Leaderboard

I'm still awaiting those portraying themselves as experts, or knowledgeable, or having ongoing activity to present some type of proof that doesn't require faith in the statements they make. Still waiting. But, hey, I'm a patient man. Not expectant, but patient, nonetheless.

Sheri - I have said it before this Kevin Richards guy does not have to interact with these animals directly in any way shape or form to accomplish anything regarding conservation. Him interacting with these animals only inhibits them from having a normal wild life, they are now comfortable around humans and may even seek them out for food ect... These animals will never have a normal life. I am willing to bet these animals are all confined in paddocks, something you won't see in the videos. The direct contact he continues to have with these animals no matter what he says is only for his own selfish reasons, the animals do not need it and essentially he just needs his "cuddle lion" fix end of story. In regards to the guy with the bears and ax handle... hahaha good luck with that, sure a swat might keep a curious or even an annoyed bear at bay but a sledge hammer couldn't even make an angry/hungry determined bear flinch.

Gad, I hate to see my own typos quoted back to me...! Thanks for not making a point of that, BTW. Speaking for me my own personal self only: I've never confused any of the evidence to date as proof. There's only strong, middling, weak and laughable evidence out there. We all get to say which is which for us, you too. But yes, some seem to, but then again, I don't have any idea what their level of experience is. There needs to be a whole lot more of that kind of allowance here, if you ask me. I invite you to check in on this topic on the thread I just posted. Define your goals as a skeptic for us. Really, I'm interested. But to bounce the analogy back to you, if you catch every kind of fish in the pond, what if you still haven't caught any of the turtles? No turtles there, then? Sasquatch just might be the turtle in that pond, for all we know of it, and that ain't much.

How about a group of 4 researchers making calls and wood knocking, in a remote area, surrounded and harrassed by a clan of unruly woods folk, until they escape with their lives, never to enter the woods again? lol

I think Timothy treadwell is a very good example of a non mechanistic approach that went horribly wrong. I personally just don't give a crud, if I need to cuddle with something it will be my wife......my dog or whatever. Not a grizzly bear or a lion. I have a healthy respect for them and give them a wide berth. If they come looking for trouble I will certainly give that to them as well. He should have let nature take its course and let those cubs drown.

I think the genre is long overdue for a good, suspenseful, high quality offering. I want to see the creature appear menacing, yet with ulterior motives. Conflicted. Intelligent, yet not a predictable human clone, nor loyal canine companion. An entirely unknown species, operating with its own interests, perhaps knowing inflicting harm upon a human will bring retribution. I do not wish to see a North American gorilla nor orangutang. I wish to see an intelligent, sentient creature. Not a "wise man of the woods," but something more. Hope that's not too much to desire. Good luck in your endeavors.