Leaderboard

" This idea that we are all guardians of the purity and integrity of the evidence, always poised to give thumbs up or down, is just absurd to me. I must have missed that vote to appoint me an arbiter of the truth as I see it. Obviously, some here campaigned for that office, and won, and now feel they have a mandate. Frankly, I wouldn't want the job." -WSA I don't understand this. You are human. Surely you have, at a minimum, a preliminary opinion based on your first impression? You are allowed to have a reaction and an opinion without being an "arbiter of truth". From Toejam, to Timbergiant, and now to this, you refrain from an opinion on what looks to be pretty sketchy all the while taking shots at people that do express an opinion as if you are taking some moral high ground. I'm sorry, but I don't understand that approach at all.

I can't ever throw in the towel. I'm stuck with the memory of what I saw. It was on my home turf, no question of mistakes of scale, no question of mis-identification, no chance of hoax. Someone else can call me liar I guess, but between me and me, the only options are real and delusion. I suspect without the sighting, with my other experiences and their consistency with the stories and reports I've investigated, I'd still be above 99% sure. I won't just discount those reports or experiences. Each and every one individually would have to be accounted for in a different, even more reasonable, even more believable way. That is .. more believable and more reasonable as **I** judge them. I could care less that someone else discounts them. I could walk way from "research" easy since I'm not a researcher. Walking away from wanting to know ... not possible. MIB

I came here to learn and share information which has been very good for the most part. Regardless of what others believe or accept, I have been blessed with multiple visual sightings and interacted with them on two occasions. You would think my questions were all answered. Sadly, the more I have experienced, the more questions I have on how they do what they do. The small box of belief I had them in at first, has grown by leaps and bounds. It is now to the point where I believe the general public never will accept this phenomenon as being very real and it doesn't matter to me anymore....it is what it is....

I first started coming here because back in the 90's we were experiencing something that we had no idea what we were dealing with. It wasn't something that you would just blurt out to others that you were scared of something that didn't make any logical sense. It was a relief to find others on the forum that may have seen, heard or experiencing similar events. I keep coming back because over the years I did get lucky and had my first visual back in spring of 2006. That ramped me up to wanting to know more, share more and try to connect the dots on what they actually are.

So it's insane for me to be hopeful that Sykes or NAWAC for example will be successful? That's easy for you to say...You have seen one! Besides, it's your fault. I said I believe because people I who I trust is telling the truth, like YOU, have seen one! There is nothing I would love more than to be able to go out in woods all the time (or even every weekend) in an attempt to have a sighting of my own. But I don't have the abililty to do that. I could go hiking and do (when my foot isn't broken), but no one that I knows is interested in looking for Bigfoot. I'm not comfortable going alone (I'm a big chicken). I'm lucky to find someone to just go hiking with me . :/ So, I am content to follow along with what others are doing and stay hopeful that someone will be successful. Although lately, I've been thinking that it might not be a bad thing it they are never proven.... I'm just selfish and want proof so I can be a "Knower".

I dunno, you'd have to ask her what she thinks she's doing, I guess. That is just my stab at it. But, if two independent genome studies come to roughly the same conclusions it is going to be quite newsworthy, and it casts some different light on those with claim to have footage, etc., like this here. I respect Bill Munn's opinion on this subject as he is undoubtedly the expert, but I can't help but scratch my head at someone's choice to perpetrate a hoax using the visage of one of popular culture's most identifiable characters. It is so ludicrous to think somebody would chose to do that it perversely makes you wonder IF they did it. Like, what? Nobody would notice who their critter looks like? But you see Rod, I really don't have to decide that. It costs me nothing to read and think about everything they put out. My wife will still love me, my kids will still (I think) respect me and I won't lose my job. This idea that we are all guardians of the purity and integrity of the evidence, always poised to give thumbs up or down, is just absurd to me. I must have missed that vote to appoint me an arbiter of the truth as I see it. Obviously, some here campaigned for that office, and won, and now feel they have a mandate. Frankly, I wouldn't want the job.

Well, apparently DWA is not one of those people. Maybe Mr. Brown and the rest of his team would have enough......, uh, reasoning ability to suspend the lead slinging part and try to study the creatures as Dame Goodall did with wild chimpanzees. I really doubt that Dame Goodall, a primatologist, ethologist and anthropologist has blessed the group's Rambo approach to "protecting the species", especially since Dame Goodall was at one time appointed a UN Messenger of Peace. The truth of the matter is I don't know when, or if, any of your posts have been serious. Just to be on the safe side - and keep my BP down - I'll just assume all of them are jokes and ignore them.

