Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/01/2010 in all areas

  1. 11 points
    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.
  2. 9 points
    I missed this earlier. And I will give credit where credit is due. Dmaker is speaking the truth. As for the rest of it? I dont play Dungeons and Dragons. I dont hang out on Dungeons and Dragons forums and tell them how dumb they are wasting their lives playing it. And I dont belong to a anti Dungeons and Dragons forum where we talk about Dungeons and Dragons players and how dumb they are to waste their time playing the game..... Why? Because its an even dumber waste of time....... And I will say this. Anytime your in the back country for any reason? Its not role play.... No matter if I’m scouting for Elk tracks or Bigfoot tracks? The trails are just as narrow, the cliffs are just as tall, and the rivers are just as wide. I dont care if your scouting for pink unicorns and leprachauns? One slip may be the end. No joke. Its no game. I’ve had horses roll over me and crack ribs, Mules upside down in creeks, bucked off, hypothermia at 10,000 feet in the Bighorns of Idaho in late October. This isnt a “game” for pot smoking, cheetos munching, kids rolling fantasy dice in their parents basement. Bgfoot may be a myth. I dont know for myself. But the rest of it? Is stark reality. I dont even know if you dont live in western north America? If you really even comprehend it. And no that one summer trip to Yellowstone doesnt count. And I guess thats why I bristle at the notion that this is just a role playing game. It may be for some? Sitting around the campfire at some state park campsite in Ohio and tell spooky Bigfoot stories while eating smores, do some wood knocks and whoops, listen to forest sounds and get freaked out together and convince each other that Coyote howl isnt really a Coyote at all...... yah I get the comparison. Thats not me. Try rolling out of your bed roll at 2am in the morning 50 miles from the trail head because the Stock are going ape shit on the highline. You know Griz are in the area as well as Blacks, Wolves, Cougars......because you have seen their tracks, or them. Your out there in your long johns with a rifle and a flashlight...... by yourself. I dont care how skeptical you are..... in the back of your mind? Bigfoot may just be a myth to you sleeping in your warm bed. But out there in the vast wilderness, in the pitch black, when you know something is out there? He haunts the recesses of your mind. He does mine. And I dont have any problem admitting it. When I crawl out of that tent I am ready to face anything with a metallic taste in my dry mouth. I can control my fear but I will not lie and tell you its not there. Its always there. Maybe its because of some ancient artifact in my DNA. Maybe its the experience I had as a child. Maybe its because I too ate smores and listened to stories around the campfire as a kid. Illogical or not? Its there. I would be lying otherwise. And I bet you my bottom dollar? That these scofftic JREFers? Deep down, way down inside, in the pitch black on that camping trip when a heavy branch snaps close to camp? Its there as well. Its visceral. And its probably why they hang around here..... Its like a morbid fascination that they just cannot tear themselves away from. Or maybe its just because they like to make fun of us weak minded folks that cannot 86 it like they can!
  3. 9 points
    I feel frustrated about the direction that the research aspect of the subject seems to have taken. People making outlandish claims, some researchers (term used loosely) presenting findings that cannot be substantiated, and the shows used to entertain do nothing for the seriously interested enthusiast. They all seem to discredit and make light of both the creature and the study of them. There's no shortage of serious research efforts, though. All you have to do is find that niche' among the muck and mire. Personally, I tend to shy away from outlandish claims like mind speak, telepathy, teleportation, association with orbs, and habituation claims with spiritual implications for the humans. It seems that if any of this stuff were true, these "knowers" would present proof of such claims, but, rather conveniently, they claim to choose not to do so because of their desire to protect the creature, or because they feel "special" to have been selected by the creature because of some purity or goodness that they themselves posses. To listen to some of these descriptions of the creature, you'd think they are bullet-proof and clad in a cape. Fortunately, there are more grounded claims and efforts to disseminate more logical and realistic information without all of the anthropomorphic and paranormal associations. These outlandish claims make the topic a target of ridicule and make anyone with a serious interest in the creature look like a lunatic to the majority of the populace. Personally, I think the warm, fuzzy, flute playing, supernatural, wise and benevolent forest hippy persona of the creature has done more to deflect from serious research by the scientific community than anything else.
