Leaderboard

<I believe he is on record as stating that he doesn't care if anyone believes him> I'd say hm leaving in a huff shows he does.

If ya got the goods, you don't have to advertise....

Couldn't the same be said for bipto? He offered no evidence, and saying that it was never his intent to do so is not any better than saying that the skeptics can't give anything to substantiate their opinion. Stagnation seems to be defined as allowing others to be critical of unsubstantiated claims. To me, stagnation is humoring the claims of others without asking them to substantiate their claims, all while walking on eggshells in an effort to avoid offending the person making the claims. I've raised my child, so I'm pretty much done with making an effort to boost egos, or should I say avoiding the truth to keep from offending. People have to learn that there is no right to avoid offense, and if they can't post their incredible, unsubstantiated claims to a forum without being able to handle a differing opinion or criticism, and want to take their tales elsewhere, then that's up to them. I wish the guy all the success in the world, but if he can't handle the skeptical and skeptical proponents questioning him here on the BFF, how's he going to handle an inquiry from the scientific community, who'll certainly critique his claims unless... ... it's accompanied by evidence, which is where all of this got started from - Claims that lacked evidence. If bipto wants to return and present evidence along with his claims, or continue to give unsubstantiated accounts, he's more than welcome.

I can certainly sympathize with being afraid. Fear is something we all have to conquer in one way or another, and in rare instances, it can be a really useful emotion to have. But the reason everyone keeps going back out there is that they're not getting hurt. Just because any one individual Sasquatch person has the physical strength to cause a lot of suffering to a human does not mean it will cause that suffering. And as the record shows -- and as the experience of many people on this site shows -- these kinds of events are extremely rare. The feeling that many hunters have when they get a BF in their sights -- that the BF is too human-looking, so they can't pull the trigger -- is the exact same feeling a BF has when it looks at YOU. S/he sees you as close kin. S/he does not see you as lunch. If s/he had a gun, s/he would not shoot, either. (There are some BF who have been shot at a few too many times to be immune to anger about it, and would willingly hurt someone who tried to hurt them. So that's an easy one, right? Don't try to hurt one.) If you hear a BF "stalking" you, you're fine. In fact, you're almost 99% sure not to be in danger if a BF is stalking you. Look how many people have lived to describe the experience! That should tell you something. As someone pointed out earlier in this thread (and before that person, many others over the years), if one of them "wants" you, you will not hear them. Not a chance. Attitude is important here, as it is with everything. The calmer you can be in any stressful situation, the greater the likelihood you will emerge from it unscathed. And if you are walking through the woods with no thoughts of harming a BF, and with no desire to dominate, showboat, or threaten anything there, you are 99% sure of having a lovely time. Just play your flute. And if you don't have a flute, speak quietly, respectfully, and reassuringly, and you'll be fine.

Well, I had a big ol' post written up, but it was somehow lost. So, I'll be more concise with this one. Bipto, I hate to see you leave, but I also hate to see you take pot shots at the BFF. Dude, we didn't make the claims that were made, you did. The members make the forum what it is, be it a sideshow, full of sound and fury, etc. Maybe that's about it because your claims are unsubstantiated. Do you honestly expect everyone to believe you based on your word alone? Surely you wouldn't do likewise of others claiming to see some of the things you've claimed. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. On the BFF we accept very little at face value. We may have a tendency to over-analyze claims and be more skeptical than some other forums dedicated to this topic, but we think that is preferable to the alternative. Don't blame the forum for your exit. You could present evidence to substantiate your claims at any time, as well as giving the skeptics something to chew on. I want to wish you luck with your endeavors, and I hope that you find the evidence to accompany your claims. Science demands solid evidence, so no amount of conjecture or storytelling will bring the creature to light. Whether it's here, on Facebook, or anywhere else, a tale with supporting evidence will hold up much better than a tale without.

I think Sykes wanted to make a showing that Science wasn't ignoring cryptozoologists anymore and his paper was to be testament to that. He wanted to silence the cryptozoologists. He did seem encouraging to bigfooters that they should keep trying, so maybe he will be open to testing more samples, but it will still likely be in a publicized way. We should ask him if and when he does if he can get both maternal and paternal lineages on hair samples that test human.

Susiq: I flew 727s for many years until the airline got rid of them. Loved that airplane, very safe, flew in two of the three positions on them. Never got senior enough to be captain. Flew the 757 until I was forced to retire. Loved that airplane too in a different way. Anyway in spite of all the arguments about what is safer woods or highways, I stand by my feelings. If you cannot rationalize being in the woods for whatever reason stay out of them. Some of us have precognition abilities (this will send some people into a tizzy) but I have experienced it myself. And observed others having feelings they ignored at their peril. A classic case I can think of was a B-52 gunner who had a really bad feeling about flying one day. He went out sick and the airplane that he was supposed to fly crashed killing everyone on board right on base. Only it gets worse. The gunner was walking on base and the airplane hit and killed him on the ground. In my case I was driving along the road in California that parallels the Sierras. I had vision of a car running off the road and going out into a field with a big cloud of dust. Sort of like a day time dream. I slowed down trying to figure out what was happening. 5 minutes later I came around a corner and this time saw in real time the exact same scene. If I had not slowed down the car would have hit me as it crossed the road before going out into the field. The driver was fine and just shook up but if we had head on we both could have been killed. I had a couple of things like this happened when I was a fireman. A feeling not to go someplace or great danger then a roof fell in where I would have been. After my zapping thing which scared me quite a bit, I had to rationalize going out in the field again. I thought the local BF were my friends until that point. Now I don't know. I worked past it just like the many times I had to do the same thing in the military after crashes that killed flying buddies. But if you cannot rationalize your fears, by all means stay out of the woods. You will never be comfortable. Another thing that many who have made arguments is that they are assuming BF is a homogenous population. In my area they are pretty reclusive but can be provoked. A 100 miles away in Northern Washington they seem very aggressive and quite willing to show themselves and chase people out of the woods. If different species or subspecies are involved like, dogman etc, then all bets are off as to what they are like and how dangerous they are. One could be having a bad day or have been shot at recently too in any area. You never know when you have an encounter.

