Leaderboard

Per anthropologists, Neanderthal is extinct. So are all the other pithicuses and homos. Dead. Gone. Then, there's the contrived story of North America, and they keep having to move the goal line and the out-of-bounds lines, as more discoveries are made. Then there are all the narratives and legends from every continent - now they're going to carry weight. Have to be considered, when previously they were ignored. Then there will be the geneticists - and that's going to require an entirely new re-write of their "tree" of apes and man. And then the big one. Science versus religious texts. Science has been saying no. Religious texts are full of references. Admission of the existence will demonstrate validity of the discounted religious texts, and demonstrate the narrow minded allowances of what is so-called "science." Just to name a few

As a member of a profession with more than its share, I recognize the type DWA, and I know your time in has given you a "Yup, here's another one..." perspective as well. They are always with us. I just generally catalogue and file them under "people not likely to make a difference" and move on. Saves a lot of time.

Send out the sheriff to arrest Yuch1?

No, to state the facts is not to declare an intent. Yuchi - you KNOW these things are scary, have the potential to do a lot of damage fast, and that with anything unfamiliar, there's no telling how each meeting engagement may unravel. A fox may be rabid, or skunk, or a bear may be having a bad day, and just become aggressive. I've never hesitated when things look to go South. I get the impression I'm being engaged, it's reflex born out of instinct. So far, it's worked for me.

I think that if you acknowledge Sasquatch as a real creature, biological and natural in every aspect, well you might have to be open to the possibility that other creatures, maybe not so explainable, could perhaps exist. The Dogman sightings definitely point to something, whether natural or other I don't know. Reputable researchers of Sasquatch have seen Dogmen or their tracks, I cannot explain how they could exist, but you have a problem if you dismiss them simply on the grounds of what seems possible. I agree with you that it makes zero biological sense from my perspective, but who knows what might account for bipedalism in a canine, we were all once quadrupedal creatures(well at least if you buy into evolutionary theory which I have problems with anyway), perhaps they have taken the first steps in that evolutionary process, pardon the pun. Melba can be questioned on the basis of much more substantial things than her claims to sightings or experience. Sykes himself can attest to strange experiences, just read his chapter on the Big Guy, who happened to live underground beneath a large evergreen....Lets face it, we cannot account for much of what we claim in regards to Sasquatch, how it survived, developed bipedalism, continues to thrive despite intrusion into its environment on every side. You can fool yourself living off in the mountains to think that Sasquatch is limited to these areas, if anything can be proven it is that Sasquatch, if real, live across the country in most forested areas, and many sparsely forested areas. Just because a sighting is in a large forest vs a small forest does not preclude the latter as being as legitimate as the former. I get why it seems irrational to accept Dogman as viable, but can I write them off based on what I think is rational?

I find it tough to trust any person who would not take a snickers if offered one. They are delicious and anyone who refused one could possibly not be right in the ol' noggin.

If you shoot a BF, all you have to do is claim self defense. I think that's what FarArcher means, and I agree.

Leaftalker in post #200 you seem to be responding do someone else's statements in blue with your red comments. The statements in blue or red are not mine. As a matter of fact they appear to be yours. Then you turn around and criticise your own comments by adding red for emphasis then criticize me for not knowing the difference between all and some when "all" are not even my words but someone else. It looks from reading the thread that you cannot tell the difference between what you said previously or another persons quote and what I said and perhaps even criticise your own response. I am at a loss to even try to figure out what the problem is. .

Your walking around in the woods with a gun?

Don't Bogart, pass over here.

So most of you might know that I am a golf pro, I worked at Medinah Country Club two seasons ago, little did I know that in John Greens data base two sighting actually occurred right on the property, well that is just to weird considering I said early in the year that I thought it doubtful one might come to the property, but in the distant part of my thoughts I said, or is it. Well now I am working in South Milwaukee, just north of Oak Creek, in fact Oak Creek flows right along side of my golf course where it dumps into Lake Michigan, which I have a lovely view of from my Clubhouse. Well upon interviewing for the job and driving through the area the urban bigfoot thought re-entered my mind, and with what I already mentioned above, well I had to see if any sightings were close by. The area has many supposed haunted sights, including the seven bridges trail in the park I work in and the clubhouse I work in which dates back to the 1870s, well those paranormal investigators are out in some of the same areas as the Sasquatch, or urban sasquatch as is the case here. The area just south of Oak Creek is ideal semi rural bigfoot habitat, with railroad and power-line easements as well as streams that feed into lake Michigan. Salmon run up these streams to the nearest blockage in the spring and fall. Fishermen are out in force during daylight attempting to catch the elusive rainbow and steelhead trout that are currently using the streams. Abundant and large deer herds roam the entire area, as well as raccoons, coyotes, skunk, possum, badger, and you name it. So one of these paranormal investigators was staking out a supposed haunted road just south of where I work and was approached by several sasquatch, whose eye shine was caught on camera, and apparently had killed a deer. The were in a soybean or pea field presumably pursuing deer. So I once again have renewed faith in my theory that these creatures indeed use areas very close to urban centers, just outside of them actually, where the last stretches of cover allow them too. Taking into account all the surrounding area and what it offers as well of course.

For some habituators I have had contact with, BF has become a religion. For these people BF has achieved Demi-god status. You cannot hide cameras because BF know you have done it and are angered by it. BF pop in and out of our physical world, read minds, know the true history of mankind, are allied with extra terrestrials, use portals, have short little furry demons as helpers to guard their portals, travel on UFO's, know the difference between good and bad people, and the list goes on an on. One might as well be talking about Thor or Zeus as BF seem to exhibit similar powers. OK maybe BF can do one or two of these things but all of them? Dr J supposedly does not allow drugs or alcohol in his camps but where does this stuff come from? Sleep deprivation or mass hallucination? Quite frankly should one trust what happens in camp when the camp proprietor is a hypnotist too? Just wondering.

If the Bigfoots of the habituators are our own species or a near relative and you love your country then the incentive to go public may be so that the Forest People can have their own dignity, autonomy, and freedom by having a say in the future of their own country. By failing to register Wood Apes and Skunk Apes on the electoral role the habituators are effectively oppressing these mostly gentle hairy giants, are they not? END SASQUATCH SLAVERY NOW FREE BIGFOOT FROM THEIR OPPRESSIVE HABITUATOR-OVERLORDS Let the Hairy Ones participate in the direction of their own future once every 4 years and then they can go back to living their constitutionally free and mysterious existence just like the rest of us... Of course, that's a big “ifâ€â€¦

Some of the speakers in the March conference are what I call experiencers. They are satisfied to have contact experience and either not interested in collecting evidence or refuse to do so for their own reasons. I think most have no interest in scientific acceptance of BF. I tend to agree that it may not be in BF best interest to be accepted by science. The experiencers have ditched the gadgets or nearly done so and might have more contact because of that. The problem is that does not do much to further what we know about and accept about BF. Gadgets are modern humans accepted way of documenting things of a scientific nature. I guess it is all about what a person wants to result from BF contact. While many of the experiencers ditch the gadgets that might support their observations, doing so certainly does not prevent them from writing books and expecting people to believe them. That seems entirely too convenient to me and might be a big part of the problem with the public at large accepting BF research.