Leaderboard

hiflier, I don't know if you've had any encounters of your own, but I've had several. We agree that they are omnivores and we agree that they need a lot to eat every day, but your ASSumption that they are universally benign creatures is faulty. I perceive them as continuously hungry, continuously in search of immediate, or future, food sources. I perceive the primary reason that they lurk around us as food related, not curiosity. Yes, they are curious, but food will always be a prime consideration in their minds. As I've stated, they think, reason, and choose courses of action based on the situation. They do eat as much meat as they can get their hands on. They have to in order to support their muscle mass and cranial development. They need high protein intake and would not be what they are without it. THIS is also nature. They are top predators. Their lurking behavior is no different than that of a tiger, a wolf, a bear, or child molester. I have on two occasions been in situations where they have attempted TO DRIVE PEOPLE AWAY from food that they were cooking. Food that was not harvested from the environment, food that they had brought with them and were preparing. In another encounter, one had its arm in our tent trying to take a dog from us when it woke me up. I also believe that if my brother and I had run as the male that confronted us expected, it may well have taken Dave. I don't know if "zapping" is something they actually do, but I do know that from a biomechanical standpoint it is possible. The adult male that fully exposed itself in broad daylight had no need to do so if all it wanted to do was avoid us. It, and any others with it, could have slipped away to the South without any of us ever knowing that they were there. Instead, it presented itself and it sure didn't act curious. It seemed stern and annoyed when my brother and I didn't run, then briefly cautious, then disinterested. It was as if it were thinking, "are you really going to stand up to me?", then "do they have some ability to injure me that I can't see?", then "don't bother, I really don't want him anyway." I could go on about food related encounters and being stalked while fishing. WE ARE A SOURCE OF FOOD. We make kills, fish for, gather, collect and store food that they steal, we plant, grow, breed, husband, and harvest food that they pilfer. We provide in plenty food sources with vital nutrients that they cannot easily find in large quantities, and we cook it, creating aromas that apparently inspire them to attempt to drive us away from the food at times. And in a pinch, it would not surprise me in the least if they grab a wandering child from inattentive parents or an isolated cross-country skier during a harsh winter. If a bigfoot wants something and feels that it can take it with impunity, then it likely will. Who's going to stop it if we aren't paying attention, don't see it, or no one else is around to stand up to it? You are entitled to your platitudes, but you're wasting your time if you believe you can sway me from my own experiences.

"...he says the same things over and over about, incessantly. " Sounds like someone we all know.

Proof is not something you can weigh or measure. It either is or it isnt. Evidence on the other hand can be weighed and measured. The crux then becomes what is peoples perception of the evidence. And here we are.

ShadowBorn wrote: No, SB....Todd's hoaxed videos certainly don't help him, in any way. Neither do his make-believe adventures, in the Land of Sylvanic....tunneling underneath mountains...( )....being surrounded/chased by Sasquatches...and having tree trunks thrown at him. Also, I wonder what ever happened to his "video of an encounter with a Sasquatch that ended in violence"....(with Todd apparently the victor)??? Did his pet T. Rex eat it?? I don't know if Toddy ever has had a legitimate encounter with a Sasquatch....but, one thing I know for sure.....I don't care if he has.

