This isn’t meant to start a war on whether Bigfoot exists or not, but if it happens, then so be it. You believe what you believe. 
But lets try and make this a real scientific discussion as opposed to name calling and insults regarding this “creature” and other “creatures” we’re still finding today.
If events like this can happen, why is it so hard for you to fathom that there is possibly a Bigfoot out there in undiscovered mountain country? Or does this change your mind on the issue at all?
(The link is to footage of a recently discovered, rare species of dolphin. Presumably, the fact that a new species of dolphin was discovered three years ago suggests the possibility that there are other large species still to be discovered.)
As it relates to Bigfoot:
Those dolphins look quite a lot like any other dolphin I’ve ever seen. It would take someone with a keen eye getting a close look to tell them apart.
The text says that scientists have been searching the Australian coastline looking for them. That’s a very large area to search.
Many more people travel in Bigfoot’s alleged habitat, and can see farther when they do, increasing the likelyhood of encounters.
Land mammals leave evidence of their passing, in the form of droppings, impressions in the ground, scent trails, and tufts of hair.
Everything points to the dolphins being harder to find and identify, yet that short film clip and article is more complete and credible than any evidence of Bigfoot that I’ve seen.
I wouldn’t say that it could never happen but all of the confirmed hoaxes including the most famous video turn me off a lot.
I do love the fact that there are still wonders left to be discovered though. Firm documentation of huge squid in the past few years are very interesting especially considering how agile, aggressive, and intelligent they are. I could easily believe that they have attacked smaller ships in the past.
The one that blew my mind was the discovery of evidence for Hobbit People in Indonesia just a few years ago. Scientists still debate whether they are real or just humans with stunted growth. Most likely, they are real and 3 foot tall people lived on at least one island. The current inhabitants of the island say that they survived until at 100 years ago and they can even describe the funny way that they talked and acted. I don’t know if all of that is true but it is likely that they found a 3rd species of humans (after homo sapiens and Neanderthals) on one island.
Puull-eeeze! :rolleyes: :dubious:
We knew dolphins existed. We knew dolphins lived in that part of the ocean. That there are varieties we haven’t recorded yet is no surprise.
If it was a species of dolphin showing up in, say, Lake Michigan, or one with rudimentary legs, as dolphin ancestors must have possessed, I’d regard that as impressive.
But even that would prove nothing about Bigfoot, for we know dolphins exist, but we have never dissected a great, hairy man-ape. Except when an NFL quarterback needs his appendix taken out, that is. 
Well, the ocean is seriously bigger than the US western states.
having said that, I have no problem believing that we may have a resident population of large apes, look how long populated malaysia is and how small the land mass, yet the orang-utan is a fairly recent discovery. As to the lack of dead ones, there really is a lot of area in the west that is not particularly well traveled, and bodies tend to get eaten by scavengers and insects fairly quickly, and they may be smart enough to avoid humans like the plague we are.
Just because they are humanoid does not mean that they need to settle in one place, and may have a large migratory range and only make nests in caves and sheltered areas in teh winter, and levae them to be mistaken for bear caves.
Except for Alaska. 
I’m pretty sure the Malaysians and their ancestors have always been aware of them. The word first came into English use in 1691, I see from Wikipedia, but I’ve never heard they were unknown to the natives before Westerners came along. Could be wrong, though; I’m not in Malaysia.
Oh I know, but I’m not equating dolphins to ape men. I mean, if we can discover species that we never thought existed, why can’t it be possible that there may in fact be a Bigfoot, ya know?
Also, what about the Montauk Monster that just washed up on shore? Take a look at that thing, ugh !! If someone had of taken a picture of that thing swimming underwater they would’ve screamed “THAT’S FAKE!!” but there it is, washed up on shore today. lol Well, so far it’s real haha.
But that’s my whole point really, if other shit exists that we are just finding, why not bigfoot or even aliens?
No one is saying it’s impossible. Just that there’s very good reasons to reasonably expect new large species to be found in the ocean, while there isn’t in the Western US. If you want to dream that’s fine, but you’d be silly to bankroll a search.
