Leaderboard

In what world is the default conclusion to purposeless, ramshackle, haphazard assemblages somehow "giant, undiscovered, hirsute apemen" are responsible? It fairly boggles the mind.

As Huntster knows, Russia can be seen from Big Diomede Island. Palin never claimed, nor said, she could see Russia from Wasilla but the Tina Fey spoof on Saturday Night Live did originate the statement.

The data indicates a builder with hands (and without tools!) that builds structures that primarily could not serve as practical shelters, and are primarily built from dead wood stripped of bark, and which form recognizable identifiable archetypes across the country. That's not a conclusion about the data, that's what the data is; I think the implication behind "blaming the data" is really that you're just not looking at it closely enough to see what it actually looks like. The notion that no one has seen a sasquatch building a structure somehow places the theory in epistemological purgatory is a colossal cop-out; they are encountered in the vicinity of structures, and structures are found in the vicinity of encounters, connect the dots. That may not be universally true, perhaps it is a regional behavior, I don't know, but speaking from personal findings and experience in Colorado and the Midwest, they are the builders. Plenty more examples from all across the country are out there, I recommend spending some time on Youtube.

No, not proof. Technically, the most that can be said is that you interpret it as further evidence against existence. It's not "proof" of anything since nothing has been proven. Its value as evidence for existence or non-existence remains under debate. As I've said before, I've seen two. Misidentification of known species was impossible under the circumstances. That means I sure hope they exist, otherwise I have a serious problem. And if I have that problem, how can it leave footprints that tracks can be cast from? Are we imagining the existence of the track casts? Imagining the pictures of track casts? How far does the rabbit-hole of imagination and delusion have to go to Rube Goldberg our way to dismissal of all evidence? MIB

This one may be from a movie, too. I ran across it today & there was nothing said about it. They were calling it a dogman, but it looks more like a BF to me. Anyway, it is pretty clear as BF pics go.

Do you think this pic is real or made up by producers of the Russian Yeti? I think it is simply a fat dude in dark clothing.

Like everything about BF Incorrigible1, it is not a conclusion at all. What it is, is the most viable hypothesis because nobody in opposition has any coherent, credible or consistent theory to explain it otherwise. No, really you don't. Dismissive handwaving is something I presumed only the scoffers engaged in around here. Guess not so. Explain the data, or don't, but please don't dismiss it as something not there. It is. There are recurring and congruent structures that exist across wildlands in N.A. They lack any sign or indication they were built by humans or natural processes. I say the weight of the evidentiary probabilities tips to the creatures that have been sighted in and around these structures, and which have left footprints in their vicinity. What have you got besides, "Nuh-Uhhhhh!" ?