Leaderboard

I strongly believe that Matt became frustrated because the show's Director and Co-directors would not allow the field team to go into some of the aggressive Bigfoot areas. Good reason for that belief, and probably a good thing for the crew.

Cool opinion, with a weight and value of a dung beetle's trophy.

Forget the scientists; just get in the woods and prove their existences to yourself and friends that are also woods rats and seriously interested enough to spend the time and money to see and interact with a few. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do that, although I know two who have. Who cares what others think or believe? If they don't have the guts and interest to do that; what is their opinion actually worth? Just over a week ago, a good friend - who is also a "knower" - took four semi-interested male college students to one of the active group's areas I have been working for years. They got cute with one of the resident males that typically come into that remote camp area when people are there at night. The boys were noisy and laughing when they heard a growling, stick breaking approach. One boy thought the sounds were made by others in the group, and walked around their truck and growled loudly. Immediately the male growled deeply and a lot louder and more aggressively and bluff charged him through the brush to within about ten feet of the truck. They all piled in it and left in a hurry. What the boy did - without knowing it - was to challenge and insult the male. I and a another "knower" spent some time up there night before last before last to make amends, although the wind and the nearby river's high water flow prevented us from hearing anything except their distant "gathering call" about dark, and that was only possible through an amplified sound system. Several night visitors/camper who have been at that site have left in a hurry, sometimes leaving the bulk of their gear behind.

My interest in the subject is fueled by the understanding this problem is special, for the reasons all of here appreciate, no matter if you are pro or con. It falls in that crack between the objectively verifiable and the subjectively persuasive. On top of that, it is exacerbated by the entrenched lines between lay experience and the credentialed --whose livelihood depends on keeping the members' handshake a well guarded secret. What I am certain of is the futility of either side convincing the other it is mistaken. I just have no energy for that exercise, even if I once did. If we are going to solve this special problem we are going to have to act way smarter than we act right now. If that solution comes from any direction, even from a quarter I don't regard as friendly to my conclusions, I would be a fool not to accept it. So, if a so-called scientist wants to makes good-faith effort to craft a solution to his special problem, I for one would be all ears. (With emphasis on "good faith")