Leaderboard

dmaker, what makes you think anyone here is trying to make you a believer ? Why do you make it about you ? I know I didn't come on this forum to make people believe. I am here because I know this creature is real. If you don't think so , that's fine. But when anyone posts their experience's, I really don't beiieve their doing it for your benefit. No offense but we are here to share experience's, and our sighting's.

Oh boy! Another argument between dmaker and DWA about the existence of bigfoot! I can't get enough of those.

Really. There is nothing I find of interest on which my opinion is "slam dunk I am right and slam dunk all you heathen are wrong." That is about the most ironic thing you have ever said. That sums up your entire position perfectly. "Eye witness testimony--the weakest form of evidence possible in a scientific discussion." "Couldn't be more wrong, as shown time after time all over this site." Every time you say things like this you display how utterly wrong you are. Why do you keep doing it? Or are you suggesting that you are right and every proponent of the scientific process is wrong? And this can be backed up by more sources that one would care to count. So is that your contention? Despite the scientific process's very clear and firm position on anecdotal evidence, DWA has pronounced that principle wrong. Based on...uhm...his love for Bigfoot stories? Good luck with that.

My current thinking on those who scoff at nature's unclassified diversity is to invite them to spend a night on the ground, alone, in say... Clarke County, AL, or anywhere else in the Black Belt, or any other similar wild locale, N. or S. on the continent. Leave the cell phone and tablet at home too. Ditto the tent. Come tell me the next morning you are of the same position, and I'll just shut up already. Until they have that kind of cred, their opinions don't matter that much to me, and to a lot of others here, and I feel free to disregard them whenever I see them. This is one of those times.

I've taken a number of classes at the Tracker School, conducted by Tom Brown Jr. In them we are frequently taught stealth tactics. One of the bigger problems humans have in the wild is that we rarely wear the right clothing for silence. Brain tanned leather is the best and synthetics suck. BF, OTOH has an ideal set up for silence- no need for clothing. An additional factor is also taught at the Tracker School. You may think a particular thicket is impenetrable, but in an exercise known as the 'drum stalk', we were shown the meaning of the phrase 'the landscape plays the animal like an instrument'. If you blaze through, even well dressed you get scratched up, but if you move with the landscape, even if in shorts you may have no scratches at all, and you will move with a lot less noise. The Drum Stalk had us about 1/2 mile from the drum, off of any paths and blindfolded. We could wear anything we wanted. The trick was to sense which way the landscape was going to allow us through. Seems odd, but sometimes you can do this better blindfolded Now imagine being trained that way from birth, combined with the ideally adapted skin and now you have a really stealthy creature. So I am of the opinion that they don't need parallel paths at all. They are experts, we are a joke in the woods by comparison.

@Dmaker, Yes I can make that statement as fact. As far as evidence goes, my experience with the outdoors and the local wildlife is good enough evidence for me. If it's not good enough "for your standards" that's your problem, not mine. Don't care what you think, it's just the same ole same ole and that's the end of that discussion for me on what I do and not know.

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.