Leaderboard

I value what I collect. Two perspectives. 1) I have no interest in proving existence. I may be interested in education efforts after proof occurs. A single piece of evidence that may have no value in the context of proving existence may have a lot of value in education efforts after proof is accepted. Your recordings, while not proof, might have the same value later. 2) Even inconclusive "evidence" can be a memento of a fun trip. An analogy .. I have a half dozen or so sets of deer antlers in my garage. I don't plan to put them on the wall. The deer were eaten (by me) years ago. The only value they have is as a reminder to myself of the experience. In that same spirit I have some track photos and short vids and audio recordings of ... something. They're not for validation, they just remind me of steps along my personal journey. MIB

How to explain the state of bigfootery today? Bigfoot is a personal experience that doesn't need to rely on evidence collection (or even common sense for those who believe solely on the basis of sighting reports). Whatever you experience is, it's all you need, your participation is all that matters. If you show up you should get a ribbon regardless of how you place. For those few who might still care about results it's become impossible to justify the lack of evidence without special pleading. Don't worry, there are special pleadings aplenty and we can find one for whatever situation is encountered. Ever increasing numbers of game cams mean nothing because squatch avoid cameras unless it's a filmed encounter you personally find compelling. Increasing reports in urban areas are true because people don't make mistakes or lie, there's no need to look for evidence. This works because squatch don't leave evidence - no bones, no hair, no scat, no DNA. If you record some audio similar to a fox or owl it's obviously squatch because we know squatch are in the area from the anonymous sighting reports. Squatch are rare and hard to find due to their population being kept in check by dogmen so don't feel bad that no hard evidence is found. Except those areas where they are everywhere like hab sites and research areas where 10+ years of research can't yield a clear photo, hair, or scat because the squatch are super stealthy apes or all knowing forest shamans or invisible. It's all good, just keep posting your encounters and impressions because Science is most likely going to recognize Sasquatch any day now due to the overwhelming weight of the reports. SASQUATCH 2015 - ALL IS WELL, KEEP ON KEEPING ON!

I had about five face-to-palm moments reading the recent posts. Can anyone really, REALLY refute the observation that you are very ulikely to find proof of something (even something inert and stationary) if you aren't looking for it, AND you don't believe it even exists to begin with? I mean...what is there about this point-beyond-elementary that gets so much denial around here? And Crow, we are all likely to be dead before some kind of proof lands in our inboxes. To which I offer a great "So what?" Wish the world operated on my personal timetable too. Crap, oh well.

You use the word "we" a lot. The "we" I associate with are quite comfortable with the amount of evidence and data "we" have found. Anyone like myself, who has seen a BF, is, in my opinion, worlds ahead of some of those names you dropped there. Not only have I seen one, I've recorded them, seen their footprints in various soils, and obtained handprints. I'm not worried about 2015 at all. :-)