well said See, so a couple of plusses for these , and here's why.... long ago in BFF 1, iirc, I started some of those threads about skeptics / why they get involved, why pro BF with no sightings want to "bleev" etc ....... seems I remember Bip chiming in somewhere about how a dose of skepticism was needed when considering the BF phenomena, and should be expected and good for the discussions....... why make that point and then not expect it to be applied to yourself ? also,considering Bips pot shots at BFF2........... fwiw, a big part of his BFF 1 was much more skeptically minded . saskeptic , Parnassus and crew were much more aggressive in going after the BF stories than what we see now. the back and forth there made it more the sideshow . it certainly wasn't a research sight. BFF 2 is a more accepting forum , imo , or you wouldn't have the "habituating BF" or paranormal BF threads we have now. agreed again, I've been on forums where almost every one agreed . while its great to see all get along for a while, the fact was the forums dry up eventually. without an opposing viewpoint sooner or later the discussions fizzle out when everyone runs out of high fives and "cool story bro's " . the discussion dies, its that simple.

Anecdotes with no supporting evidence are not the cutting edge of science. I just went to my lab and created a time machine. No, seriously. You just have to trust me. I have proof but you will have to wait 20 years because that's where I put it.

I'm perplexed as to how anyone can expect to publish details about an ongoing investigation without expecting any questioning, negative or otherwise. If you make claims on a public forum, you're bound to generate responses. If anyone expects to simply come here and chronicle their experiences without a critique, they are sadly out of touch. This also goes for those that expect only positive responses to such claims, as well. Just as those that claim things to be happening, those that don't think so can express their opinions, too.

... and that's fine, but you have to expect questions from both the proponent and the skeptical. That's what a forum is all about, really.

Interesting, about your GF's parents house. Yeah, that type of thing is what concerns a lot of people. And some BF hunter types are not very scrupulous and not very nice. I would be very concerned about someone digging around and getting info that they shouldn't have, and that would have appeared to have been "safe"... Seems to happen all the time. I've appreciated what you've been saying recently about not worrying about BF in the woods. I think your attitude is great. People, however, are much scarier to me than BF, so I have a lot of sympathy for anyone who doesn't want to share photos (which, of course, is their right). And there is nothing "life or death" about any of this. This is not about curing cancer, or curing anything -- except the fear-driven behaviors that keep us attacking each other for things like not sharing photos. That's what all this BF stuff is good for: illuminating those not very developed parts of ourselves that could use some developing.

^No offense but I think you're just in serious denial here. I wouldn't go that far. The results at least did come up with a very unconventional animal as a culprit for the Yeti, and people have described it as not looking like any conventional animal. Sykes is even planning an expedition to obtain a specimen. Just goes to show that there really are strange things out there, maybe not what people think but still. Maybe there's something similar running around here too? Could be an unconventional animal or maybe someone with hypertrichosis shying from society. Who knows? Could be a lot of things. Just because the dogma says it should be a certain thing doesn't mean it can't be something totally unexpected.

That what he said alright... http://www.thebookseller.com/news/yeti-title-genetics-professor.html ----The Quest for the Yeti will describe Sykes' hunt for genetic traces of species whose existence remains scientifically unconfirmed, including the Yeti, the Sasquatch and Big Foot. For the most part the samples he has tracked down for analysis have turned out to be known species such as humans, bears or apes; however two samples taken towards the end of his quest will "change our understanding of human history," he says.---- Wonder what those two samples were? An extinct raccoon?

Back to the threads question. It would be difficult to tell if a BF was just following you out of curiosity, trying to escort you out of the woods, or stalking you. But logic says that if a BF is close enough for you to hear it moving in the woods near you, it is close enough to grab you in a few steps and kill you. So stalking for the purpose of attacking seems unlikely to me. They can run us down any time they choose and can move fast enough to circle ahead without you continuing to hear them and ambush us at some point up ahead. If they are moving and following you they are quiet as they can be but nothing that big can move without making sound if you are moving at any rate at all. The faster you move the more noise they will make. If you are in camp or in a static situation, they are frequently reported to approach with absolute stealth without any sound. Human snipers can to the same thing but it requires a very slow and careful approach. But even their stealth approaches can be perceived if you listen for nearly inaudible low frequency sounds. The soft thudding sounds their feet make can still be audible on a stealth approach. I noticed that the last time one was moving in on me. I was hearing sets of two or three very low frequency thuds that seemed like I was hearing their footsteps as they moved from one tree to the next as it approached. It sounded similar to very distant thunder. I did the unpredictable and moved towards the soft thuds I was hearing. I did that until I heard an answering growl and backed out. Yes skeptics, it could have been a bear so I will save you the effort of a response. So the frequent reports, where someone hears something following in the woods, that stops when you stop, and moves when you moves, is in my opinion most likely a BF that either wants you to know or does not care if you know it is there. I guess you could call it escorting. In these situations, I have started talking to the BF. I have no idea if they understand but I want them to know that I know they are there. In reality when you stop and listen that says the same thing. But my purpose, if one is that close, is to try to establish some level of communication. I think it likely from reports that they have some level speech of speech ability even it is very primitive. By talking to them I am trying to convey that I put them on an equal level as I would with another human I encountered in the woods. And by talking to them I am indicating I want to communicate. Even if they cannot understand, what do I have to loose? If one knows me well enough to step out and try to talk back at some point, all the better. I can always hope. Randy