Uncontacted Indian Tribe found in Brazil

[Unforgiven]

Ack, my sincerest apologies. I loathe when people speak in acronyms and assume you'll know. *sigh* Yes, I have to admit it... I loathe myself now. Sheesh.

OP can mean opening post, or original poster, depending who you are talking to, but it essentially means the same thing.

Ah ok I'm with ya now. No worries, I'm just a little slow on the up take tonight.

Two things here, starting with the OP.

Some group of 87 people living as a tribe in very dense canopy combined with being within a native reserve, having little sporadic contact with the larger tribe they splintered off of, is a lot more like some people living in the wilderness far far away and actively avoiding people as a group in a specific area that is not very likely to be examined too closely is not too difficult to avoid detection, than Bigfoot. Which according to legend is scattered all over North America and Mexico, living solitary lives in perhaps the most examined and explored continent in the world.

The case of the people in Earth As One's post happened in the 1800s. Long before the advanced technology we have now sweeping every inch of the planet from space. For the time, I would not make the claim that it's most likely they could not go undetected. But this isn't the 1800s, it's now and there are tell tale signs that people are living up there in Thule Greenland and they would be hard pressed not to notice the aircraft filling the skies each day.

As well since that time the worlds population has doubled, twice from around 1.5 billion people to over 6 billion at this point. There are many more people to see and many more looking.

And so while it's possible for Bigfoot to exist, there has never been a single shred of hard evidence to prove such a thing actually existed now or ever.

And so to answer you question, If you can remember what it was after this long way round, neither. Both the OP and Earth As One's post are believable in their likelihood, but have no comparison to the existence of Bigfoot. And so can not be used as an argument as such.

 

[karrie]

And so to answer you question, If you can remember what it was after this long way round, neither. Both the OP and Earth As One's post are believable in their likelihood, but have no comparison to the existence of Bigfoot. And so can not be used as an argument as such.

Okay. That clears things up. Threads can get very confusing, especially given that people will often reply to the OP without adding quotes to indicate that it was the OP they replied to. So, when I read earth's post, I assumed it was simply a reply to the OP. Thus my confusion as to why you would cast doubt on either the OP's article, or earth's recounting. I hadn't realized there was a bigfoot argument going on! lol.

 

[Unforgiven]

Okay. That clears things up. Threads can get very confusing, especially given that people will often reply to the OP without adding quotes to indicate that it was the OP they replied to. So, when I read earth's post, I assumed it was simply a reply to the OP. Thus my confusion as to why you would cast doubt on either the OP's article, or earth's recounting. I hadn't realized there was a bigfoot argument going on! lol.

I'm probably one of the worst abusers of thread drift in Canada. I like to think it's because any thread worth it's weight will go where it chooses to go without regard for topic or relevance to the original idea. heh heh But that just might be a defence mechanism of some sort. ;-)

 

[earth_as_one]

Here is a reference to the story I heard regarding the Inuit of NorthWest Greenland:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-7294%28197210%292%3A74%3A5%3C1062%3ANECPEI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A&size=LARGE&origin=JSTOR-enlargePage

 

[Unforgiven]

Here is a reference to the story I heard regarding the Inuit of NorthWest Greenland:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00....0.CO;2-A&size=LARGE&origin=JSTOR-enlargePage

Just to clarify, I have no doubt of the validity of your post or the article you've posted. My response was and remains to be directed at the premise someone else raised that your offering here could be an explanation of why there isn't a shred of actual proof that Bigfoot or anything like that exists in some remote areas of highly populated countries.

 

[earth_as_one]

For these people, there wasn't a shred of actual proof that other people or anything like that existed, beyond the endless glaciers to the north, south and east or the endless ocean to the west. Then one day a ship appeared. Must have been quite a shock!

 

[Unforgiven]

For these people, there wasn't a shred of actual proof that other people or anything like that existed, beyond the endless glaciers to the north, south and east or the endless ocean to the west. Then one day a ship appeared. Must have been quite a shock!

Sure and I suppose that at the time it happened it had happened hundreds of times before with the advent of European exploration of the Americas.
The point being that technology has changed enough to the point that it would be impossible for Bigfoot or a group of Inuit to live undiscovered in the US, or the Arctic due to monitoring.

Some remote place in the Amazon heavily covered with a canopy in an area that belongs to a tribe and thus not an option for business to exploit is a area that would not be monitored quite as heavily as the US.

 

[Dreadful Nonsense]

For these people, there wasn't a shred of actual proof that other people or anything like that existed, beyond the endless glaciers to the north, south and east or the endless ocean to the west. Then one day a ship appeared. Must have been quite a shock!

remember the movie what the bleep do we know?
They used a little known fact of history to prove a point.
When Christopher Columbus and the the 3 ships were off the coast of the first island they discovered, the natives did not notice them.
Their minds could not comprehend what their eyes were seeing so they saw nothing. It was only the Shaman that saw the 3 ships and brought it to their attention. This was also wriiten about in the book of the same movie name.

Therefore it is very likely that these tribes actually sort of mentally shut down when seeing such modern anything

 

[WilliamAshley]

I wonder if me and some freinds could wander into the rain forest throw our clothes away and if we survive be termed an undiscovered tribe... wonder if that would come with mineral rights?

 

[Dreadful Nonsense]

I wonder if me and some freinds could wander into the rain forest throw our clothes away and if we survive be termed an undiscovered tribe... wonder if that would come with mineral rights?

I did this in high park and got arrested

 

[#juan]

Some group of 87 people living as a tribe in very dense canopy combined with being within a native reserve, having little sporadic contact with the larger tribe they splintered off of, is a lot more like some people living in the wilderness far far away and actively avoiding people as a group in a specific area that is not very likely to be examined too closely is not too difficult to avoid detection,

You know, at any given moment there are about five thousand jet airliners in the air. Surely they must have seen the odd aircraft. Brazil has a sizable air force and they must overfly that jungle from time to time. It just seems to me that it has got to be very difficult to remain completely untouched by civilization anywhere in the world.

