Leaderboard

No burn. Only deliberate curiosity. If you take this approach, and keep your expectations in check, you do not make yourself vulnerable at all. I keep my eyeballs peeled when I am out of doors anyway, always. If I spot something that fits my understanding of what this animal is, I will have chalked up another experience of the kind I hope to have plenty of by the time I croak. If I don't, I'll still have lots to reflect on that is pretty special too. I think we call this outcome a "win-win", am I right? No timetable. Low expectations. Look for consistencies in the evidence and follow it. Do that, and you're playing the long, smart game, I believe. I"m astounded at all the mind-blowing discoveries that have been made in my short life. None (Repeat: NONE) of those were my due, or anyone else's. They could just have easily not happened. I'm just grateful to my fellow humans that they expended the calories to make them, or were paying attention when those were dropped in their laps, and had the presence to document them when they did. I'm thankful for all those adults and teachers who steered me right as a kid to pay attention to that kind of knowledge, and who stoked my energy to stay curious, to this day. Life would be a pretty grim undertaking without that... for me at least. I try to find a down-side to this field of inquiry, and I'm frankly unable to ever see any.

There is no burn. I've seen one, I know they exist, I want to learn more and more and more about what I saw, there is no burn..

Apparently BF has a soft spot for dogs at times. I don't recall offhand that I have ever read any accounts where BF had an animal companion. http://newenglandfolklore.blogspot.com/2014_08_01_archive.html

Yeah I know doc, only pulling your leg.. It's what happens though when we are so far away from these things, like we are. And by so far away I mean that, as I've said before and with no disrespect to anybody, the field is littered with unqualified volunteers and a hardcore behind it who wants info, but of course can't get enough to sustain their appetite. So things repeat, and repeat, and repeat.

Nobody's forcing bigfoot to do anything, but we see them in places we assume they normally wouldn't be. Ergo, assumption that they keep to the forest of necessity is questionable. Heck, they didn't just crop up in 1959. They've been around for millennia, and for millennia we have competed with them for prime habitat, sometimes violently if certain lore is indicative. There have even been times when we deforested far more of the continent than is now deforested. We haven't done them in yet, and I don't think we're about to.

Congratulations! You got something right.

This is a Bigfoot discussion forum. It is not a laboratory for evaluating field samples of possible evidence. If you are looking for proof, its in the field. Have to ask: If you saw a Bigfoot in broad daylight at close range would you recognize it based on how other people have described them? To you personally, would that be proof that they do in fact exist? Respectfully