You're dodging the question. Have you seen it or not?
First of all, "read Krantz, read Meldrum, see LMS" is a complete dead end for you as an argument. It does not matter how many times one wades through bigfootery texts and videos, the outcome is always the same- there's no reliable evidence. Most of them are nothing but attempts to repack and sell the same evidence pieces and try to convince the reader they are better than they actually are, accompained with some new (usually baseless) speculations. A single thing will convince skeptics that there's something else behind bigfootery other than a modern myth - reliable evidence (no, it does not take a body) and good methodology. "Read Krantz, read Meldrum, see LMS" can not substitute the absence of the above.
You by now should already be aware that I am not the type of person who relys on second-hand comments, so here's your answer, as if you actually needed one.
Now, stop dodging, LAL, and tell me - the book and the DVD- they use or not anecdotal evidence?
As though "bigfootery" is responsible for that.
Who are the people responsible for Biscardi, Moneymaker, Creekfreak, GA boyz, Freeman, Bulletmaker, Ivan Marx, Lisa Shiels, Mary Green, Janice Carter, [add footer hoaxer/kook of you preference here]? Who buys their stuff?
Skeptics?
Who are the people which keep presenting evidence of poor quality and flawed reasonings to back bigfeet?
Skeptics?
Only if you choose to relegate it to the tabloids and refuse to take it seriously. There are a few scientists willing to look in to it. The climate may be changing.
The problem LAL, is that once I took it seriously. More than once I've looked in to this stuff seriously. And there's very little to be taken seriously.
Yes, the climate may be changing, a body may be produced very soon, there’s some group with amazing evidence waiting for the right time to release it, stay tuned, some new imagery are amazingly clear, the rapture is coming, planet X will cause havoc very soon, the Maya calendar predict the end of the world.
See the study on the teeth wear. It's most like that of chimpanzees. Chimpanzees eat meat.
There were forests with abundant food. Gigantopithecus was not a specialized bamboo eater (as Ciochon thought at first) although they did eat bamboo, and were not confined to bamboo forests.
I got the phrase from Dr. Meldrum who cited the study. Dr. David Daegling, who was one of the authors of the study, used the phrase "fairly eclectic" here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=uJ...&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result
If you read the articles I linked previously, you probably saw its not the way you wrote. The papers clearly state the creature was herbivorous; they merely say that the evidence points towards these animals also eating plants other than bamboo. The comparison with chimpanzees (which have some meat in their diet, depending on the group in question) is quite a stretch; going even further and comparing it to a mythical pig-throwing, deer-eviscerating, salmon-eating, mussel-collecting, rodent-catcher bipedal brown, reddish-brown, red, black, dark brown, white giant ape is baseless speculation.
There was a flurry of sightings near The Dalles, Oregon, that might indicate sasquatches can cross grassland if not actually inhabit it.
Speculation based on nothing but anecdotal evidence. Bad science at best, pseudoscience actually.
According to "sighting reports", bigfeet are also known to lie down in roads, climb trees, throw pigs, eviscerate deer, rock cars, steal beans at someone's backyard, swim, smell worse than skunks, abduct humans, rape humans, emit infrasound, bash trees, collects mussels, knock on woods, twist trees, have glowing eyes, walk on all fours, throw rocks and pine cones, twist trees, hide in corn fields, eat worms, bury their dead, speak, eat rodents and salmon, live across most North America and the list goes on.... Hey Drew, is my list longer than yours?
Bigfoot killed my spelling! How about that one?
Why should I read your posts (again) when I can read Ciochon, Daegling, et al. They wrote it up.
Make sure to, when reading Ciochon, not miss the many parts where it becomes clear that the footer arguments trying to pose gigantopithecus as bigfeet are very weak. Make sure you will not cherry-pick a word or a few sentences in an attempt to back your position.
