Leaderboard

You might want to retract that, your desperation is showing.. The Manhattan Project cost about $26 BILLION dollars, 2016-equivalent, to develop the a-bomb. The build up and accomplishment of putting the first man on the moon cost about $174 BILLION, 2005-equivalent. Total investment in bigfoot research .. I think we worked out to something under $10 MILLION a while back, but lets say $20 million to give you the benefit of the doubt and have nice round numbers to work with. So you're saying that you expect a bunch of disorganized, private individuals to achieve what the full, coordinated might of the US Government accomplished .. and do it with 1/10,000 of the budget. That's just ridiculous. Likely the best you can do, but still ridiculous. Your last comparison is just as ridiculous. The correct comparison would be official discovery of sasquatch vs the first manned flight at Kitty Hawk. If you want to compare something to the time from that first flight to supersonic flight, wait 'til we officially discover sasquatch then see how long it takes us to talk to them. That's apples to apples. Game, set, and match. Foolish, foolish Crow. MIB

Since this thread is about hoaxing would some of you skeptic geniuses that have an explanation for everything kindly explain how someone manages to get out in the woods ahead of me and leave fresh footprints, make noises off in the brush when I try to get them to come out of cover, growl at me, throw things, break branches, generate infrasound, and yes get their picture taken after whooping for several minutes then sounding like a bipedal dinosaur coming through the woods towards me? Considering no one knows where I go on any given day, no one follows me on the logging roads (can hear other vehicles and see the dust) , and often I spend all day out without ever seeing another human, I am really curious how some hoaxer manages to pull all of that off in a 100 square mile area. Mind reading? 24 hr a day surveillance? Black silent helicopters? Of course I am a simple proponent so probably am easily fooled by those incredibly intelligent hoaxers like Roger Patterson.

Geogerm, it's all good. We are actually living in a rare moment in our Homo history, that we cannot confirm another similar, closely-related species living concurrently with us. Hopefully Norse can provide a type-specimen and correct that situation.

Nope. Science takes as long as it takes. You are transparent. Apparently everyone sees you but yourself. That is the bigfoot mirror! You wimped out, now you try to discourage others so they don't succeed where you wimped out. Sour grapes. Repeat: science takes as long as it takes. MIB

To my understanding, "good" and "evil" are moral judgments based on intent. As such, they have a built in implication of consciousness rather than mere instinct. A lion or bear that eats you is not "evil", it is merely hungry and acting on instinct, same as a venomous spider or snake that bites you in self defense. Harmful, absolutely, evil, absolutely not. (Note: I recognize that some particularly narcissistic people consider anything not submitting to their will to be "evil." That's not what we're talking about I hope.) Basically, I consider the question itself invalid so either answer to be nonsense unless you build in the assumption that bigfoots are self-aware with a sense of right and wrong and occasionally deliberately choose to do "wrong." It is probably more productive to couch the question in more objective, less subjective, terms. Risk. Costs. Tangible outcomes. Something that most "camps" can agree on rather than building the value system of one camp or another into the discussion and forcing the others to accept it or not participate. MIB