Of all primates, only the Baboon and the Human thrive in areas without significant fruit resources. There are limited wild fruit resources in Europe and North America, compared with Sub-Sahaharan Africa, or Southeast Asia. So, we’re not a promising site for primates.
Most of North America has an annual hunting season for wild game, in the Autumn. Men, familiar with the outdoors and skilled in tracking & stalking wild game, go out by the thousands, every year, armed with shotgun, rifle, carbine. crossbow, or longbow. We’ve been doing this throughout the Colonial period, the Pre-Civil War Era, the Golden Age of the American West (would the Mountain Men and trappers have failed to catch one? I don’t think so.), through two World Wars, & into the current Postmodern Era. Nobody has ever bagged one yet! If they had, they could have been rich & famous overnight. I’ve lived in the Wisconsin countryside, & in the mountains of East Tennessee. I’ve known the outdoorsmen who live there, thrive, & love the back country. Believe me: if Bigfoot existed, they’d have shot one by now.
Note what the footage looks like when you actually find a new species. Damn good, isn’t it? Compare it to the fuzzy useless crap that people pass off as “bigfoot”.
Two threads running about Bigfoot, of all things, and this is the most sensible point made so far.
Where is the ‘damn straight’ smiley?
And how many versions of a man of the forest story do the local indians and natives in the area have? What is the difference between telling the outsiders of the cat-bear [panda] or man of the jungle [orang-utan] and telling no shite there i wuz and there was this huge apelike man shambling around in the woods stealing vermin off my traplines/watching me from the bushes/walking off that-a-way?
Um… pandas and orangutans actually exist?
Moonshine.
The dolphin story doesn’t correlate at all with the bigfoot story, for lots of reasons–many of them already pointed out upthread.
There weren’t thousands of people out searching for a new dolphin species, yet the very first photographs are clear and recognizable. If bigfoot, a land mammal, really existed, then wouldn’t at least one of the pictures be verifiable? Wouldn’t at least one set of tracks have been followed? Wouldn’t at least one dead specimen have been found?
I attended a course at Yellowstone National Park a few months ago, where they explained the process for performing wolverine population counts. If they spotted a track, then they by golly found the wolverine, even though there were only three or four of them in the Yellowstone ecosystem. Yet nobody can follow 14" long humanoid tracks in the snow? Give me a break!
What about dead bodies? Don’t they ever die?
You are forgetting the well-documented Yeti. 
There ain’t much fruit on the slopes of the Himalayas.
Because this statement is based on a logical fallacy:
Orangutans were once considered mythical, but now known to be real.
Bigfoot is considered mythical.
Therefore, Bigfoot exists.
There are myths about dragons, unicorns, chichevaches*, dryads, Zeus, Pegasus, etc. Dragons in particular showed up in many different cultures who often had no connection with each other. That has no bearing on whether they actually exist.
So until someone can bring actual evidence, there’s no more reason to believe bigfoot exists than there is to believe there are unicorns.
*A creature that only ate vituous women and thus was always hungry (yes, sexist, I know, but this was a few centuries ago).
I don’t think that article really helps the case for the existence of Bigfoot. The claim that the Australian Snubfin Dolphin “has only been known to scientists for three years” is a bit misleading. Scientists knew about the dolphins before, but thought that they were the same species as the Irrawaddy Dolphin. Only recent genetic tests proved that the populations were, in fact, different species.
It’s not as though the Australian Snubfin had never been filmed or studied before; indeed, the ‘discovery’ was based on close anatomical and molecular examination of specimens.
Mighty good vittles, I tell you.
Actually I think if someone had seen that thing underwater, they would have screamed, “Gross! There’s a dead dog underwater!”
I have no doubt that it’s ‘real,’ insofar as someone took pictures of a genuinely dead, bloated animal. Looks pretty much like a dead dog to me. Of course if the discoverers genuinely believe it to be a new species of sea monkey, they should want to have the carcass examined professionally. That’s what I’d do if I discovered a dead skunk ape in my backyard. Instead it’s supposedly been dragged off to the backyard of some Montauk roadkill collector.