Leaderboard

Your right.... science had told us exactly what they need from day one. It aint a cool video.....its a body, or a part there of. As far as species being discovered? I think your dead wrong. Sasquatch habitat isnt on some remote island in the south Pacific devoid of humans. Humans utilize it for their own everyday along with the lands resources. We pave it into parking lots, and strip malls. We build dams and kill salmon runs. We strip the timber in clear cuts and build roads to get the logs out. The endangered species act protects species from these activities. Species like Grizzly Bear and Wolverine. It works. Imagine the giant stands of timber and salmon runs that once stood where Seattle is now? Did NOT discovering Sasquatch save the lands from becoming a concrete jungle? Surely not. But we have laws on the books now to protect species and their habitat RIGHT NOW. Why not use them? Need proof and we could. Lastly I have a question for you.... Your a huge PGF proponent, right? You argue against skeptics daily that Patty is real, right? WHY? If you dont want the species discovered? Then agree with the skeptics and tell em what they want to hear.... Its all a hoax folks....nothing to see here....just move along. Your position is a walking contradiction.

I remember. Interesting yarn, and I was willing to suspend disbelief long enough to engage him to see what else he had to say. When that turned out to be "nothing", that was all I really needed to know. Aside from his tragic need for attention, and the juvenile nature of his "experiment", it only points out a basic misunderstanding of the nature of the phenomenon by those trying to perpetrate hoaxes, no matter the nature of them, and also those who hunger for their views on BF to be somehow validated (YES!!...now my [friend, co-worker, relative] will FINALLY see I am not crazy, and they will have to bow down to my superior intellect!). If you have a need for that, you are a mark for guys like this. And you don't need them. There is plenty of objective data to reassure any thinking person. The misunderstanding guys like him have, and the premise of all that they do, is that the evidentiary foundation for the animal is so ephemeral that others couldn't possibly not require these kinds of validating tales, and that, fellow BF forum-ites, is the hook that dangles. Once you do the grunt work of reading, observing and thinking on this topic you won't ever need people like this wahoo to confirm what you already know, through their lurid tales of derring-do. I sure don't, and there are many here who feel the same way.

It appears that we have hit a lull in the interest surrounding sasquatch or bigfoot, it is not that hard to figure out the why? Finding Bigfoot may have not been the favorite of those versed in the subject, but it brought necessary attention to the matter. So many shows and investigations were spawned by that effort, and plentgy of people became aware of the creatures existence as the result, or at least hypothesized about the matter. Today we are quickly shuffling all that under the rug and moving on in our rationale sort of manner. We could have a large meteor bearing down on us and do the same thing, it is all a matter of the ho hum every day attitude that man cannot seem to overcome. Until we have the meteor in sight we will most likely ignore its possible collision with our reality. Sasquatch will not be a matter of concern until it is right in the face of people...That is also true of other matters man ignores freely, for instance death.

The seeming lack of interest is also a perspective of what is on the internet- or should I say what is not on the internet. We know stuff is happening, it is just not being publicly forthcoming. For instance, the results from any testing being done, or waitin to still be done by Dr. Todd Disotell on samples from Derek Randle's Oregon nesting site. Dr. Disotell is supposed to be a speaker sometime over the Labor Day Weekend at a conference being presented in Portland, Maine at Loren Coleman's International Cryptozoology Museum; something I will miss unfortunately because I am on the road when that conference goes on. The samples were supposedly sent to him last year and testing was waiting for the right equipment in order to perform the relatively new Edna process and, I assume other more conventional DNA testing. The tests were slated for this 2018 year and so far there has been no updates from either Derek Randles or Dr. Disotell. Of course, it is understandable that nothing will be said unless, and until, results if any are positive- or even negative for any indications that the nests exist because of Sasquatch. Yeah, there's a lot of garbage out there, still a lot of snickering and eye rolling, and the subject, while seemingly more tolerated, still generally carries a stigma in science. Regardless of all of that there are those who do take this subject seriously and will continue t do so as long as there is no definitive answer to the phenomenon of what people have reported seeing and evidence is still being produced. This is a good topic, LCB, as it has a chance of perhaps zeroing in on what we DO have and what we ARE doing that is pertinent to discovery. I also think the junk that is out there in the general public WILL serve to discourage 99.9% of ever attempting to even look for a footprint or do much else more than 50 feet from a camp or inside a treeline. And on that note, lets not forget the fear factor. And the fact that FB used all of this high-tech gear that few can afford and probably think you need this equipment at high cost to be a 'real' researcher. So they do nothing.