Leaderboard

What I'm trying to say is that our arguments need to be founded upon the actual sequences rather than words. DNA is molecules, and the arguments over the identity of Sasquatch begin there, not with a recent copyright or the ambiguities of human language.

I can assure you that I read every word. I think you overestimate the value of the accompanying text to the pictures you posted, and underestimate the air of superiority you convey when responding towards others who simply say they don't see it. In doing so, you set the stage for your own discontent. Lots of people have the knack for seeing or hearing things nobody else does that when properly investigated, obviously do not exist, except in the mind of the proponent who cannot accept that he/she is not truly uniquely gifted. This leads to all sorts of rationalizations about the properties of this wondrous thing that only reveals itself to those with special qualities of their own. It is a dangerous road to go down, and I'd recommend some serious and objective reflection to any who consider to start walking it. The fact is, every story I've read of yours where you claim to have witnessed a bigfoot, you have never had an unobstructed view to confirm your supposition. If I have missed a story where you did, I apologize in advance. I agree that you shouldn't show any more pictures that you accept are no better than what you've already shown. This forum is generally interested in finding good evidence, with the understanding that good evidence advances the goals of all on either side of the "belief" fence. I strongly suggest you advance the next time you think you see a bigfoot in a tree, taking photos all the while. When you close on that position, and if you find nothing there, you should then reverse your steps and see if what you were seeing was simply your own mind creating patterns out of chaos. Many understandably have short patience with the endless stream of proponents making incredible claims yet presenting bad or no evidence and then, as the topic of this thread explores, refusing to share their "better" evidence. Some create exclusive pacts with each other, supposedly sharing these pictures privately, then publicly patting each other on the back and telling the wider excluded group things like "I've got a picture so-and-so sent me and it is clearly a bigfoot. Too bad the rest of you blew your chance to see it." I appreciate that you don't care to share more evidence that you admit is bad. I can even appreciate if you are too scared to try to get clear evidence. How about joining the call for others to submit evidence that they maintain is definitive? I submit the following suggestion to the BFF admins: Create a gallery where members can post their evidence anonymously. Then, if their evidence is found wanting, they need never suffer the indignity of public "defamation". If their evidence gets a positive review, they can claim it proudly.