Leaderboard

Exactly! Science in its purest form is unrestrained by agendas, or by those who control resources. It is collaborative, and all hypotheses are explored without prejudice. In real terms, however, science costs money. As a result, scientists must demonstrate the value of their research in order to continue it, and usually must convince funding sources of the value of their proposed research before they can gain funding to pursue it. This skews the scientific process, and promotes corrupt science. A scientist has to eat, so he has the following choices: 1. Find someone, somewhere who will fund their research without condition or constraint (very rare today - only those with the highest status may achieve this, and usually only if they have a demonstrated track record of producing results of value). 2. Find someone who perceives value in their proposed research and convince them that if they fund the research, the results will provide some form of return, either economic, social, or political. 3. Find someone who has an economic, social, or political agenda and perform research that supports their agenda at their direction. So, he who controls funding, controls what research is performed and scientist quickly learn that if they want to enjoy continued funding, they need to provide results that the funding entity considers valuable. So if I tell you I am looking for proof that field mice are turning green because butterflies are sneezing more often and offer to fund you while you prove this, most will attempt to gain as much funding as possible, for as long as possible, by demonstrating results that a) do not result in a loss of funding, and encourage further funding. Today when you read a study you have to also look at who funded the study and what that organization's agenda is. How does the funder benefit from the results of the study and how might this relationship have skewed the study? Powell, as a case in point, was in a position of influence and clearly had a prejudicial position, if not an agenda, and he used his influence in a corrupt manner to skew the course of research in the field over which he had influence. At the very least, for any who have been demanding proof that the Smithsonian has ever acted with prejudice, to suppress certain findings, they now have it.

Well Iam confused...... We have a scientist that specializes in bipedal locomotion and foot anatomy saying a real animal is out there based on cast and film analysis. But a Wolverine biologist with a camera trap snap shot is gonna blow the lid off of this thing! Riiiiight. Btw, has anyone called these organizations about strange photos? Or are we just assuming that they are just going to run to the press with a photo?

No one is doing backflips about anything coming from Todd Standing because the man is a hoaxer. Bigfoot showing up on conservational remote cameras isn't going to ruin careers, it would make them. So far we've seen at least three different conservation groups employing hundreds of remote camera stations across huge expanses of territory right in the very heart of alleged Bigfoot country. The following is yet another example of how Bigfoot should have been found and wasn't. This is not a government group. Conservation Northwest has been employing remote camera stations across the North Cascades, the Columbia Highlands, the Selkirks of the Rockies for over 10 years. Their cameras are operating year round in addition to winter snow tracking. This group was responsible for documenting the first wild wolf pups born in Washington in over 80 years... http://www.conservationnw.org/what-we-do/wildlife-habitat/wildlife-monitoring These are images of the real animals they document and monitor in Washington State and British Columbia... http://www.flickr.com/photos/conservationnw This is what the BFRO tells us are authentic Bigfoot snow tracks. http://www.bfro.net/news/SnowTracks/index.asp Conservation Northwest cameras are not recording any Bigfoots and trackers are not finding Bigfoot tracks and sweeping them under the rug for fear of The Man and losing their jobs. We have had over four hundred years minus the last 55 years without something like a Bigfoot stigma to come up with the same evidence we have for every other large mammal in North America. These groups do not report Bigfoots in their survey areas not because of conspiracies and fear and extraordinary abilities on the part of Bigfoot. They do not find and report them because they are not there. They find single wolverines because they are there. They do not miss out on the Bigfoots because they are omnivores rather than carnivores. They quite successfully document all the large omnivores that are there, and the herbivores as well. Amazing finds are what they strive and hope for. Finding the animals thought not to be there is the highpoint of what they do. The reality of this world is that Bigfootery talks amongst itself about remote and rare and passes around Bigfoot sightings maps that look like an epidemic, an undocumented species ninja-ing itself from the books with absurd regularity. Bigfootery wants to blame everyone else and the world around it why we don't have proof or even reliable evidence of this Fortean dream. To believe in Bigfoot as presented to us by Bigfootery is to invest in a cavalcade of excuses. To believe in Bigfoot in 2014 either demands not being informed or being informed by the dogma of a strange subculture that is completely out of touch with reality. Bigfoot does not ninja-funk remote camera stations. Social constructs are something humans do and something that conservation work takes apart for the people that care to pay attention. No Bigfoots on conservation cameras is important evidence that it is not there and that we have a subculture of people looking for excuses as to why not.

I think we all eventually fit into a comfort zone as adults. When something happens that rocks us out of that zone, we tend to rebel against it. I think that some folks may be this way about the Bigfoot/Sasquatch phenomenon. To think that something that big, powerful and quick lurks out there is more than they want to/or willing accept. For those of us who unexpectedly stumbled into an encounter, we had absolutely no choice about this. I was fortunate enough to have later seen one at a distance through binoculars. I can't imagine what it must be like for a person to be totally unaware, then be standing right there in front of one!! That has to be at the top of emotional stress for sure!! Probably one reason some never talk about it...