Leaderboard

Crow: But, you saw no water in the photo. Dr. Meldrum has hundreds (I think) of photos and casts of BF tracks. Is that not a little more convincing evidence that BF exists than that of a parched desert providing convincing evidence of water somewhere at some time in the past.? The whole concept of habituators is a false concept anyway. Humans don't habituate BF; BF simply continues to hunt and forage in areas they have used for tens of thousands of years. After "we" moved in a very short time ago, and after "we" didn't try to harm them or disrespect them, they simply accepted our presence on the land they "owned" but which "we" owned the title. If anything, "we" became habituated, not them. I think any "habituators" on this forum will tell you the same thing. Bigfoot sure as heck "habituated" me in the Ouachita Mountains, and it was done on their terms, not mine.

Crow your NASA analogy is backwards. In the Sasquatch search the regular people are the ones "probing" at their own expense monetarily and otherwise, while you, government funded "science", the skeptics, skoftics, and denialists sit back and demand information at the same time ridiculing and laughing and joking about the whole affair. You should take your own advice and go out and explore and probe for yourself because it is apparent to me that YOU are the only one that you will ever believe in.

Claiming to be a habituator without any proof is the lowest of the low in my book. If a bigfoot family is living in your backyard? You should have ample ample evidence in the form of hair, saliva or scat. Not to mention incredible film footage that would surely make some of us stand up and take notice. All we ever get are excuses. Either the person has some beef with science or the forest people have let them know they dont want to be documented. Either way it is a claim without proof. I suggest if your a habber with bigfeets living in your backyard and they told you they dont want to be documented? Probably best to keep the secret to yourself.......just sayin. (And no I do not think this is truly happening) I think Crow is just trying to drag the community through the mud here. But what evidence we do have did not come from habbers. It came from field researchers pounding the bush, and responding to reports. Which I think is a more plausible scenario as to why we do not have hard evidence(few animals and lots of forest) Than families of bigfeets hiding out at "nice people" home steads, and the evidence is just 86'd.

I think most "habituators" remember the Erickson Project and how well that turned out.

Crow?

The community does not need me to furnish mud. The community is stuck in it's own mud and it's beginning to show. It's beginning to show with threads like "Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?" "Patty's Time Is Running Out", "Active Bigfooters Hunters What has Been Your Success?". I didn't create those threads. I'm leery of all steady/close/personal repeat accounts of anything dealing with things like UFO's and bigfoot. So far in my lifetime none of it has ever produced anything of substance. Neither community vettes itself to any reasonable degree. The bottom line I suspect is that nobody truly want's the puzzle to be solved. The game is too entrenched and vested interests, ego's and commerce are what likely gives licence to giving the habbers (the one's holding the best cards) a free pass so to speak. If they deliver the goods the game is over and if they're shown to be fantasists or worse the community acquires another smudge. I don't know what if any dialogue has been established between the bigfoot science elite (the Bibnder's and Meldrums) and some of the more potentially credible habbers but it seems as if this hasn't been established or even attempted. It's one thing to claim to be searching for the truth and it's another to actually employ every resource that might harbor the truth. I'm reminded of Enoch and Autumn Williams book how that portrayed a very vivid habitation portrayal. Yet it was kept entirely off of the real science radar and that is rather telling. The entire mess could have been, should have been vetted out before William ever put pen to paper. However then there would have been no book. Catch 22. I'm certain there are more than enough people who for one reason or another accept the habber line and passively accept the thin cover that keeps the potential of it from fruition or worse yet feeds into fantasy. Maybe it is more the game than the truth. But your signature says it all with the skeptics. You playing the odds.... you hit a wall, something really interesting and you cant find the zipper, so you wait around 50 years and because nobody has drug in a body? Well then it was a hoax. That's not science.....its betting at a horse track. The Bigfoot community is by and far away amatuers with day jobs, there is no chain of command and we do what we can. But for you Crow, I guess the fact that you ignore that there is a giant rift between habber and researcher says a lot. I' ll tell you what? If you wanna take Sasfooty and crew to the next Anthropologist convention and have Sasfooty commune telepathically with Sasquatch in front of hundreds of scientists? Be my guest. For most of the Bigfoot community we dont take that stuff seriously, so dont drag us through that mud pit.

Thanks, and I think guys like Big Tree Walker and other researchers could be on the right track as well. Maybe its DNA or prey species bone artifacts that proves its existence. I would gladly welcome that.

