#gigantopithicus

[j-gold-art]

Available on Redbubble!

gigantopithicus, hyracotherium/eohippus, parasaurolophus,

[darozz]

[paranormalplanets]

Sasquatch

Linked photo's by M. Rangel

Some of the hobbies I’ve taken up lend themselves well to the paranormal. I like hiking, photography, and astronomy. So when I have an opportunity to go out into a secluded part of the woods, I make sure to bring my camera and my 30x power monocular. On one of my outings to Mt. Ranier national park (Carbon river entrance) I noticed a particular foot print in the sand while I was heading toward the Chenuis falls trail. It was very large and somewhat disfigured, I took a couple of pictures of it, but I wish that I’d thought to place something next to it for a sense of scale. This discovery heightened my belief in the possibility of bigfoot. The foot print I found was a little different from a normal bare human foot print. Differences that I noted were:

It’s larger than a normal foot print

It’s toes are shaped differently, they’re a little on the chunky / blocky side

It has a less defined arch, the sides of the feet have less curvature

The foot has different proportions when it comes to foot vs. toe length

I took a photo of a print that I made in the snow using a pair of Vibram 5 fingers. This is so you can compare the differences between the overall foot structure. Now I wear about a size 10 for the 5 fingers and the tracks I made were ~ 4” shorter than the one that I found hiking. The depth of the prints were about the same, but I have to keep in mind that the snow is less dense than the sand where I found the bigfoot print. I should note that I’m over the 200lb mark and as such am not very light on my feet.

People often argue that the existence of a giant ape in the pacific northwest isn’t likely because if it were to exist there would be more sightings of it, or some hiker would have stumbled across the body of one in the woods. I have some points I would like to make to counter this argument. The first being that I don’t believe people have an honest understanding of just how vast the wilderness is in Washington state. There are thousands of acres of dense woodland in which a creature such as Sasquatch could exist. Also backpackers and hikers tend to stay within a certain distance of trails and camp grounds, and very few traverse the true wild lands of the state. There are many places which are near impossible to travel through, and that are inhospitable to humans without the right training and gear. I believe that these large barrel chested apes are adept and surviving in dense woodlands at high elevations. It’s my belief that if there is a species of giant apes living in the pacific northwest then they live in the high elevations of the mountains far from human settlements, only coming down from their sanctuaries when the weather drives them out.

Another thing I would like to point out is that their are many outdoors-men who could spend their entire lives in the wilderness without ever catching sight of a predator such as a bear or cougar. I myself have personally seen both bear and cougar tracks in the woods on multiple occasions. This ties in with the fact that people have greater success finding bigfoot prints than Sasquatch himself. I have only twice in my life seen a bear in the woods, and it was from a distance. While it’s not a daily occurrence, people do spot what they believe to be bigfoot in the wilderness. Why it’s not more prevalent is something I plan to postulate on. It’s said that you’ll never see a cougar in the woods, because if they’re near they’re up in the trees behind you, stalking you. Now if an instinctual predatory species can elude humans easily in the woods, why is it that people find it hard to believe that an intelligent great ape would be able to do the same. I believe that people tend to view bigfoot as a large blundering imbecile who, do to his size, can’t help but be found. This perception is entirely wrong. It is my belief that this species of giant ape is predatory, and as such is both a cunning hunter, and adept at hiding itself. If you think of Sasquatch as a creature as ferocious as a bear with the intelligence of an early human, then the pieces start to fit together. Most wild animals stay away from humans, because they recognize us as a threat. If there is an intelligent ape species it’s likely to be able to pick up on other animals response to us, and as such be wary of our presence themselves. If this is the case then I’m impressed that there are as many bigfoot sightings as there are. And as for coming across a dead body in the woods, I’d like to ask when was the last time someone came across the dead body of a bear or cougar in the woods. While skeptics will still claim that we should have found some remains if not a body, I lend that perhaps this species is more closely related to us that we dare think, and as such take care of their dead.

- M.

[partingtheveil-blog]

Sasquatch:

Linked photos by M. Rangel

Some of the hobbies I've taken up lend themselves well to the paranormal. I like hiking, photography, and astronomy. So when I have an opportunity to go out into a secluded part of the woods, I make sure to bring my camera and my 30x power monocular. On one of my outings to Mt. Ranier national park (Carbon river entrance) I noticed a particular foot print in the sand while I was heading toward the Chenuis falls trail. It was very large and somewhat disfigured, I took a couple of pictures of it, but I wish that I'd thought to place something next to it for a sense of scale. This discovery heightened my belief in the possibility of bigfoot. The foot print I found was a little different from a normal bare human foot print. Differences that I noted were:

It's larger than a normal foot print

It's toes are shaped differently, they're a little on the chunky / blocky side

It has a less defined arch, the sides of the feet have less curvature

The foot has different proportions when it comes to foot vs. toe length

I took a photo of a print that I made in the snow using a pair of Vibram 5 fingers. This is so you can compare the differences between the overall foot structure. Now I wear about a size 10 for the 5 fingers and the tracks I made were ~ 4" shorter than the one that I found hiking. The depth of the prints were about the same, but I have to keep in mind that the snow is less dense than the sand where I found the bigfoot print. I should note that I'm over the 200lb mark and as such am not very light on my feet.

People often argue that the existence of a giant ape in the pacific northwest isn't likely because if it were to exist there would be more sightings of it, or some hiker would have stumbled across the body of one in the woods. I have some points I would like to make to counter this argument. The first being that I don't believe people have an honest understanding of just how vast the wilderness is in Washington state. There are thousands of acres of dense woodland in which a creature such as Sasquatch could exist. Also backpackers and hikers tend to stay within a certain distance of trails and camp grounds, and very few traverse the true wild lands of the state. There are many places which are near impossible to travel through, and that are inhospitable to humans without the right training and gear. I believe that these large barrel chested apes are adept and surviving in dense woodlands at high elevations. It's my belief that if there is a species of giant apes living in the pacific northwest then they live in the high elevations of the mountains far from human settlements, only coming down from their sanctuaries when the weather drives them out.

Another thing I would like to point out is that their are many outdoors-men who could spend their entire lives in the wilderness without ever catching sight of a predator such as a bear or cougar. I myself have personally seen both bear and cougar tracks in the woods on multiple occasions. This ties in with the fact that people have greater success finding bigfoot prints than Sasquatch himself. I have only once in my life seen a bear in the woods, and it was from a distance. While it's not a daily occurrence, people do spot what they believe to be bigfoot in the wilderness. Why it's not more prevalent is something I plan to postulate on. It's said that you'll never see a cougar in the woods, because if they're near they're up in the trees behind you, stalking you. Now if an instinctual predatory species can elude humans easily in the woods, why is it that people find it hard to believe that an intelligent great ape would be able to do the same. I believe that people tend to view bigfoot as a large blundering imbecile who, do to his size, can't help but be found. This perception is entirely wrong. It is my belief that this species of giant ape is predatory, and as such is both a cunning hunter, and adept at hiding itself. If you think of Sasquatch as a creature as ferocious as a bear with the intelligence of an early human, then the pieces start to fit together. Most wild animals stay away from humans, because they recognize us as a threat. If there is an intelligent ape species it's likely to be able to pick up on other animals response to us, and as such be wary of our presence themselves. If this is the case then I'm impressed that there are as many bigfoot sightings as there are. And as for coming across a dead body in the woods, I'd like to ask when was the last time someone came across the dead body of a bear or cougar in the woods. While skeptics will still claim that we should have found some remains if not a body, I lend that perhaps this species is more closely related to us that we dare think, and as such take care of their dead.

- M.