Leaderboard

Back to the original post and the last one, I have advocated that BF researchers make contact with their state University anthropology or biology departments and establish a dialogue. Too many expect to just give Meldrum or Disotell a call and expect them to show up should they find something significant. There are problems with that. They are busy and hard to get in contact with. And there is such a thing as turf especially with state sponsored scientists. Throw in Federal land and you have even more problems. Meldrum in any state but Idaho might be a problem. Lets say for example that I found a mostly intact BF skeleton in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest washing out a river bank in Washington State. Ape looking skull, huge, no doubt at all what it is. While I might notify Meldrum, we know each other, I need to get a state sponsored scientist involved very early. He/she would likely have federal contacts. The skeleton would need to be examined in situ to give it a proper extraction. If earth layers are involved, in that it washed out of a river bank, a geologist needs to be called in to try to establish the age of the strata it was embedded in. Federal permits or permission would most likely be involved. However, I would want as many people as I could outside the Federal government to have seen the skeleton in case the government decides to confiscate it. Turf and scientific credit for discovery is very much involved. The best hope is getting a state and federal scientist who agree to share the discovery. Me, I would get no more credit, than if I was a kid that discovered a dinosaur bone eroding out of a bank. Would be thanked, patted on the head, and told that they would take care of it. Afraid to involve the feds? Dig it out without their permission, take it to whoever, get a lawyer, and expect to get some time in federal prison. Look up the history of Sue the T-Rex in the Chicago Museum of Natural History and what happened to the discoverer of that. He got two years in federal prison for violation of federal laws. Throw into the mix that BF would likely be included in the Native American Antiquities act, and you get into even more trouble. . A discovery on state or private land is cleaner. As long as you involve someone associated with that state and have the blessing of a private land owner. . State associated biologists or anthropologists would know the protocols and can avoid stepping on government toes. This whole thing is not easy other than how easy it would be to get in legal trouble. If you have a dialogue going with a state university biologist or anthropologist established before a find, the whole process would be easier. Expect them to get most of the credit unless you have scientific credentials of your own. Chock that up as the price to pay. If they have any ethics, they might at least share the credit. It should be noted that Jane Goodall did most of her work, discovery and scientific recognition before she had any formal academic training. Because of her previous work with chimpanzees as a lay person, her sponsorship by Dr Leaky, she was allowed to pursue a Doctorate without preexisting academic degrees. The discoverer who leads to acceptance of BF, the great North American primate, if they play their cards right, should be able to get similar recognition.

No offense intended to Hiflier, swas, and other proponents, but just handed out several plusses to Twist, Dmaker, Squatchy, and their ilk. If you don't like that, step up to the plate and deliver more than anecdotes and derision to anyone mentioning the king's lack of clothing.

Hiflier, probably close to half the replies in the last few pages are you engaging the skeptics. You have to at least admit you have a hand in the thread disruption. You can claim it’s in an effort to combat this but two kids screaming on a school bus is still two disruptive kids despite who yelled first.

I received a correspondence from a natural museum curator who, while not dismissing my presentation regarding shoulder span ratios wanted time to think things through before answering. I have corresponded to a few academics on the matter. Waiting to hear back from a couple of others but one was interested enough to understand the issue and so I sent along the stabilized version of the PGF that included some walk-away frames. I will only do that if someone shows interest in the problem of shoulder span ratios. That was just last week. Thank you for asking, Patterson-Gimlin. I sincerely hope this thread can now stay on the course it was meant to follow and some discussion regarding additional ideas for moving the BF subject further ahead can be proposed. It was on a pretty tough road there for a while.

Hiflier Believe me I do not want to be the focus of this discussion or have people focus on me at all. I was just trying to help just like Twist was and a few others were. That's all. None of us have proof or maybe some of us do and are just no willing to share that proof with the rest of the world. As you can see by what is going on here in this discussion it is not helping your cause much. I can care less whether people want to hear what I have to say in this matter. All I can say is that I have a lot of respect for all the members who sign up on this forum. We all want to know what the truth is about these creatures and arguing about it is not going to help your effort of what you or I are trying to accomplish. It will take all of us to figure this out. As we all can see that this is not an easy task. Rather then focusing on why skeptics keep engaging in arguments of why they do not exist we should be focusing on how to bring this creature into existence. Some of us already know they do but the question remains do they still exist in the now. This is where our focus should be. S.M. I do not consider my self either since my encounters do not happen on a regular basis. Now I can only speak for myself onto why I have not been able to back up my claim with proof of a clear picture . The reason is I have not been given the opportunity of being able to get a clear shot of one. But the real reason is I have not really tried as much as I have said I would. I really do not even want to get that proof for fear of loosing of what I have gained in the years of my encounters. The encounters will stay with me for ever like a long lost love. You can call me what ever and I really do not care. But those memories are more then the memories of my childhood. Unless you experience it your self you will never understand. Yes, I did put up with a lot of ridicule and yes it made me angry but I have learned to push through it. I do not blame you for what you do and I would be the same if I did not have my own sightings. To get to the truth takes harsh words and you have had some. I have no regrets. I hope that this helps.. Again my own opinion.

No offense Hiflier but I don’t think you get it.

^^^ Calling us trolls isn’t going to strengthen the evidence for Bigfoot.

I think it’s pretty standard protocol for those making the grandiose claim, BF in this case, to provide adequate proof. Dmakers position holds its ground each day that goes by without proof of BF. It is on us proponents to advance the cause.

That is what they are. Without any supporting evidence, an anecdote is just a story. Not what I said at all. Are you actually suggesting that I might be part of some bigfoot cover up conspiracy? Good grief, conspiracy theories have to be one of the most boring things on earth. That is just your opinion. All of those things have non bigfoot related sources. Until something more convincing and unambiguous arrives, I don't believe that any scientific investigation is warranted. Simply put, bigfoot evidence is wholly unimpressive. Until, or if, that changes, don't expect any higher degree of scientific interest. There you go hiflier, there's a suggestion for your thread. Stop trying different angles on the same old crappy evidence, and get something tangible.