Leaderboard

Far be it from me to deprive the BFF world of your blazing brilliance.

Not confirmed since 1967 speaks volumes to the harsh reality that the creature simply does not exist. Of course you know that, but it is all in fun to pretend otherwise.

Sorry I do not have the "substance" to post 9,000 times that by reading every report BF is a lock. All the while changing what science is to fit your narrative. I believe in BF and hope eventually science does get on board but changing what science is about is not the right means to get it proven. I will leave alone all the disparaging comments you have made about other BF enthusiasts and women, not even worth addressing more than I already have.

There are many factors at play. That is one of the reasons I remain interested in the subject. Perhaps people are engaging in bigfoot role playing because of the popularity of things like Finding Bigfoot? What makes it gameplay is not so much the physical trappings--although they are there with things such as camo outfits, military sounding operational names, night cameras, etc--, but more the tacit understanding that the whole thing unravels if you admit bigfoot does not, or more likely does not, exist. Anyway, I'm probably steering the thread off topic with this line of commentary. I'd start another thread dealing with bigfoot as a form of recreational pretend for adults, but I don't think it would go over very well. It would be meant objectively and not meant to be ridicule, but I don't think it would be taken that way, so I'll just leave it at that.

Can't have your cake and eat it too. Is NAWAC doing their job or not? Have they not read enough reports??? Edit: IB4 More posts in capital letters proclaiming if you do not agree with DWA, YOU are wrong.

Well, comments like that will help to ensure a one sided conversation. I can't believe you actually just said to the entire membership here that if you don't agree with me, your opinion does not count. Your arrogance has reached a new height. I'd say congratulations, but you're probably already patting your own back.

I've seen them only a few less time on all fours than walking upright. They seem (to me) to go on all fours when they want more speed.

Monkeys making stone flakes that are indistinguishable from flakes found by anthropologists in supposed human ancestor digs? Is not teeny. Its a giant monkey wrench.

Is anyone ever going to fess up to DWA being their alt. account created for comedic value? I always have a great chuckle at his posts and ideas regarding science and scientist.

If it was 100% it would not matter. Im thoroughly convinced most proponents do not want to get to the bottom of this. They would rather participate in this myth for eternity, than to move forward to the answer with the very real possibility the creature does not exist.

Technically, a scientist is anyone who applies the scientific method when investigating a hypothesis. There were scientists long before there were scientific organizations, degrees, and scientific awards. Is an amateur astronomer who discovers an asteroid barreling toward Earth any less an astronomer than someone with a PhD in the science? The amateur is probably using a better telescope than Galileo had. On the other hand, is Bill Nye, the "Science Guy", really a climate scientist? After all, he only has a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering. The real question is: "What does society currently accept as reasonable qualifications for a "Scientist"? And the answer may vary from field to field, subject to subject, and political viewpoint to political viewpoint. Unfortunately; advanced degrees, experience, and resources are accompanied by a healthy portion of hubris.

Clearly it's someone with a white lab coat and a clip board. Extra scientist points are awarded if it's an attractive female in a white lab coat, hair up in a slightly messy bun, black rimmed glasses and she is chewing on the end of her pencil as she ponders the BF mystery.....

Twist ... Try taking your shoes off and go deer hunting barefoot. Until you actually do it, rather than just speculate about it, you simply can't comprehend how incredible the difference is. MIB

Oh, our perception of counter-intuitive behavior is all on us. We, and I include myself - think/thought we were the apex predators - and that was one very uncomfortable realization. We look at their bulk and assume they'd be clumsy, maybe slow, possibly uncoordinated to a degree - and the opposite is true. Fast, very coordinated, and have the ability to go into stealth mode at will - much better than we can. That's a real eye-opener. Nothing like I would have expected. We look at their primitive appearance, and assume they're dumb. Just a big, dumb animal. Just the opposite - very clever, very adapted to their environment, and skilled enough to avoid us at will, although I think some of the youngsters get careless time to time and get spotted. But even they can cover lots of ground fast, and quickly disappear. We think we can surely see something so large if one is around. BS. Masters of camouflage, masters at concealing themselves low and in the shadows. And don't forget to look up in the big stuff! And since only one is seen as a general rule - it would be natural to assume they're somewhat loners. Another big mistake. We only see the one they wish to show - and just like the ape families, and just like the human families - both are very social creatures. There are a few exceptions in each, but the bulk like and prefer contact with others, and it helps by sharing the workload/tasks that working together provides. Counter-intuitive to be sure. But that's our fault.