 

[Unforgiven]

You know, at any given moment there are about five thousand jet airliners in the air. Surely they must have seen the odd aircraft. Brazil has a sizable air force and they must overfly that jungle from time to time. It just seems to me that it has got to be very difficult to remain completely untouched by civilization anywhere in the world.

I disagree with that.

While in these two cases, both very different circumstances and times in history, only one didn't know there were others.

But in the case of remote, there are millions of tiny atolls all over the world that have never been set foot on. I would say that it wouldn't be difficult at all to drop of the face of the planet and never see another person again for the rest of your days. But that isn't North America, suposed stomping grounds of the legendary mythical creature Bigfoot.

 

[Zzarchov]

Unforgiven, you seem to vastly over-estimate the level at which technology keeps an eye on the world.

It is only some key locations that recieve the kind of money and attention that buys , that would be needed to search the earth.

Even then orbital technology is useless for the most part to find anything living in a forest. rainforest or jungle

 

[Unforgiven]

Unforgiven, you seem to vastly over-estimate the level at which technology keeps an eye on the world.

It is only some key locations that recieve the kind of money and attention that buys , that would be needed to search the earth.

Even then orbital technology is useless for the most part to find anything living in a forest. rainforest or jungle

On the surface it may seem so. But this is just a topical "what if" "so then" discussion.

I agree that orbital tech alone is seriously inadequate to find a person or a small group of people. But then, it is only one tool in a massive tool box isn't it. As much as the premise of Bigfoot seems to want to be lost in this thread, it still remains that of all the tools available to us, only the most sketchy and easily dismissed speculative evidence is presented.

But there is one factor that no one really mentions in these discussions, is that should the whole of North America bring it's full attention upon finding some mythical creatures living in the woods, the conclusion would be that there in fact are none to be found. So what's the result of that? No more stories and no more attractions, no more little bit of income from people visiting something else and stopping along the way to "See Bigfoot's Giant Frying Pan."

This would be gone and probably a greater loss than any benefit of finding the actual creatures. Good fun is important.

The only problem is taking something light hearted like this and becoming too serious about it. It has the ability to lend itself to charlatans and scam artists more than willing to dupe the gullible out of their money. Like faith healers and spirit guides, some just take advantage.

So while I enjoy telling all the little kids about NORAD tracking Santa Claus on his Christmas Eve trip around the world, as much as anyone else, I don't get dressed up and start hunting for him North of Inuvik.

 

[#juan]

I disagree with that.

While in these two cases, both very different circumstances and times in history, only one didn't know there were others.

But in the case of remote, there are millions of tiny atolls all over the world that have never been set foot on. I would say that it wouldn't be difficult at all to drop of the face of the planet and never see another person again for the rest of your days. But that isn't North America, suposed stomping grounds of the legendary mythical creature Bigfoot.

Surely you jest. Millions of tiny atolls?? There simply are not that many little dessert islands out there that would even support a man or a group of men for more than the short term. Remember, maps are now made by satellite camera images. Every little island has been at least looked at. A person needs more than a few coconuts and the odd fish to live. I don't say that if you picked the right island and brought a few necessities like seeds so you could grow a garden and there was enough drinking water, etc, you couldn't live.. but of course the other danger is that you might be tempted to hang yourself in the second year.

 

[Zzarchov]

For bigfoot, we would have to really search the forests to check, currently we don't bother. After all, even if you find bigfoot, then what? The massive costs incured with a detailed search wouldn't even begin to be covered by your 2 week stint on the talk show circuit and book deal.

While interesting, finding a north american ape just aint that important in the grand scheme. The reason the myth is still so strong is because no one has really wasted the money to look. And where no one looks (under the bed for instance) monster lurk.

 

[catman]

The Metyktire tribe, with about 87 members,

Must be some serious inbreeding going on there.

 

[Zzarchov]

Its got a large enough size to avoid inbreeding

 

[Unforgiven]

Surely you jest. Millions of tiny atolls?? There simply are not that many little dessert islands out there that would even support a man or a group of men for more than the short term. Remember, maps are now made by satellite camera images. Every little island has been at least looked at. A person needs more than a few coconuts and the odd fish to live. I don't say that if you picked the right island and brought a few necessities like seeds so you could grow a garden and there was enough drinking water, etc, you couldn't live.. but of course the other danger is that you might be tempted to hang yourself in the second year.

Hell Indonesia alone has over 17,000 islands. I don't think it's even known who many could support human habitation ,let's not forget trade, and there is a world of difference between having a look at an island through a sat image passing over and actual exploration.

Nature is diverse. It's amazing to see what people eat and when you get down to it, the sea can provide an abundence of food. That people used to live this way for thousands of years, should be a good indicator that it's only a matter of understanding how to.

That it's not possible to sustain yourself off of every little speck of dirt poking up through the surface of the oceans, I would suggest that should you look, hard enough, you could find one.

 

[Unforgiven]

For bigfoot, we would have to really search the forests to check, currently we don't bother. After all, even if you find bigfoot, then what? The massive costs incured with a detailed search wouldn't even begin to be covered by your 2 week stint on the talk show circuit and book deal.

While interesting, finding a north american ape just aint that important in the grand scheme. The reason the myth is still so strong is because no one has really wasted the money to look. And where no one looks (under the bed for instance) monster lurk.

So just the pressure we put on wilderness areas in the US for example, hasn't managed to turn up a single bone, carcass or living body while hunting to extinction many other mammals in the same areas doesn't strike you as odd?