  4. 8 points
    Well, comments like that will help to ensure a one sided conversation. I can't believe you actually just said to the entire membership here that if you don't agree with me, your opinion does not count. Your arrogance has reached a new height. I'd say congratulations, but you're probably already patting your own back.
  5. 8 points
    I've arrived at the conclusion that it isn't just the bigfoot proponents that "have it all figured out".
  6. 7 points
    For those who believe they have experienced something paranormal, what you are asking is also the most dishonest and shows the most self-disrespect. It involves suppressing information and disenfranchising themselves to buy a troll's approval. MIB
  7. 7 points
    Hello, everyone. Just thought I'd show up for a second to answer whatever has been posted since my longer post above... I have four more posts until I'm not limited to two a day, so this frequent posting helps... Yeah, Bobo in a wig and makeup is something that one wishes to un-see, but we can't. It'll be burned onto your retinas for weeks to come. However, what I wanted to say about the sometimes ridiculous stuff we do on the show is that the whole point of any seemingly-dubious thing we do is to do something out of the ordinary. It makes great TV, sure, but more importantly, it's something that no bigfoot has probably ever seen before. Think about dogs for a minute... Smart dogs are a pain in the butt because they get into everything and need to be entertained. How much smarter are sasquatches? There isn't much to do out in the woods except for play with rocks and sticks, so when something interesting and unusual comes into their territory, it makes sense that they might come check it out for a while. Some might run for the deep woods, they are all individuals after all. However, some might come to take a look and trip out on what's going on, especially if their food needs have been met for the day. (That's what was going on when I might have seen on in NC: http://cliffbarackman.com/finding-bigfoot/finding-bigfoot-episode-guide/finding-bigfoot-season-one/finding-bigfoot-season-one-caught-on-tape/) Just do something out of the ordinary and they might check you out. It sometimes works! They knock and call for a variety of reasons. I have observed knocks when they seemed to be cooperatively hunting (this is also reported by witnesses). They sometimes knock when people enter or exit an area (this is also a documented behavior in lowland gorillas, though they clap. I think sasquatches might be clapping sometimes, too, but that's another story...). They seem to knock to say something like, "I'm here, where are you?" Howls, calls and vocalizations are another whole topic. I assume there are even more reasons to vocalize than knock, since the variety of noises is so much larger... However, as far as why we do noises when we aren't totally sure what we are saying... Howls and knocks are what I refer to as the "quick and dirty" technique. Think about this... We have basically two nights to "find" a bigfoot in an area where we probably never have been before. Add to that the fact that about a million people will watch us do this, fail or not, and then heavily critique us for whatever happens. That's a lot of pressure, so we use the most effective means to see if one is around, which is by making the noises, no matter what they mean to the sasquatches. Noises sometimes produce great results. Also, it stirs up the indicator species, such as coyotes. There are several benefits. The downside is that once the bigfoots figure out those noises are coming from us, they won't respond again. For us, that doesn't matter so much because we are leaving the area soon. For a researcher that might frequent the area, once the bigfoots associate the noises with that person who drives that car, noises won't be as effective until things "cool down" a bit. I'm not a celebrity, I'm a bigfoot nerd that happens to do it on television... You're welcome, nonetheless. I can't speak for Ranae. Even if I could, I wouldn't be accurate because I'm not sure what she thinks is going on. She sure speaks like she thinks they're real, but then she says she doesn't believe they exist. Who knows? You'd have to ask her and have her defend her position. To me, it doesn't matter what other people think. Their existence doesn't depend on anyone's belief, not even my own. I want to add to this question... Do you ever get frustrated with Ranae? how can anyone listen to all those town halls and see all the evidence and eyewitness testimony, all the legends, folklore, and stories, and still not believe there is something out there? A scientist needs evidence and data, I get it, but a scientist should also realize that most of these eyewitness accounts all describe the same characteristics and behaviors of what they have seen. And these stories are coming from everyday people who have no incentive to make up them up. Just these facts alone should intrigue a scientist, but Ranae won't budge. Do you ever get irritated by her? Sure, we all get frustrated with each other at times. Have you ever taken a long road trip with a significant other or close friends? We all get on each others' nerves every once in a while. I think Ranae has softened over the years, but she's awfully stubborn. As I mentioned above, you'd probably have to ask Ranae about what she believes and ask her to back up those beliefs with whatever she thinks is really going on. The show is better for having a skeptical voice. Four "true believers" in the woods wouldn't make much of a show. Besides, I love the way Ranae and MM butt heads (they are both very stubborn, which makes for great television). I hope you all are enjoying the new episodes! They are a lot of fun to make, though they are a lot of work that isn't exactly easy. It takes the effort and commitment of dozens and dozens of people to produce an episode, and I hope you enjoy all of our effort! Best, Cliff
  8. 7 points
    Seriously, if in posting that above info are ya'll trying to out the location of "X"? If it is indeed that location.............Shame on all of you!
