Cryptomundo
for Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and More

10 Responses to “Bigfoot = Giant, Ground-dwelling Siamangs?”

1. dconstrukt responds: December 16th, 2013 at 8:57 am

   i’m obviously just a normal person reading this, and don’t know any of the science behind any of this, but it sounds like nonsense to me.

   they don’t even look anything alike if we’re assuming the PG film is legit.

   If they’re just an ape… as he claims…

   why are they so elusive to film?

   we are finding great photos of new cats and other new undiscovered species, who probably get less attention and have less ppl looking for them… and are coming up with CLEAR, photos….

   yet everything with these bigfoots is either blurry, or suspect at best. (not even gonna talk about the stupid stuff we see 95% of the time)

   just makes you wonder.

2. DWA responds: December 16th, 2013 at 9:12 am

   At first it was [facepalm].

   Then The Zoologist In Me took over and had to admit that a giant, ground-dwelling siamang actually sounds kind of cool. (Like a Himalayan polar bear.) OK, I’m rooting for you to be right, Matt! Not sure I’d bet money. But hey. Speculation gets to run rampant when the mainstream isn’t paying attention.

   I mean, who would buy a gorilla-size lemur? No, Melba, not yours; I mean the one that actually existed.

3. chadgatlin responds: December 16th, 2013 at 11:16 am

   It is a fairly interesting theory. Siamangs are known to walk bipedally when on the ground.

   After watching videos of them walking I noticed a striking similarity to reports of behavior of the Orang Pendek as well. Since Siamangs live in Sumatra, is it possible the Orang Pendek is an undiscovered sub-species or close relative?

4. Cryptoraptor responds: December 16th, 2013 at 12:08 pm

   Is Matt Moneymaker alluding that the P/G film is a hoax OR that there are two distinctly different genus of Sasquatch? The PG creature had prominent lips and a large but human-like nose. Siamangs are very agile arboreal apes that resemble tailless monkeys. I can’t imagine Patterson’s beast maneuvering in a siamang-like fashion.

   What is Jeff Meldrum’s response to Matt Moneymaker’s statement?

5. TheRaZorEffect responds: December 16th, 2013 at 5:18 pm

   He believes this based on his own observations of the “Matilda” video. Which to me, (in the small clip that has been released to the public) looks fake and nothing like Patty from the P/G film. In my opinion, either the P/G film is real and Matilda is a hoax or Matilda is genuine and Patty is a fake (or they’re both hoaxes.) It’s either one or the other, and Matt has put his money on the new horse (Matilda.)

6. sasquatch responds: December 16th, 2013 at 5:50 pm

   I don’t know if all you guys have seen that recent video from Russia- where the thing moves very quickly in a bouncy powerful mode with it’s arms raising up, well; it struck me how monkey-like the movement in that video was…

   Now, would “Patty” be able to move like that? I don’t know…

   In the PG film she seems pretty unhurried so maybe they can kick into a much higher gear when they want…

   I mean; check out your average person and compare the way they move on a Sunday stroll to that of Usain Bolt when he means business, or an NBA player like Doctor J leaping from the free throw line and slam dunking!…You’d think they were different species.

   Also check out a video of a lion laying around napping like a slug all day, then what they can generate in speed, power and agility when bringing down a water buffalo-it’s a huge difference…So, I don’t have a problem with this.

7. DWA responds: December 16th, 2013 at 9:45 pm

   dconstrukt:

   they don’t even look anything alike if we’re assuming the PG film is legit.

   Well, not so fast. The P/G film is one of the best pieces of evidence for thinking this; it’s the only one I’d consider. (Which doesn’t mean I’m betting Moneymaker’s right.) There was a gorilla-size lemur in Madagascar that doesn’t look like any of the current ones. So differences between arboreal and ground-dwelling types of the same animal would be expected.

   If they’re just an ape… as he claims…

   why are they so elusive to film?

   1. Known apes are, incredibly so (the big problem of TV wildlife documentaries…nobody sees how almost-impossible they are to make);

   2. No one’s trying. (Says Brian Brown, and he works with the group that’s making the most serious effort.)

   we are finding great photos of new cats and other new undiscovered species, who probably get less attention and have less ppl looking for them… and are coming up with CLEAR, photos….

   Each one of those animals has approximately 25,000 times – actual educated guess – the investment in those pics than the total effort that’s been made in filming sasquatch, including P/G. Each individual person looking full-time for one of them – and there are numerous looking for each or you wouldn’t have the pictures – is one more than is looking for sasquatch and yeti combined full time.

   Pretty slam-dunk reasons.

8. dconstrukt responds: December 17th, 2013 at 11:13 am

   DWA – I think the pg film is legit. (or one of the best hoaxes of all time)

   but PG film bigfoot doesn’t even look remotely alike in body structure or face to what matt says.

   and they all look even less alike than the wookies.

   the other thing… there’s (from what I can see) quite a few ppl out there now looking for bigfoots… my GUESS is there’s probably more ppl looking for bigfoots now than that new tiger species that was filmed and posted here a couple of weeks ago?

   (I could be totally off here)

   and that film was crystal clear.

   Also what about that photo of a tapir?

   can’t think there’s THAT many ppl out there looking for a tapir in brazil.

   Heck, I’ve never even heard of them.

   no clue what a bigfoot really is, no one will know until we have solid proof and a body to really look at.

   we used to say DNA was the holy grail.

   we have it now, and still have doubts.

   the mystery continues …

9. DWA responds: December 17th, 2013 at 12:58 pm

   dconstrukt:

   Well, I am not sure entirely what a “giant ground-dwelling siamang” would look like.

   (Part of the reason I kinda doubt Moneymaker’s right here.)

   But I can’t rule out something that looks like what bigfoot witnesses are describing.

   (Although I would tend to think it’s an unclassified hominoid rather than a variant on something known, which is what “siamang” says.)

   As to new tapirs and cats: we are pretty much taking scientists’ word for it. When I look at those tapir photos, I don’t see anything different from the tapirs we know about. I am taking their word for it that the additional due diligence was done to suss that one out as a different species. Same with the cats, really; some of them look so close to variants of known animals that I’m taking the researchers’ word for it.

   And the bar for sasquatch evidence is a lot higher too. I’m not taking their word for anything; I’m simply considering the question open (although I think the evidence points that way) and waiting for what they bring out to show me. Anything short of proof isn’t proof.

   (Oh. I am taking, say, NAWAC’s word for what they’re doing in, say, Area X. But that’s only because I don’t see evidence that should make me think they’re lying to me or misrepresenting stuff.)

   But no one is a full-time, paid bigfoot researcher; and for that reason no one has put in the time I would expect to come up with proof. Once full-time money is on the case I would expect that to change, very rapidly.

   I should add, finally, that the ties between sasquatch and siamang seem, to me, now, the same sort of circumstantial stuff that people cite in their assertions that sasquatch are human, another thing the evidence makes me seriously doubt.

10. Dufusyte responds: December 18th, 2013 at 9:16 am

    The P/G footage was staged, so do not let it influence any discussion of the real creatures.

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|