norseman Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 ^^^^^^^ So would that justify the discrimination he encountered during that career by his superiors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) ^^ Please indicate where I said as much Norse. I didn't. But let's look at your question since you brought it up. The only reference made in the article to anything that even remotely talks about discrimination is the following: "I was threatened with my job as a result of speaking openly about these findings..." That comment does not describe a career long history of discrimination. In fact it seems to me like an isolated incident. Is it justified? Not in my opinion. Is it being reported accurately and truthfully? I cannot say for certain, nor can you or anyone else. So I take it with a grain of salt as I do all anecdotes when it comes to Bigfoot. Edited January 6, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Frankly, all I need to know about the lack of trail cam photos is contained in Bipto's take on the matter as it concerns Area X. To paraphrase: We have no trail cam shots of Wood Apes there, but we also have no shots of black bear either, and we know bears are there (too). If it all came with obvious answers, it wouldn't be science, would it class? (And it wouldn't be nearly as fun either) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Norton Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Stan, does a "gap" equate to a coast to coast breeding population of giant, bipedal ape-men? That seems like quite a "gap", as you say... You say it's wishful thinking for this project to be expected to find a Bigfoot, but what about all of these projects combined? None of them have produced a picture of a Bigfoot. Now if you take the conspiracy theories out of it ( as I believe most rational people should do), then is it still wishful thinking for the combined effort to produce at least one photo of a Bigfoot? Or is a clear photo of a Bigfoot just wishful thinking in general? Well, the coast-to-coast thing is a little cheeky in that you are implying that, due to the spread of purported sightings, it should be equally abundant everywhere...is anyone sensible really claiming that? It is perfectly valid for an organism to be very widespread yet be very scarce too. I have no evidence-based answer as to why there are no decent sasquatch trail cam images and I do find it odd...I do however refrain from concluding from that fact that sasquatch is imaginary. It's one piece of the puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Look, as someone who has defended his share of EEOC and employment discrimination cases over the years, I can assure you there is no duty in the law or otherwise for an employee to continuously expose his employer's discriminatory views through repeated provocation. If this govt. employee experienced this but once, it is naive to discount it as inconsequential just because he didn't have another go at it. Human nature and the law will tell you that nobody has a duty to do a futile act at their own peril (I don't care how much the NSA wishes it to be so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Frankly, all I need to know about the lack of trail cam photos is contained in Bipto's take on the matter as it concerns Area X. To paraphrase: We have no trail cam shots of Wood Apes there, but we also have no shots of black bear either, and we know bears are there (too). If it all came with obvious answers, it wouldn't be science, would it class? (And it wouldn't be nearly as fun either) I just think that we all have gotten so besotted with wildlife footage and Amazing Scientific Findings that we don't really look behind them to what was actually involved in getting them. One of my favorite illustrations is the Bactrian Camel footage shot for the PBS "Planet Earth" series. Over six feet at the shoulder; 600-1000 kg in weight; live in herds; no trees to hide them...and the only reason they got any footage was that they were gonna overspend their unlimited budget because this was getting on this program. Oh, the unlimited budget. That's what one gets when the world accepts that the animal's real. Toss in a small population; woods that could hide something bigger, quite well; a generally solitary animal; and the steadfast refusal of society at large to accept their existence...and add to that the relative unlikelihood of getting the trailcam shots in the very first place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Well WSA, it would be interesting to discover if Conservation Northwest, or any of the other projects, are lacking trail cam photos of any large mammals known to be in the area. I would suspect that they are not. So I will take Bipto's commentary as peculiar to that area only. Perhaps large mammals are not terribly abundant in the valley of the Wood Apes--well, aside from Wood Apes that is. And if I recall correctly ( not an avid reader of the NAWAC thread mind you), do they not have difficulty with batteries and such so do not deploy many trail cams for extended periods of time? So it would make sense that they catch fewer images of animals given they have fewer cameras on the ground? DWA, every thing you just said can be applied to other animals too. Other animals that we have plenty of photographic as well as physical evidence for. Special pleading for Bigfoot seems to ignore the fact that other animals with the same habitat and same qualities do get successfully recorded. ...now queue the "But Bigfeets are super smart..." argument.. Edited January 6, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Norton Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Yep, the number, distribution and deployment period of the cams will clearly influence the likelihood of any particular creature being photographed...that's a valid point to consider for any study. Whilst I find the NAWAC stuff absolutely gripping and quite addictive, the lack of any trail cam images (and the failure of the security camera system) is very puzzling in that it would appear that there is every chance of that place more than any other coming up trumps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 DWA, I can drive 75 km and get footage of a Bactrian Camel on my smart phone. Point being, they exist and I don't need a documentary to prove that. http://www.torontozoo.com/exploretheZoo/AnimalDetails.asp?pg=360 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) IMO, we spend way too much time here pondering what evidence there isn't, rather than concentrating on what evidence there is. That is far easier to do, isn't it, and we all like easier, don't we? So we shouldn't be too surprised. Still, one continuously holds out hope, doesn't one? Edited January 6, 2014 by WSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) ^^ Sure, WSA, please provide some trail cam photos of Bigfoot and we can all discuss them. In the meantime, it is perfectly on topic for this thread to discuss the lack of such. But if you are done tsk-tsking us all, maybe you can provide some decent evidence for study? Otherwise, your moral high ground ( as usual) comments are duly noted. Edited January 6, 2014 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 http://cliffbarackman.com/research/field-investigations/vermont-trail-camera-photo-analysis/ check it out dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 @Dmaker - Would you think that if BF exists, the gov't would know about it? There are lots of reasons why the gov't would want to cover it up. Financial, political, historical, and religious reasons. An active cover up today is not necessary. The population as a whole doesn't believe it exists, and with the circus around the study of these alleged creatures, it's easy to see why no one would believe. Same as UFO's. A large portion of the population simply won't accept UFOs/Aliens either. It's easy to keep something in the dark when the mainstream shouts you down at every turn. Oh, another question Dmaker - do you think that the gov't has ever investigated BF reports/sightings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbear Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 itsasquatch Didn't someone put together evidence supporting that photo is a bird? I could be wrong. Even if someone didn't that's what it looks like to me, definitely not BF JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Go on with yourself Dmaker, is all I can say to that. My bingo card with you was filled a long, long time ago. Peace & out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts