Comments on: Bigfoot Tooth Found?

By: bigdog11

bigdog11 — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 07:53:50 +0000

Looks like a wild boar’s tusk to me

By: joso

joso — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 11:35:13 +0000

I was raised in Hebbardsville. Now, I know these burial grounds, and Pleasant Hill, Green River, Ash Flats, even Mr. Nunnelly’s pal Greg Tackett. I do not know, however, this Hebbardsville Hillbilly.

“Local Press”? Well, we have no local newspaper in Hebbardsville. We get the Henderson newspaper “The Gleaner” where I have never seen the Hillbilly critter mentioned. The features reporter, may be interested in speaking with “M.F”.

I do not mean to cast shadows on Mr. Nunnelly’s story, but I haven’t even heard whispers of BigFoot.

By: sonofawindowdresser

sonofawindowdresser — Fri, 04 May 2007 16:57:48 +0000

OK, I would really like to make something which is very important very clear. In no way does the existence of Bigfoot contradict evolutionary theory. This misinterpretation is the result of an understanding of evolution that is not accurate. To suggest that Bigfoot undermines evolutionary theory is to perceive the process as one that is driven by a goal to become human. THIS IS NOT HOW IT WORKS. Keep in mind that the ancestors of apes are also our own ancestors. This would also be true for Bigfoot. All the higher apes, and humans, share a common ancestor in the distant past. Bigfoot is not a “missing link”. It can’t be. It is equally evolved from the point in the past – just as much as we are. Please take this into consideration. Evolutionary theory is not in any way put out by the existence of another bipedal hominid. All it means is that another species managed to survive.

By: KentuckyCrypt1-1-06

KentuckyCrypt1-1-06 — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 04:51:47 +0000

Very interesting news. I never even new there were many bigfoot sightings here in Kentucky. I’ve never been to the Hebbardsville area before though. Yeah, if locals found out about the burial grounds there would probably be nothing left of the artifacts. Hope to here more info about bigfoot here in Kentucky. Maybe I’ll journey to different areas around here and see what I can find. There are a lot of things you can’t explain in the woods. I’ve heard a lot of strange sounds out there before its kind of thrilling though! I just love the adventure of it all!

Keep up the good work Loren.

By: WVBIG_2006

WVBIG_2006 — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:58:24 +0000

BMNunnelly says “I do plan on returning soon with a better camera to take more pics of the tooth and the Great Hill.”

Any 5MP digital camera with a macro mode should work fine if the correct aperture is used.

By: Nachzehrer

Nachzehrer — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:37:43 +0000

I wonder if it’s a peccary tooth? This might be “Hesperopithecus” all over again.

By: MattBille

MattBille — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:05:39 +0000

I don’t doubt the motives of a Native witness who wants to keep a burial ground a secret. The track record of American society, and even of scientists, in dealing respectfully with such places does not inspire confidence. Recent years have brought much better behavior on the part of government agencies and scientists, but the incidence of of illegal “pot hunting” has gotten worse if anything.

That said, we (meaning the larger cryptozoological community) simply do not know if meaningful evidence exists without having an independent, qualified team examine it and report publicly. We may never know what is factual beyond the existence of an unexamined tooth.

Regards,
Matt Bille

By: Sordes

Sordes — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 12:30:49 +0000

A very easy way to look if this tooth is in fact a real tooth and no model, would be an x-ray examination. This would show if the tooth has Cavaum pulpae. But a good photograph alone, showing all angles, would be very good.

By: Roger Knights

Roger Knights — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:24:24 +0000

The easiest next step to strengthen or weaken this claim would be for the investigator to get the names of three or four of these folks who observed these Bigfoot gatherings along with the witness. It would help if he had supporting witnesses.

By: heinselman

heinselman — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:13:09 +0000

Regarding Post #31:

“shovethenos Says:
December 27th, 2006 at 8:10 pm
heinselman-

Are you saying that the record length for a human tooth is .9 inches and that this tooth, at 1.5-2 inches, would be anomalous if it were human? Or was I reading what you wrote wrong? (You didn’t state whether the human record of .9 was root & tip or just tip.) ”

Answer:
The record tooth is the tip not the entire root+tip. Meaning the exposed section in the mouth was .9 inches long in the boy.

Craig Heinselman
Peterborough, NH