Leaderboard

LOL, except to talk down to them? When challenged to demonstrate knowledge you claim to have, you clam up. I wish I could say that I am surprised.

It's alright for you to say you think bigfoot did it, but no one can say I don't think bigfoot did it, without being told to shut their yap by you? I don't think bigfoot is responsible for any tree breaks. I think they are all the result of natural events such as wind or snowfall. Perhaps even some human effort to boot. Must I now "shut my yap"?

Gumshoeye, while you're willing to chat please explain the contradictions of your comments: "I did not see the thing when I snapped the photo" "It was standing upright looking at me looking at it." "Prove it to me" attitude? Nope. The proof is right there in front of everyone's face- what we're dealing with here is acceptance or denial. The more I think about it Gumshoeye the more it equates a hoax- deliberately telling a phony story presented as being true.

We have one person outright lying about bigfoot stories, another person touting an April Fool's joke as being compelling, and you still want to preach about real-world skills and knowledge, huh?

Interesting. Wonder why Jayjeti dropped out of the conversation when Hart joined us.

My new-new modus operandi? Don't engage with those who don't know what the hell they are talking about.

Prove your knowledge, then. Demonstrate how snow load or wind, or age or plant pathology could not have possibly done, say, 5 -10 tree breaks of your choosing. Better get started, here is your chance to shine.

Another provocative post by the person whose stated purpose here is to stir up animus whenever the mood strikes him NOT to have an honest back and forth.

Agree with all of the above, and though you've each said it in context, the biggest potential obstacle is this: If bigfoot is in fact a hybrid, then the assumption that any human DNA appearing in samples is just contamination is fundamentally wrong and results in discarded evidence. The only safeguard against this is to publish proper sample collection procedures to the community and to carefully collect DNA samples from every person in the chain of custody. If the samples show human DNA that corresponds to that of anyone in the chain of custody, then it is obviously contaminated. If it shows human DNA that does not correspond to anyone in the chain of custody, and the sample itself is clearly not of human origin, then the sample must be analyzed under the assumption that a hybrid origin is possible.

I was in the woods when I received a text telling me about Ray's hospitalization several days ago. I returned home last night, and today was the first opportunity I had to visit Ray. I just walked in the door from doing so. Ray is in good spirits, and for a dying man, he looks great. He is ready for the impending transition. We spent our hour and a half together talking about bigfoot, astronomy, interesting people, his rich and unique life, and other stuff. He told me about his books, some of which have yet to be published. He shared insights and stories. It was great. Back in 1997, I was road tripping with my soon-to-be (and now ex-) wife. I subscribed to the WBS newsletter, the Track Record, at the time, so I took a chance and called Ray Crowe when we were in Portland, OR. I was hoping to see the bookstore and some of his sasquatch artifacts kept in his bookstore's basement where the WBS met every month. Ray told me on the phone that all that stuff was over at Larry Lund's home because of a flood or something or other in the bookstore. Ray gave me Larry's number, which I called, and my ex and I spent four or five hours with Larry that night. The evening blew my mind. The thought that there were actually people into this stuff I guess hadn't really occurred to me at that point. I credit (or perhaps "blame" would be a better word) that night with accelerating me to wherever I find myself today. It started with that phone call. It started with Ray. Today, I thanked Ray for this. I'd be lying if I said I did this with dry eyes. I feel like we in the PNW all owe Ray a lot. He started the monthly meetings here in Portland, of which echoes can now be seen in HopsSquatch. He carried on the tradition of newsletters pioneered by the Bay Area Group and the Bigfoot Co-op (am I showing my age now?). He suggested to us that we always wear our "skepticals" while reading his newsletter, as it was raw data, no filters added, which is good advice for all bigfooters. He's not dead yet, but he is on his way to check out. He is/was not only a catalyst for my life path, I am happy to call him a friend. Think positive thoughts for friend of the 'squatch, Ray Crowe.

http://monroetalks.com/forum/index.php?topic=27514.300

Your post is absurd. Are you only looking for biased pro-Bigfoot supporting viewpoints? No honest objective views? My comments were completely non-offensive in any way and I was simply stating an honest personal opinion of what I see. Not only is the object the same general shape of a tree break, but it also matches in color. How is that being rude to anyone? Please explain. Can you show me where I "ridiculed" anything? Can you show me where I gave "harsh and relentless criticism"? Can you show me where I "mocked with scornful laughter"? This forum is not exempt from opinions. People here constantly complain about all of this "mockery" and "ridicule", but even when someone posts a simple objective opinion, you blow up and get defensive because it isn't supporting your personal views. If you only want biased pro-Bigfoot viewpoints then just be honest and admit it. Don't disguise it as something else- 'being mercilessly mocked and ridiculed', because that was clearly not the case here.