Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/14/2015 in all areas

  1. How dare you question any report, no matter how outlandish and fantastic! ::sarcasm font::
    2 points
  2. I am not among them. This creature continues to plague me. As a non believer. I am haunted by the simple fact I can not dismiss this creature as folklore and fantasy. That is because the PGF film shows a creature which has too many features that would most likely be all but impossible to achieve in a suit. Even now, let alone almost 50 years ago. This film is also the single most important thing that has me on the side of skeptical believer. Lots of other things seem hard to believe - like having no body, very little picture of video evidence, etc. No bones, etc, etc.... but I cannot discount what I see in the film, nor can I discount many thousands of eyewitness accounts as ALL being either faked or misconception.
    1 point
  3. Crowlogic What do you mean "it offers absolution for never acquiring physical proof" ?Nothing nor should anyone of us except the absolution for never acquiring physical proof. Physical proof is what it will take to prove these creatures and the paranormal aspect of this creature should be left to the paranormal. Stay with in the physical realm since the paranormal just throws screws in the whole mess of understanding these creatures. If people want to go on the portal thinking side then who cares . We cannot prove it just like any other aspect of the paranormal part of these creatures. so why dwell on it where it will only lead one to head aches and hard ship. Stick to the flesh and blood part of these creatures since there is more info on that. Also does it matter whether they are human or ape or a new species when we have no idea on where they survive. This is why there is a paranormal section on the forum to discuss these issues.
    1 point
  4. Well, one would first have to publish a bigfoot paper in a peer reviewed journal before one could charge peers with ignoring it or obstructing it. So, how many peer reviewed journals have bigfoot articles? And before you mention RHI, let's restrict this to the same peer reviewed journals that any biologist would submit to? Not just the single bigfoot friendly journal on the planet? You know, just to be objective and fair. Why can't the peer review process used by every other journal where discoveries are presented and accepted, even by enthusiasts on this board, be good enough for bigfoot papers? Every time there is a novel discovery dealing with the history of mankind people here get all excited. And rightfully so, that stuff is exciting. No one seems to have a problem with Nature when it publishes something that is perceived as friendly to enthusiasts, so let's not suddenly claim that Nature, for example, is not a fair example of a journal due to bias, etc. Nature seems fair enough when you like what they have to say.
    1 point
  5. Hello JDL, Yes, I agree. But DWA's post was off on at least two levels. Slamming all credentialed scientists, slamming the one's in the public arena who trust them and issuing a post in the usual off topic manner about the usual pet topic of his own- science and it shortcomings. And now I'm off topic as well, sorry.
    1 point
  6. So the thread runs full circle to the point I originally made, that being that we have not advanced the science of bigfooting one iota, and that Patterson and Gimlin riding horseback with their rental 8mm was as good as is gets. I mean anything we have done since that moment is basically trying to emulate that moment. Glimpses have been had, and truly technology should be more reliable than then, suffice it to say few of us ride horseback, or have the knowledge of guiding that Gimlin brought. In this techno age we have to return to studying those ancient arts of those who mastered the forests before us, surely we can regain our sense of prowess in those wooded confines and begin to make some headway, Halfpenny I am signing up...and bring me a good horse. Horses and dogs together, that's the ticket... at least when they run away chickening out I know what I am up against, hey wait for me....Point is our senses our way too dulled to be reliable, but another animal who exists at the same wave length as the Sasquatch knows what they are about, and can sense the danger they pose, so maybe they are our best asset in determining when and where they are present, and studying behavior of say dogs in general may be a clue. In many of my best recording a dog is yapping away long before I get a vocal or something else. sirens coyotes tree knocks.mp3
    1 point
  7. #1 I don't know enough about to talk intelligently. 2. The Falcon project was headed down the tube from it's inception. None of the principal group of individuals had any experience with aviation. Riding in the back on Alaska Airlines does not really count. While notables can be a valuable asset to raise money, early in the project they should have brought in someone with RPV or other aviation experience before selecting a contractor. Having delt with contractors in the military, give them a chance and they will cut corners and make promises they cannot deliver. Someone knowledgeable should have defined the specifications and written a request for proposal then handed it out to several contractors engaged in making similar products. All of that said, a more modest program could be fielded for probably less than $10,000 If that has any level of success, and looks promising, then fund raising to develop more advanced vehicles would be easier to raise. The concept has certain flaws like expecting to look down through trees in BF habitat and flying a civilian RPV at night. Recent drone issues have put a FAA microscope on any program like that. Any program has to be modest, operate under the radar so to speak, and comply with the present FAA rules or it will not last long. 3. Les Stroud is part of a TV production company. It is a business with schedules, budgets, deadlines, etc. He also is a family man. Spending weeks expecting BF to show up does not lend itself to an entertainment production company and film in the can. He could have three weeks in the field and have absolutely nothing to show for it on film. If anyone knew exactly where to go for bigfoot to show up then we would already have film of them. Finding Bigfoot had the not much happens format pretty well covered already.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...