Well, being a skeptic you know I don't buy into a lot of this stuff anyway, but I do try to keep an open mind and have started to be more receptive to what others in the BF community say about their own experience. -- I’ve noticed that. That’s very cool (and smart). Good for you. Your own particular "habituation", as I'll call it, is a good example. I know we recently discussed it in another thread and while it's not something I see plausible under scientific terms it's not something I readily dismiss -- That’s awesome. It’s not wise for us to dismiss the experiences of other people just because we haven’t had the same experiences, even when – or especially when – societal pressure seems to dictate we do that. Our society is seriously messed up, so its pressures generally are, as well. So again, good for you for bucking the trend and thinking for yourself. I can find explanations for your habituation account but from a skeptical view. For instance I believe what some think of as being "spoken to" by BF could actually be ultrasound or infrasound of some sort and people misinterpret it as hearing someone speaking to them. -- Ultrasound and infrasound are, as I understand it, simply sound waves that are above and below the part of the wave spectrum that humans can hear. Infrasound (and ultrasound?) is/are felt in the body and can affect a person’s mood, but by definition, you cannot “hear†infrasound. And something you can't hear can't be misinterpreted as the very clear messages so many of us get. So whatever I and others are hearing, it’s not infrasound or ultrasound. And I do believe that if BF exists they are very intelligent creatures and very aware of their surroundings. Therefore they would see some people as less threatening. I have taken from our conversations you are a woman and I hope I'm correct about that and I mention it because I'm sure BF would see women as less threatening. They would know it is usually men who carry guns and are looking to kill something. I'm sure there are some men who they would learn to see as not a threat as well. -- It’s very true that there are many, many men who are not perceived as threats. However, it is not quite accurate to say that BF “learn†to see some people as non-threatening. They are extremely perceptive and intuitive. They don’t rely on visual cues to evaluate who’s a threat and who isn’t. They know your mind and your heart immediately. But then there are folks like myself, it's been very seldom if ever in my life I went into the woods unarmed. Even as a kid I would have a BB gun, so folks like me they would see as a threat or at least a concern and they would not show the same actions or reactions towards us. -- What makes you think that? It happens to be untrue. They do NOT see people with weapons as being threats to them. They only see people who are coming after THEM with weapons as being threatening. I would treat one the way it treated me most likely. I'm one who thinks we need a BF body for absolute proof, but even then, I don't think I could shoot one unless it seriously threatened me and got close. I quit hunting years ago because I lost the heart for killing animals so that alone would probably keep me from wanting to shoot it plus there's the old "they look so human" factor. -- And they know this about you. They know this the instant you step into their domain. They know you are reluctant to kill things, and that reluctance speaks volumes about you. You are someone that some BF somewhere (or many BFs somewhere) would be happy to know. But if I see one I'm not going to wait to see if it wants to be friends, it better step the other way or I'm popping a cap in it's behind. I don't mean to sound cruel but understand I don't expect a warm reception from a BF. -- Why wouldn’t you expect a warm reception from a BF? You just said that you don’t enter the woods with an interest in killing anything. The minute you step in the woods, they know this about you, and it’s an appealing thing. So you can -- and should -- expect a warm reception. Live and let live: It’s a magical thing. Every living being loves that attitude.

Archer, quit while you're behind. Doubt you can.

I have to take some small issue w/the title of the OP. Standing was exposed a long time ago due, in part, to the very fine efforts of several Forum members w/skills in computers, photography, and other specialized areas. Perhaps the question is whether Standing has finally given up all hope of continuing his hoaxes unchecked.

Sounds like NAWAC has some serious (body acquisition) competition. I have two (late) uncles that were in condition black situations during WWII, one receiving two (2) purple hearts with the first for a day at the (Omaha) beach. Another, is a friend, retired (medical) USN SEAL. These men are/were among the most humble and unpretentious individuals you'd ever have the good fortune to meet. They never bragged about anything done in the line of duty and rarely spoke of the overall events much less any details being rendered. I can only imagine the horror of war would make men that "been there, done that" become introspective and not prone to ostentatious display. I have also met individuals with a proclivity to unload their "sea stories" at the drop of a hat yet in most all instances, once the light of day was shone upon their background, were instead, "in the rear with the gear" and nowhere near the action.

Eureka! Why have I never heard the question before? What an original, never-before-mentioned idea. Will have to reassess everything.

In my misspent youth, I was paid to go to remote areas, located a point where I could observe comings and goings along an anticipated line of approach. You'll see some folks pretty relaxed, thinking about something else, more or less care free - and they maintain a relaxed, almost careless body posture and walk. Then, you'd see others who concentrated a whole lot more on their surroundings, their heads on swivels, a faster or even a much slower pace, a more purposeful method of walking, and their body language told you quickly - they were trouble. Which made you pay even MORE attention to what they were wearing, what side they were favoring, what they were carrying, and what lumps you couldn't readily identify. Same thing in the forest. You see someone peering, taking a few steps, looking around some more, stepping carefully around sticks and vines, you can tell in an instant that he's not just taking a casual walkabout. Mannerisms, body language, posture, details of his tracking across the terrain, head and eyes always moving - all indicate he's hunting something. It's no mean feat for these same critters to observe humans, take note of their behavior in the same manner I did, and decide whether this one is "trouble," or not. I'd suggest that they'd likely try to avoid detection from folks with an uneasy manner, while maintaining an eye on them. After all, if anyone comes to the conclusion that this person may be "trouble," you don't want to lose sight of him and possibly be surprised. On the other hand, someone that's casually walking or casually sitting around their camp, are relaxed and seemingly unaware of what's going on around them, especially if they have nothing in their hands that may be a weapon - they're not a bother. For both types, they'll generate curiosity. They're visitors, after all. And for those casual, non-threatening folks, it's really not a big deal if they hear or see you or not.