Leaderboard

Um, Jiggy, is that you?

DWA, when you were a child, did your mother ask you stuff like " If your friends said that you should jump off a bridge, would you do it?". I bet you always answered, "Yes".

Bohdi, Nevada is not somewhere I would put high on a list of bigfoot habitats, but I don't see why one couldn't live there in spots like these. Maybe you need to step outside that casino and look around a bit.

"When there hasn't been anything like this that science hasn't confirmed..." DW When did science confirm alien visitation?

Hello FarArcher, Hey, first things first, welcome to the BFF!. Your post is relevant. Critical thinking is a potential many have. When using it in a given subject for some it takes time for others not. We are not all the same. When it comes to Sasquatch some come here with knowledge, others come here to learn. Critical thinking may be a quality both have but applying it to the subject sometimes requires building a knowledge base on what reports contain of which they themselves possess a wide range of details. Organizing it all is tedious at best. A point we've all arrived at is that a small sampling will not give a generality and errors in thinking will therefore compound and result in a skewed view of things. The SSR had been an idea for a long time- something many have thought about- but past thoughts usually had the rude awakening once the daunting size of the task became reality. But folks jumped in anyway. As it is, with hard work and time, it's been over two years that I know of gradually compiling the data into one body of searchable, researchable work. And there's a long way to go and probably more variables to add in fine tuning it to being able to target a specific search criteria. You seem intelligent just from reading your list of the many factors for why the SSR may be missing the mark but maybe over the next few weeks or months you could take a gander at it and offer some assistance in widening it's scope? There are a couple of threads on the subject of the SSR you could look at to see how far it's come from it's beginnings but, more importantly, you will understand better perhaps not only the scope of the work ahead but also the amazing pile of work that's already been accomplished to get the thing off the ground. It's actually pretty impressive; and yes, as said in the beginning, daunting.

Far Archer, It's all good, man. One thing we should mention is that most of us do this as a hobby, it's educational and it's fun. I've learned a lot of things from this project, some that have nothing to do with BF. From how to write PhP code, generate KML files from scratch, to how to calculate the moon phases, the position of the moon relative to a set time and coordinates, etc. The project involves BF, but the real motivation is to learn. So, even if there are no patterns and it's a complete waste of time, some of us are still gonna look at it, just because.

Give science something testable and verifiable and it will confirm. Stories can't be confirmed.

The evidence available to date, at a minimum, supports a reasonable decision to press forward with further investigation.

When the issue is government cover up it becomes problematic when you say there was no incident or government cover up of it because there is no official record of the incident. You can't use lack of government records to counter the idea of a government cover up. So, Its no shocker that "She was told over and over that no such record exists."

And just to be clear, since this is the existence thread, I am not saying that bigfoot does not exist. I am saying that given the current evidence, I do not accept the claim that bigfoot exists. Bigfoot exists is a positive claim. With a positive claim comes a burden of proof. That burden has not been met. Not accepting the claim, absent the required burden of proof, is not a claim in itself. Nor is it a denial of anything. I am simply saying that without meeting the burden of proof, I am not going to accept the claim that bigfoot exists based on the current evidence. If compelling evidence came along that met the burden of proof, then obviously I would accept the original claim. In the meantime, I don't believe that bigfoot does, in fact, exist. If bigfoot does not exist, then the evidence, as it were, must be explained by social construct. That bigfoot is a social construct is my provisional explanation based on the current evidence. One could call this a negative claim, I suppose. Negative claims do not carry a burden of proof.

It's amazing that we wait for science to validate what people already know.

My interest in bigfoot is strong, perhaps even as strong as some enthusiasts who believe the creature may be real. It's just that my interest is focused on the psychology and the myth. More specifically how the myth, or participants in the myth, resist challenges. I find that stuff to be pretty fascinating. That does not mean that I am here to shout down the conversation with bigfoot does not exist every chance I get. I will, however, challenge incorrect assertions. But if someone wants to observe the a modern myth like this functions, this is the place to be. This is where you can see, first hand, how enthusiasts protect the myth. Also, if I am wrong and bigfoot were ever to be discovered, then this would also be a great place to be. It is fascinating to watch a modern myth and to be able to participate in it and observe its workings. I'd love for bigfoot to be real. I know proponents will scoff at that, they almost always do. But it's true. There is something about the wildman of the woods that I think spooks and intrigues like almost no other myth. I'm not sure why, and maybe the answer to that question might lie somewhere in this topic. Who knows? I am not here to be antagonistic. I am not here to ruin the fun. I do want to participate respectfully, and objectively. No doubt, I have a different opinion than most here in this forum. That should not be a crime, if handled properly. At the end of the day, we're all just footers of a different type.

Just as a rough estimate, how much time would you guess you have spent attempting to obtain "the testable evidence" of the existence of Sasquatch/Bigfoot relative to that time you spent on your other hobbies? Is the listing of your hobbies in any particular order, or was it just coincidental that your interest in Sasquatch/Bigfoot was listed as last place after "Crossfit, hiking, biking, kayaking, books, comics and computer games". Surely you don't expect to find any "testable evidence" of the creatures on this forum. So how do you intend to focus on the testable evidence.?

Off Topic

Rogue, It completely is apples and oranges.....no two ways about it. Here is the crux of our disconnect. If a Chinese film maker had a ten second clip of a large Lizard like beast walking across a creek bed? And there was a trackway associated with the film to boot? I would not dismiss the footage out of hand as a hoax and declare that Dragons don't exist. Put it another way, if the PGF was nothing but a swirling mist that vaguely resembled a Primate? I would dismiss it offhand as a natural occurance. That's because my mind doesn't accept that we have discovered everything on this planet yet. We haven't even as a global community made contact with all of our own species yet. Albeit I will openly admit that our planet is shrinking fast and the resources that could sustain cryptid animals or lost tribes is shrinking along with it at a alarming rate. Which brings us to the next question..... what are we losing that we dont even know about. What are the unknown unknowns? Ultimately the PGF is declared a hoax for the simple reason that we do not have a mundane explanation for it, and more importantly because we think the possibility of a relic hominid living in north America is absurd. We being the majority of humanity, with very few of us ever walking those mountains in our life time.