Leaderboard

Bobby, I sincerely respect you and any thoughts you have expressed on this forum. Without belaboring the point of this particular thread, I would like to ask you to consider if the following described events and decide if they may indicate anthropomorphous actions. A little over fifty years ago I bought six acres of land that had been untouched for the previous forty years. It was was such a jungle that a person could not walk through it. I spent over a year clearing enough of it with an ax, brush hook and chainsaw to build our house. After the house was built, we moved onto the land, but only about 1/4 of it was cleared, but I continued to work to clear more. Then a nephew who had enlisted in the Navy, asked that if he helped me, could we fence part of the land so that he could leave a beautiful red mare with us until he got out of service. I agreed, we fenced about three acres, he brought the mare over and left her, and he left for boot camp. The mare was very docile, behaved well around kids and content in her new "digs". When I worked to clear more ground in the fenced area she followed me to my work area every morning and stayed so close that I continually had to slap her and make her leave when I was using the work tools. Even the chainsaw motor running would not cause her to leave. It got to the point that while I was working, she would slip up behind me and suddenly place her nose against my back and lift her head, pushing me forward. Sometimes I would loose my balance. She became so pesky, I had to cut a long switch and keep it handy. I would swat her with it when she got too close, and shout for her to "Get out'a here". She obviously did not like to be ignored or chastised for messing with me. Very soon after I started using that long mulberry switch, I was working in a small creek bed, with the switch leaning against a tree behind me. I heard the clicking of her feet on the rocks in the creek, I turned to see her ****** the long switch in her mouth, and wheeled around and ran with it at top speed. She stopped about 50 yards away, and was throwing her head up and down while nickering loudly. When I started toward her she galloped off, with the switch in her mouth. I had to laugh, and went back to work. (I found the switch later; it was chewed and broken.) While using the chain saw two days in a row, she slipped in and picked up my ax by the handle and walked off with it. Both times she dropped it in the cleared area about 20 yards away. Both days, she stood over the ax, shaking her head and nickering to get my attention. I had begun to become amused at her antics until one cold morning she really made me angry. I had just bought a new hunting coat with a game pouch and elastic shotgun shell holders. I worked in the coat in the cold morning hours, but took it off about mid day and hung it over one of the barbed wire fence's "T" posts. While I was throwing cut brush on the burn pile, she slipped in behind me, grabbed the coat's collar and pulled the coat off the "T", ripping the seam apart between the collar and one sleeve by that action. I threw a cursing fit, and chased her, throwing anything I could find at her until she dropped the coat,. About and hour later I saw her walking so slowly toward me with her head down so low that thought she was hurt or sick. I watched her as she plodded to within a few feet of me. I walked to her to check her feet and legs, raising each of the ground for inspection. After I did, and saw no injury, she raised her head and looked directly at my face, then nodded her head a few times. That was what she always did when she wanted anyone to pet her or rub her head. To me, it seemed she was - in a horse's way, apologizing. I reacted to her tearing my coat in such a angry fashion, she realized she had gone over the line. I patted her and rubbed her neck, and she became her typical perky self. Although she would follow and hang around me while I was working, she quit her "horse playing" after the "coat" incident.

Well, Bobby; there is not a doubt in my mind, or in the minds of hundreds of other people that I have met, Bigfoot does indeed prank with humans. It is NOT only Bigfoot that does that. Nearly all typical domestic animals in the South - except swine - are known to prank with humans, dogs and horses being the most obvious and repetitive. The larger wild and domesticated primates are noted for their propensity in playing pranks on other animals as well as those of their kind. South American monkeys - wild and those kept as pets - are notorious for playing pranks on humans. If their pranks are directed at some human that has offended them, the pranks can be pretty nasty or even dangerous. The humor in a particular prank is usually only appreciated by the entity that initiated it. Bigfoot may work the night shift to obtain the "bread and butter" for he and his family, but I expect he takes time out for fun and recreation just like we do. Since they don't have television, radio, or I-phones, we are no doubt their prime entertainment when we go into their back yard. They are very intelligent, have a language of their own and do not, for good reason, care to directly associate with us. From that standpoint, they may be the last hominid standing after we've wiped ourselves out.

Civility is lacking in more areas than just science! I actually belong to an organization that facilitates civil conversation between people of opposing views and it's amazing what comes out in the course of a dialogue. BUT, it is something that is taught and facilitated, so I wholeheartedly agree that it is something that needs to be taught. I could go on and on about this topic, but I won't. I agree with the points made by MIB and hiflier because it echoes my thoughts. In my experience, people mistake civility for agreement. It is entirely possible that there can be disagreement and civility. Civility is more a matter of how people interact rather than an outcome. And expressing why you think the way you do about a subject can be very enlightening because of the introspection required. Civility also requires a deeper level of listening to the other, which doesn't happen in the usual "I'm right, you're wrong" mindset. I find especially interesting those who have such a compulsion to fix others that they come to the BFF to argue with those who are proponents.

DWA wrote: That is actually wrong. Tracks have long been considered forensic evidence. For only one example (there are, of course, legion), the return of the okapi to Virunga National Park was announced as scientifically confirmed when okapi tracks, with no feet in them, were found. A body don't get more physical than that. ===================================== Its not wrong. Confirming by tracks that a scientifically catalogued species has returned to its native range is NOT the same thing!!!!! Science has the foot that made the track way!! The physical specimen is the KEY! No Okapi physical specimen? No Okapi trackway....no Okapi species.....no Okapi study......... and no Okapi game preserve. Its a skinny lost Kudu looking for water.....or a Hoax. Natives looking for tourism dollars with carved wooden hooves. Your kidding me right!? LOOK AROUND......You have been drinking the Bindernagel kool aid for so long? Your no longer grounded in reality. Some how your confused to think we proponents have the upper hand....it's a joke. Listen closely.....we will be laughing stock along with Bigfoot track casts until we have the physical FOOT that made them. If we have that!? Nobody is laughing anymore.

There seems to be a common theme among researchers that any circumstantial evidence they present will be "torn to shreds" by skeptics and made fun of. I think this is incorrect. It happens when people present their findings as a fact that it was BF related. I think the presentation has a lot to do with how it is received by the community. For example. When people say: "We got a recording of BF howling and we've eliminated every other possibility" and take it personally when somebody objects, it won't go well. On the other hand, if one presents the same recording as "we recorded something interesting, it could be a BF, but we're not sure", it will get a much better reception and respect. Objectivity in your own data is key. Frankly, you should be the harshest critic of your data, because you collected it and know more about it than anyone else. You should be looking to poke holes into it and look for holes other people identify instead of trying to defend it. You may end up dismissing the objections, but they are valuable feedback. You want the greatest number of eyeballs on it. If you're straight up about it, people will recognize you are just presenting what you got. Instead of making claims about it, just lay it out there, it is what it is. Everyone benefits by learning from it. It's certainly been the case in my experience.