Leaderboard

Big, BIG issue that last line with this whole subject in my opinion. Money rules the world, and when things involve money and lots of it, I'm **** sure not even an upright, hairy man/ape thing is going to get in the way of it.

Looks to me like one or two of the guys in Mountain Monsters, perhaps with a few more teeth.

Ken, Your pro kill and that is all that matters, we small band of brothers, hit the dark timber and try to solve this mystery when we are not being husbands and fathers, on any given weekend, or that precious weekday off work when the honey do list is done. We are few but our voice is growing, we no longer feel the status quo is working, and does nothing to advance our cause......which is discovery. Not grainy photos or plaster casts but bona fide discovery. As a grass roots movement that is growing we have a real shot at this, it doesn't matter if it's you or me or any other feller, just so long as it's done, done right and a species prospers. Yes there are nay sayers...there always will be, and they give a million reasons why it shouldn't be done, cannot be done, why we will fail or be shredded in the process. Many judge us as narsisstic cowboys with some thing to prove. That's ok too....... I think history if our hunches are proven correct? Will judge us differently, maybe blunt and crude but with good intentions and a sense of urgency...... So no our discussion about methods and gear can become heated, but that's how we are gonna be successful by trial and error. This is the essence of Project Grendel. A pro kill group resetting the debate to a very narrow focus of pursuit, discussing, boots on the ground, AAR, rinse and repeat.

IMO, the actual, real, scientific and beyond-a-doubt reason we have neanderthal DNA at such a present level...beer goggles! (both ways)

Out of curiosity, Where are the posts that address online resources for research on Bigfoot in the last few posts? Just wanderin'

Hi dmaker! I know you and I have been back and forth on this in the past, so I'm gonna make it short. The 'default position' of (some) proponents being that all reports are factual is indeed laughable. However, equally laughable is the default position that all reports are NOT factual (for whatever reason). As you stated earlier, you cannot properly vet all reports, thus the truthfulness of all reports cannot be determined either way. We both can speculate as to WHY a report is truthful or not (real BF vs mistaken/lying/etc). But in the end we simply don't know. And somewhere, in all of this mess, lies the truth. WSA and DWA do make good points IMO in that through the noise, some good signal may be there. To not continue to attempt to locate, isolate, and hone in on the 'good signal' and dismiss em all out of hand isn't the way to get to the bottom of this.