Leaderboard

That's insane man , I have never seen anything like that before . I watched a horror movie once where all the wild animals were leaving the woods because of a monster or monsters .

I 've kept all sorts of creatures over my life, as well as having been a keeper at two zoos, and I'd think most people might well be surprised at just how many different types of animals display what can(only) be described as emotions. It's hardly limited to the "upper primates". These can be seen in a lot of mammals, birds, reptiles and fish. I'd doubt it skips amphibians, it's just I haven't personally seen such displays nor read of them, and That certainly does t mean they dont have them too. For example, chameleons don't change color so much to camouflage themselves(though their base colors do tend to blend in) their more vibrant displays of colors depend on their emotional state. They have combat colors, "Hey baby, hey baby!" Colors, " leave me alone" colors, and more. In a sense I'd think it akin to degrees of consciousness. For centuries most animals were thought to be acting solely by instinct. But any creature that learns from interacting with its environment has some degree of conscious awareness, just like the first cowboy to try eating a cactus, if it lives through it it learns. Similarly, you can bet that first cowboy HATES cactus, and therein is the start of emotion. It seems to me that the more socially interactive a species is, the more likely it is to have a wider range of emotive response, but that could just be the bias of a social creature. It might just be me, but humans have been trying to differentiate themselves from The Animals for a long long time, and it seems like we jump on any unprovable(at the time)qualifiers at hand, you know, like how animals arent consciously aware, self determined, able to learn, capable of abstraction, don't feel pain, don't have emotion, don't have a soul, aren t made in gods image, can't use language, and more. Is it some deep seated insecurity that we might not be special? Guilt over that whole "dominion over" thing or some need to justify the claim? Or are we afraid that we're "just another monkey" ? This whole do our closest relatives have similar emotions to our own strikes me as a rather ridiculous question. Anyone who's spent any time observing them. knows they do, unless they approach it with the preconception that it's impossible, thereby giving excuse to ignore elements of what they see before them.

That’s a great way to put it BD. In the past I’ve said good from afar but far from good.

There is a zoo effect among urban humans. We see it with Buffalo in Yellowstone every year. And despite the warnings? People try to pet them anyhow. It’s never going to happen to them. They are cute and furry and lovable on Nat Geo. And Bears? Just like humans? Are individuals. Yes we can set some parameters among species. But nothing is set in stone. From the time you crawl out of your metal box until the moment you crawl back into it? You are food. If you don’t have a metal box (car)? You better have a plan B,C,D. A electric bear fence around your tent. Bear spray. Gun. Knife. Trip alarms. If anyone calls you paranoid? Just think of them as bear food with legs. Because going through life while playing Russian roulette with it is NOT how our ancestors got us here. If something eats me in the woods? It will be bleeding…. I promise.

That is a good Q. Yet, the Q does reveal this fact: The PGF is really good but is it not "a clear video" like the one "we get from National Geographic". The PGF is impressive. If it had been Nat Geo level of today this would largely reveal the truth one way or another. It's just good enough to be convincing and bad enough not to be.

That is why a special permit is being requested; to make the harvest legal. And the harvest is necessary to establish the scientific existence of the species. If sent certified and ignored, you have legal record of the request. If denied, you have the name of the official who denied it. In both cases, it can be appealed. Again, the intent is to approach a harvest (necessary to establish existence) legally, and to put the onus on government, where it has belonged all along.

I've read opinions on the former James Randi forum written by skeptics that if they saw a video film of a huge male sasquatch (size confirmed by an object in the film) doing something requiring super human strength (like picking up or throwing a log), they would be convinced. I believe those statements are only partially true. Many "people" would indeed be convinced. Current "skeptics"? Some. Understanding the phenomenon of denial, it is not possible that all would be convinced. Adding to that is the question of whether or not such a video would force science (as an industry), academia, and (most importantly) government to action. To this question, I say that the answer is a solid "no".

Exactly. Whether or not Standing’s footage is a hoax is (obviously) a matter of debate. For me, many of the debunking attempts that people like to trot out are clumsy and laughable and don’t really do anything to disprove the images. The morphing face… the image where a tree branch was photoshopped out… I am sorry, but the attempts at debunking seem less believable than Standing’s images. Thinker Thunker video analysis is pretty arbitrary… and the way that he got his panties in a bunch over a comment by Stroud told me all that I needed to know. Thinker is too emotionally involved to be a neutral judge of the images. At the end of the day, people often jump upon the ‘he’s a hoaxer’ bandwagon because that’s what everyone else says. Or, they find Standing personally distasteful. Or, he ‘stole my area’…which is silly unless he broke into someone’s house, stole a deed to private land, and then took legal possession of said land. Personally, I am on the fence about Standing’s images. But, I will evolve my opinion on the merits of the images themselves, not because someone told me to think that they were fake. And honestly… Standing is actually getting out there into the backcountry and doing the work, not sitting around preaching from his keyboard. That alone is worth some kudos

It’s not convincing? Or it’s suspect because Todd Standing shot the video? Because as a life long outdoorsman? If that head peered around a tree at me 5 miles up the trail? I would swallow my tongue first. Lay lead second and clean my shorts third. Yah it’s pretty convincing. And if it was attached to a 8 foot body? Holy smokes!🫣

We all know that Chimps are *genetically* close to us, but I dunno, intelligence wise I think Orangs are our closest relative. They say give a Chimp, Gorilla and Orangutan a screwdriver. A Chimp will ponder for a min and play with it, a Gorilla will toss it, an Orangutan will escape his cage.