his mythic environs with hairy wildmen. I wrote the post in response to the discussion about the paranormal aspects of man beasts, but really my point is that, whether there are real bigfoots around the world or not, there is a phenomenon to be studied. If that phenomenon is that human cultures are just very likely to produce hairy ogres in their folklore, and even to see them under certain circumstances, then the reasons for that are worth the study, as there's nothing more important to humanity's progress than the workings of its most unique organ. I really just mean that I can understand why someone making a pretty impartial examination of the subject would find it unsatisfactory to restrict themselves simply to the 'it exists or it's myths and hoaxes' options given the consistency but anecdotal nature of the evidence.

Secondly - If these creatures are coming in and out of a dimension (or whatever) why are they not popping up on a housing estate somewhere, or in the middle of a city? With 200 witnesses & CCTV?

I suppose some might say maybe they are too intelligent to do that & break their cover - Well, if that is the case they never seem to show much intelligence apart from lobbing rocks at people & breaking a few trees down.

Fair point! I suppose the same reason they haven't yet appeared on camera traps. I wonder if they cast a reflection in a mirror. Perhaps it's something to do with quantum mechanics, and they can't appear or disappear from our reality in any way that could be seen by anyone, at the time or in the future. I, for one, think that if there's not enough evidence to determine the existence of the beasties, it's an intellectual exercise I'll leave to others to invent mechanisms by which they can come and go between worlds. As it stands, I don't know about the supernatural aspects of man beasts, but I'm neither comfortable accepting their reality nor dismissing it. Both pose problems and unanswered questions for me.

 

[David Plankton]

Secondly - If these creatures are coming in and out of a dimension (or whatever) why are they not popping up on a housing estate somewhere, or in the middle of a city? With 200 witnesses & CCTV?

As for the cctv aspect, maybe these things only occur in the mind of the witness and perhaps such an occurrence would be influenced by the surrounding environment. It could be that all or most strange phenomena be explained this way. You wouldn't expect to see a monster in the Thames, for example, and you probably never would, but should you venture to the Loughs of Ireland it may be a different story.

 

[David Plankton]

A I wrote the post in response to the discussion about the paranormal aspects of man beasts, but really my point is that, whether there are real bigfoots around the world or not, there is a phenomenon to be studied. If that phenomenon is that human cultures are just very likely to produce hairy ogres in their folklore, and even to see them under certain circumstances, then the reasons for that are worth the study, as there's nothing more important to humanity's progress than the workings of its most unique organ. I really just mean that I can understand why someone making a pretty impartial examination of the subject would find it unsatisfactory to restrict themselves simply to the 'it exists or it's myths and hoaxes' options given the consistency but anecdotal nature of the evidence.

Yes, totally agree with this Pete.

 

[Ermintruder]

@PeteByrdie your statement:

Among the putative reasons for this, we can consider the possibility that they have a objective existence but not necessarily an entirely physical one, in the sense we usually understand it.

....is so resonant and concise a synopsis as to leap off the screen at every sentient reader.

@djshadow I am interested in your responses to this key proposition. Whilst you feel strongly that a paranormal aspect should not be considered, I think this may be mainly because you're (quite rightly, in this scenario) dismissing conventionally-conceived 'phantoms'.

Might you not accept, though, even as a minimal possibility, that there might be, in principle, some non-physical aspect to this? Even in the latent sense of a co-projection, an inferential gestalt product of our shared psyches? I shall stop short of calling it a toothed psychosis, and am not wishing to be swallowed-whole by the snakeless snake of superstition, but if a sub-grouping of humanity genuinely believes in, and fears, a nothing, that nothing just became a something. Gods or quasi-physical nonsters need believers in order exist...but: do we somehow (sometimes) unwittingly-imbue the daggers of the mind with an edge that truly can cut?

 

[djshadow]

A kind of primitive, folkloric body horror! I'm certainly not averse to the idea that humanity is just inclined to populate his mythic environs with hairy wildmen. I wrote the post in response to the discussion about the paranormal aspects of man beasts, but really my point is that, whether there are real bigfoots around the world or not, there is a phenomenon to be studied. If that phenomenon is that human cultures are just very likely to produce hairy ogres in their folklore, and even to see them under certain circumstances, then the reasons for that are worth the study, as there's nothing more important to humanity's progress than the workings of its most unique organ. I really just mean that I can understand why someone making a pretty impartial examination of the subject would find it unsatisfactory to restrict themselves simply to the 'it exists or it's myths and hoaxes' options given the consistency but anecdotal nature of the evidence.



Fair point! I suppose the same reason they haven't yet appeared on camera traps. I wonder if they cast a reflection in a mirror. Perhaps it's something to do with quantum mechanics, and they can't appear or disappear from our reality in any way that could be seen by anyone, at the time or in the future. I, for one, think that if there's not enough evidence to determine the existence of the beasties, it's an intellectual exercise I'll leave to others to invent mechanisms by which they can come and go between worlds. As it stands, I don't know about the supernatural aspects of man beasts, but I'm neither comfortable accepting their reality nor dismissing it. Both pose problems and unanswered questions for me.

Great post!

Its the fact whenever I hear of a paranormal possibility with these creatures I tend to (& am possibly painting myself into a corner - thinking wise) want to work out what 'agency' is behind them. Who is sending them? Are they sending themselves? If any of this is the case then how? And also why?

The popping up into our dimension/timeline, to me anyhow, denotes a form of intelligence is behind it all.

But I totally agree that, given the right environmental or psychological cues perhaps, these things whatever they might be, do appear. Be it a projection of the mind. A type of thought-form maybe.

What if its even the way of the Forest, in a collective hive mind sense sending out some kind of warning signal to humans? A defence mechanism if you will.

 

[djshadow]

As for the cctv aspect, maybe these things only occur in the mind of the witness and perhaps such an occurrence would be influenced by the surrounding environment. It could be that all or most strange phenomena be explained this way. You wouldn't expect to see a monster in the Thames, for example, and you probably never would, but should you venture to the Loughs of Ireland it may be a different story.

Yes I agree & have considered this sort of rational before.

I am not dismissing wholesale the existence of something in them dark woods. What that something is though, well I have no idea!

I do possibly lean towards some theories that maybe the old sightings by the First Nation folks were indeed some classification of ancient humans. Now extinct. Or maybe there are still small pockets of them living out there.

Or what about, given the fact some people claim to see ghosts. Why not have ghost Bigfoots? After all they might have been an early human type species - even maybe with simple rituals etc.

The question is then - For a part of you to live on (a soul, whatever) how far up the evolutionary chain does one have to be?

 

[GeorgeP]

Perhaps the majority of sightings suggest a group of creatures that live underground. I watched an episode of Monsters and Mysteries last night in which a women was attacked in the water by a humanoid with claws. She managed to get to safety and found strange blue dye amidst the deep scratches on her shins. It was later realized that the blue dye came from deep underwater caves. The air force got involved and silenced her...

As for ghost bigfoots, if their natural habitat is underground then your more likely to see them there.

Souls in my opinion enter 5 sensed, intelligent, emotional and loving humanoid forms and many kinds of animal too. Life forms that act more like a beast in their existence are probably not fine tuned enough to house a soul matrix - if they can, the soul will be very primitive. Such life forms continue their development by being part of nature or a gardener to the Earth.