Leaderboard

^We have all of these habituators with Bigfoot supposedly living in their backyard, and virtually none of them have the interest in trying to prove it. Nor do they have the interest for science or anyone else to come out and study it. So basically you're left with chance encounters, and science isn't going to put much into those unless they come with some really compelling evidence. The money and the grants only come when requested by legitimate sources for legitimate reasons. Has there been any requests made that were denied? Or have there just been no interest in requesting the money?

They were forced to get private funding in 1995. My whole point is, if the government could fund something like SETI without any evidence then why not fund BF research. So they can go out into the field for long periods, They don't need years and years . Give them a couple of years. If nothing is found then okay, at Least they tried. Other counties have started doing this. This was my whole point.

"Complete evidence of absence"? That's a massive and unsupportable stretch unless heavily qualified with something like "Complete evidence of absence in my bedroom, because I refuse to look out the window for fear of seeing something I can't deal with". And one can't claim to be objective if one is subjectively dismissing all reports from all sources. It's like saying one is dating the most beautiful person in the world.... if one ignores their bad teeth, excess weight, and thinning hair. Mainstream science has a very handy means of dealing with things it does not want to acknowledge.

No offense Dmaker, but saying your not an authority of primate locomotion does not negate your ability to accept an expert opinion, Meldrum's opinion of the prints, as a body of evidence, is that they evidence a true biological creature. Now had he not been fully persuaded of that fact, he would not be risking his career attempting to establish the reality of this creature. The existence of a North American ape would only make sense, given their range over the continents, and the North American land bridge that populated our continents. It would only make sense that this creature would find it's way over here. Unless you completely deny that theory of migration of humans and animals. Sasquatch is really not all that fantastic of a notion, it is rather rational really. To say that all these pseudo hominids existed only in our distant past seems to contradict how species of the same type have coexisted along side of each other "millions of years" if you buy into evolution, which surprisingly I do not. Or maybe we still live along side one of these hominids, and will discover that we always have...

You need reading comprehesion. I never said anything about our celestial bodies. I was talking about SETI and listening for alien life. No evidence , yet 11 million was used each year for it.LOL

I'm a scoffer now huh? That's interesting. Was it because I'm offering an opposing view? The point was that anecdotal evidence is highly fallible- it doesn't matter how much of it there is. It's all highly susceptible to misidentification and hoaxing and that goes for any kind of sighting- not just for Sasquatch. The tangible Sasquatch evidence like the prints and footage are also subject to both misidentification and hoaxing. You can say "no", but that's the reality of it. Especially in a field like this where hoaxing runs rampant. Also it is on topic since we're discussing the validity of sightings. Urban sightings have been reported, but sightings just don't lend any weight to the reality of it.

For those that actually conduct fieldwork, or interesting in doing so, here are a few observations, conclusions and comments; all based solely on field work done in the Southern & Southeastern states. All the subjects to be covered have been discussed in numerous threads on the forum. 1. Habituation Nearly all of the many "habituation" cases I have investigated are situations in which the people involved moved into homes -new or old - which were situated in long established Bigfoot foraging areas. Many of the people involved lived for several years on their property without knowing it was part of the creatures' travel routes. Over time some of the residents unintentionally made their home sites specific foraging spots for Bigfoot by storing and/or growing food that the creatures found to be to their liking and easily accessible. (Livestock, livestock feed, pet foods, garden produce, fruits, berries. and table scraps.) In some cases the people involved discovered what was actually going on and deliberately demonstrated their lack of malice toward the creatures to attempt to insure there would be no aggressive or dangerous interactions between them and the creatures. "Habituation" around those home sites was nothing more than the result of the Bigfoot having been there first, and the "new residents" accepting their presence. The situation is not much different than a home site being “habituated†by any of the other smaller wild animals that typically forage around rural home sites seeking a more reliable and accessible source of food. The only difference between the “habituation†of typical wild animals and Bigfoot is that the latter’s highly intelligent and rightly attained distrust of humans keeps them in the shadows at night and at least mostly concealed from the residents during daylight hours, even though they may have no real fear of those particular residents. The folks who live in rural areas and who do in fact have Bigfoot routinely foraging on their property seldom talk to “outsiders†about the matter. When they do, it is always with the conditions that their names and locations not be disclosed. Nearly all of them feel an obligation to protect the creatures, even though at times the creatures do things that infuriate them. Some skeptics – most from outside the area of study - persistently and sarcastically discount the possibility that Bigfoot and humans could, or would, somewhat routinely and peacefully co-exist in any location. It is not only a certain fact that some humans and Bigfoot do share the same general habitat in the South & Southeast, but anyone that does a quick study of the history, geography and topography of these areas should be able to understand why these situations appear to occur there more frequently than in most other areas. Most of those same skeptics attempt to justify their erroneous beliefs that such human/Bigfoot interactions do not exist because the people involved are unable, or unwilling to provide clear and compelling photographs or videos of the creatures. The fact that they believe Bigfoot should be easily photographed or videoed under any circumstances is a pretty compelling reason to believe that those skeptics actually know very little or nothing about the subject animals, or about the people who do.