Comments on: A Montana Monster

By: Bob K.

Bob K. — Tue, 03 Oct 2006 03:55:46 +0000

I would like to offer up a few points. First of all, there have been Squatches that have been reported to be 9 foot tall-and upwards. Judging from the twists that have been found, a general description of their build, possible weights of the largest males as well exceeding a thousand lbs.,its ability to simply beat to death some fairly sturdy game with its fists in short order, incredible swimming ability–I’ve come to the conclusion that if bigfoot exists and the accounts I’ve read are true, then yeah, a large male perhaps COULD take out a grizzly. I cant remember where I read it (sorry) but appparently, a grizzly carcass was recently found with its jaw twisted off. If, in fact, this injury occurred during combat (and that was implied), what else but a squatch could do that?

By: Jeremy_Wells

Jeremy_Wells — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:09:46 +0000

yet people hike/jog/picnic in cougar country all the time without fire-arms… we call them PETA members instead of morons though… (no offense meant to any animal rights persons, just noting the cultural/individual differences)

By: pipdog

pipdog — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 04:16:50 +0000

sounds like a wild west urban legend to me. also the story of never having his weapon when siting the creature… come on. if i was wondering around in a place where bears much less bears torn to pieces without my weapon all would have a name for me… moron!

By: cor2879

cor2879 — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 22:00:01 +0000

I know Bigfoot is usually observed as a solitary creature but perhaps to kill a creature such as a bear they gang up on them? Also I wouldn’t find it quite so unbelievable that an 8-foot tall Bigfoot could take out a black bear. A grizzly on the other hand I would doubt.

By: Stirling

Stirling — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:12:02 +0000

The lowland gorilla, discovered in 1847, was old news by the time of this report.

It was the mountain gorilla that was discovered in 1902.

By: MojoHotep

MojoHotep — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 12:53:30 +0000

It amazes me how often we overlook the obvious. For the sake of the argument, let’s say bigfoot is real. In that case, we are not talking about a big dumb clug in a wookie suit, out pretending to be bigfoot. We are talking about a creature that is way more intelligent than a bear, and that doesnt take much intelligence. A bears bruit force doesnt require it to be extremely smart. But, the survival of a bigfoot would require it to be pretty savy. Imagine survival skills beyond our wildest imaginations, passed down from parent to child for who knows how many eons. Bigfoot would also have to be sly, very sly. He would know every single trick to killing a griz without putting himself in harms way. Native Americans killed griz with nothing more than a sharp stick for thousands and thousands of years. They had lots of tricks, passed down from generation to generation. There are traps used by indigenous people called “deadfalls” these are not complicated and do not require high intelligence to make. A deadfall can easily kill a griz, kodiak, or polar bear. I worked for a government agency in the wilderness of the Yellowstone ecosystem and surronding agency. Carcasses dont last long up there, of any sort. There are lots of hungry critters, and they like to crunch the bones on carcasses as well. If bigfoot does exist, he is way smarter and sly and wiley than we can ever imagine. That is, if he is operating on the level playing field that we perceive to be our reality, this earth, this dimension, this time.

For a hominid to exist and thrive in that environment up there, a century and a half ago, would take unbelievable ability, and the ability to kill a griz would be a secondary skill. One more note, totally missed in this thread, griz sleeps several months out of the year, and when he is asleep, he is oblivious to the world around him, easy pickens for a sly, wiley bigfoot with a two hundred pound rock to smash its skull.

Of course, bigfoot might not exist, but if he did, do not underestimate him/her and his/her abilities.

By: fighter

fighter — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:10:36 +0000

The report says the creature was described as “rising on its haunches and walking on its hind legs after the manner of a gorilla.” Wasn’t the gorilla first discovered 17 October 1902?

By: Robsquatch

Robsquatch — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 09:57:54 +0000

God, I love old stories like this! It’s stories like this that would make great radio shows.

Have you ever heard some of the old re-runs on the radio like mystery theater. Just imagine a story like this unfolding with actors, theatrical music, action sounds ect; Only with an old myterious manlike creature lurking in the dark recesses of your minds eye as the story unfolds to you. The kind of radio theater that makes your skin crawl, as you shorten and quiet your breath so you can hear every second of the play as it develops.

Brought to you by rich chocolaty Ovaltine!

By: charlie23

charlie23 — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 07:41:52 +0000

“Nice imput to the bear vs bigfoot theory but the polar bear and kodiak bear i think these bears are so big and…”

Kodiak/Polar bears don’t live in Montana. Black bears and grizzlies do, but believe me: I’ve seen both of these animals up close and personal and a hominid is NOT going to kill one without a serious weapon. This leads me to believe either:

a) it was scavenging, or

b) the “wild eyed individual” was having a bit too much rotgut whiskey.

By: crypto_randz

crypto_randz — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 03:54:31 +0000

Nice input cabochris and sschaper, The mauling tactic is probablly what bears are known for they really dont give their opponents a shot plus they stand up on their two feet to gain advantage. When they attack those fangs are ready to tear apart their opponents.