Yelnick McWawa said:
Bobcat06 said:
ttha_aggie_09 said:
In this day and age with game cameras everywhere and night vision scopes and thermal technology, if squatch were out there in TX, LA or FL, he would have been seen already.
If you start talking about massive wilderness areas in places like BC, it's a possibility but still almost zero evidence to support it and I personally believe it's a hoax.
I love watching those shows and the interviews with the cryptozoologists... it just blows my mind that you're alledging that there is a breeding population of some sort of giant ape out there with almost zero fossil evidence to support it.
How much fossil evidence existed to support the existence of gorillas prior to their verification?
Is this a serious question? Wow.
No, it's not a serious question. It's a rhetorical question.
The entirety of gorilla fossil record ever excavated consists of nine teeth. They were found in 2007; 160 years after the existence of gorilla was verified. Prior to verification of gorilla's existence, there was no fossil record supporting their existence.
Fossilization is a chemical process requiring the subject to be buried in sediment then immersed in water as minerals crystallize forming a rock impression of the subject's bone or tissue. Some ecosystems, like mesopelagic aquatic zones, are very conducive to fossilization and produced tons of fossils. Other ecosystems, like the highland cloud forests found in the Congo and Pacific Northwest, are not conducive to fossilization and produce very few fossils.
But when the facts don't support your narrative, feel free to deflect or resort to ad hominems.