Excellent topic Chelefoot! Great timing as I was just posting something on the Erickson press release thread and was thinking about this very thing. I got really hooked on Bigfoot in 2007 and have ridden all the ups and downs since then. Admittedly, I have lost some enthusiasm in the past couple of years but a large part of that has been due to starting my own business and my family life getting busier. Regardless, it seems to me, there has been nothing but continuous blows to the reputation of Bigfoot, overall. The subject has become very popular in the past few years but its also attracted a lot of hoaxers and scammers. We never have "wins" and that gets discouraging after a while. If you think about it; what new evidence is there? The only thing I can think of is the Hovey photo, which I personally think looks very real. Other than that, we've had nothing new surface. I'm still a believer, although I've never seen a Bigfoot, but I certainly don't make it a point to talk to people about it anymore. After a while, credibility is diminished and its not worth pushing an agenda or belief that can't be "proven" in a logical manner. I don't even mention it to my sons anymore as they have been on the same Ketchum, Erickson and other stories, roller coaster that we've all ridden. I think that I will always believe in Bigfoot but only because I believe other people have seen them. Perhaps I'm a fool for believing other people's stories but our planet is a much more interesting place with Bigfoot than without.

I hope to meet a nice non-smoking SFBF who wants to share walks in the rain, old B&W movies and.....o.k., o.k. Well, who doesn't want to experience the extraordinary, even if just in a virtual way? Mainly, I made a pact with myself many years ago to try and never be too surprised about what this universe is capable of throwing at us. I come here to get educated.

I just want to learn about what i saw, nothing else really. All the rest is pretty much irrelevant for me but unfortunately my temperament gets me involved in silly things on the forum as i can't resist giving my $0.02. But ultimately, overall, i just want to learn more about what i saw, what it does, how it does it, when it does it, what it is and how on earth has it been able to avoid the best part of 400 plus million people for so long..

After looking closely at this evidence/no-evidence false binary equation for a long while, my conclusion is that challenging every person who comes forward to "put-up or shut-up" only accomplishes one result. Namely, the evidence goes underground, and those who shout the loudest for proof get less and less information. It fulfills itself. As harsh as it may be for some here to consider, there is a large group (and getting larger) who have no interest in sharing their information with someone who only wishes to point out how deluded they are. Just a fact. In my line of work I've seen hundreds of cocky lawyers think the way to draw out information in a deposition is to let the witness know how disdainful you are of what they are telling you. Instead, they should be doing everything but that. Flies & honey v. flies & vinegar. You tell me what works best. So, if your interest is in drawing out more evidence, coming on strong with the ol' extraordinary evidence bromide isn't going to advance the field one little bit, or get you that. The transparent attempts to claim even neutrality on this topic fool nobody, I can assure you. Those that operate in this fashion might want to ask themselves, "What am I really trying to accomplish?" If you are more interested in appearing clever to a bunch of anonymous strangers, well, crack down on it. But, if you want to see what other evidence there might be, you might want to reconsider your approach.

^^^^^^^^ I saw a set of tracks in snow with my father that were quite compelling. I've been on the look out all of my life as a mule packer, hunter and outdoorsman. But I didn't really get serious until a few years back. And yes, I've started a group called "Project Grendel" that is pro kill, trying to become more organized, get some help and spread the word. My goal is the discovery of the species, I don't pack dental resin with me, or pack expensive camera equipment around, nor do I whoop or do any of the things they do on Finding Bigfoot. I feel that the mountain of trace evidence we already have and presented to science has not amounted to a hill of beans, from the perspective of a skeptic. I pack a rifle, think like a hunter and get out as often as possible. Any evidence I find is just a stepping stone to a type specimen....... I understand that it is in and of itself is worthless to most of the world. My advice to you if your more of a conventional researcher and not pro kill? Grow very thick skin. The trace evidence you present in the form of foot casts, pictures, video and audio recordings are going to be met with stiff resistant, and even scoffed at by members of your own clan. If your a pro kill proponent you can check out my "Kill Club" thread in "in the field" section. And grow thicker skin. Skeptics will call you foolish, and fellow proponents will call you a blood thirsty savage........and then to top it off, fellow pro kill proponents may call your methods and tactics into question as dumb and irresponsible. Just remember this, all of the skeptical opinions of nay sayers do not sway nature one iota. It's either out there or its not. If you feel called to go look, and you enjoy it? Then no body has anything to say to you, nor should you feel beholden to answer for your self or your motives. It's a personal quest that each of us must make up our minds about........