IMO the OP is a thinly disguised attempt to bait people having a high level of interaction to come out into the spotlight. It belies a basic ignorance of what such interaction entails as it is often a one-way program with the entities making all the calls. It speaks to a skoftic mentality and further reinforces the mindset of those having a high degree of interaction, this website is not good country for them. Can't say that I blame them as what they have is often unique and to risk spoiling it just to satisfy the egotistical desires of others is a no go.

Why would a disbeliever advocate even ask this question to begin with? Hit the road, rube.

Science is being done and presented here in some of my threads as well as in the research section. Come follow along or not. From what I have seen here, most people don't want to hear about science, it's not sensational enough and definitely boring. But yes progress is being made.

This isn't the most welcoming place on the internet for "habbers". I know of several that have come & gone without ever fessing up to being one. A few others that did admit their affliction were banned or just left in disgust. We have to be stubborn to stay.

Most habituation humans do not want BF "discovered" because they think it would be bad for the BF. If the federal government gets involved like they did with the NA they are probably correct. Additionally they have a trust thing going on with their local BF and outing them would wreck that. Unlike Shadowborn most will not even introduce visitors to the local BF. There really are not that many admitted habituation people on this forum as opposed to some other forums.

Just to explain why I will NEVER try to kill one of these animals. Until 2010, I had never seen but two of them clearly. The first was a huge male that came to the back of my pickup camper shell. He was completely benign, and was talking to himself before he stopped within two feet of the back of the pick-up. Just nosey, curious and neat as he picked up my cooking gear and put it back in place.. The next was a noticeably pregnant female that stepped out in plain view just outside a holly thicket. She was listening to the Sierra Sounds from the CD I was playing. She was completely benign and curious. About 3 PM on July 27, 2010 another one was apparently watching me put up a game camera in a deep, hollow that had a spring fed stream running through it. When I finished, it responded to some light wood knocks by breaking fairly large green tree limbs. When I clapped two rocks together once, it hit a dead tree with what sounded like a rock. After an hour or so I started walking out. It was standing and waiting on me beside the trail. It deliberately let me see him eye-to-eye for a few seconds, then ran off like a bat out of Hades and jumped off into the stream bed. He was a teenager in excellent physical shape. Had the light coating of black hair on his body been shaved off, he would have looked like a high school fullback. No sane and rational human would ever shoot one of these creatures after seeing him. There are aggressive BF which are dangerous. Some grown animals have been shot and wounded for no reason other than being what they are; huge, hairy and fearsome looking beings. Unprecedented destruction of their homelands - especially in the Southeast - - has, without a doubt, caused them to be more hostile toward humans who encroach on their ever dwindling foraging areas.

Interesting. You guys in Australia waited too long remaining subjects - we fought the Brits and became citizens - so we don't have to have a reason for a firearm. Now we too, use our firearms for vermin. We have lots of two-legged vermin, but thanks to our firearms, not as many today as a week ago, or a month ago. Actually, we don't have too few gun laws - some argue we have too many. I note that Europeans can't fathom our gun laws, nor our preference for personal firearms. With the attacks of immigrants rampant, they may be wishful for American type gun laws and commonality. It's not that every other American has a gun, but we do have 40,000,000 more firearms than American citizens in this country. And that's not nearly enough, so our factories are punching them out very efficiently. Our problem is ammunition availability. We keep selling ammo to the world who are using it, and it certainly drives up costs over here, and creates uneven distribution problems. Of the roughly 370 million firearms in the US, on any given day, the bulk are NOT to be found in remote areas of the US. Many are kept at home, many are what some of us would consider sub-calibers, unsuited to shoot and drop a Bigfoot, and many are handguns designed for anti-personnel use. Those who have experience killing, understand that firearms are just tools, and not one tool can perform all tasks, and what is great for prarie dogs or small game will not drop a brown bear. So there's that, too. Suitability. One would need to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right weapon for conditions, with the right amount of grunt, and then be lucky enough to get a drop. And then, get it out. Which I postulate, might be a bit more difficult than many may be inclined to believe.

When are our gun laws going to be tightened? The 2nd amendment is over 200 years old, so not soon. My opinion is that most people are not pro kill. Just because they own guns or shoot deer does not mean they are shooting Bigfoot.