  9. 6 points
    It’s easy to look at sighting reports and pick em apart. And things like audio files in which a pack of coyotes is being described as Bigfoot vocalizations. But do any of us have any close family and friends claiming to have seen a Bigfoot with conviction? Unlike some of you? I’m not a knower. But I would like to share a few stories with you. With the standard disclaimer that physical evidence is needed. My father had a cabin up by mount Index, one night while walking back to his cabin in the dark. Something large and grey crossed the road in front of him. Now he openly admits that he had been drinking..... but not that much. He said that it could have been a mountain goat. But he had never seen a mountain goat that low before and along the river. Dad was a prolific hunter in his younger days. Had a friend who sold me my engraving shop. She swore while coming back to Kettle Falls along the Kettle river by the boulder creek road she had a Bigfoot cross the hwy 395 right in front of her. Her husband is a good guy, but definitely gave her quite a bit of flak for sharing that story. But she has never backed down. She was adamant being a local it wasn’t a known animal. My packing partner who is also a member of the BCHA claims to have heard a frightening sound while riding his horse. He never saw what made it. I had some examples of the Sierra sounds and he picked out the sound byte that starts out as growls, snarls and gibberish and then breaks out into whistling as the closest to what he heard. He said that his horse was having none of it. And it freaked him out. He lives in Ferry county and has Bears and Cougars in his yard. No joke. One of our own BCwitness who I have met twice with in BC while doing some jet boat repairs up there had his own sighting. I respect him to the utmost as a woodsman and his prowess in the woods. And BC is BC.... it’s a massive province with most of the population living in one city.... the rest is mountains, trees and glaciers. I think BC is likely the best last place on Earth for the search. I have spent a lot of time in the Kootenay region as they call it, a lot of country up there. Like Alaska big....and as remote. Getting guns up there is problematic tho. Of course my own snow track story you guys have heard a million times. Do any of you have any stories to share of your own or others? Does having someone close to you a witness sway your own beliefs? Discuss!
  10. 6 points
    Ive always been open to BF producing eye shine but the idea of actually projecting light out of its eyes I cannot buy. I typically just toss that on the same pile of BF traits such as using portals or other amazing feats that perpetuate the legend and myth that is BF. No offense to anyone but I can’t buy it.
  11. 6 points
    Messing around with outdoor hardware and peeking are commonly reported when BFs come around homes. It's thought to be curiosity rather than aggression. Hopefully, he'll be smart and not resort to violence. Here's a list I found elsewhere. Light ’em Up Put up lots of lights up high –over 15 feet high, if you can manage–around the yard for night time. Put a wire cage around the bulbs because they will throw rocks or yank them off the wall. Even Christmas lights are useful. Strobes are good, too. Shine lights out from inside the house. All lights must be able to be switched on from inside the house. Motion detector lights can be defeated, so don’t use those. Bigfoot are too smart for that. Zillion watt flashlights and spotlights. They hate that. I hear they dislike green and blue lasers, available cheaply on the internet. Lock doors both when out of the house and when you are in the house. Lock up tight at night, close windows. Small, inexpensive motion activated and very shrill alarms which firmly attach to windows and doors can be bought for around $5. They work surprisingly well. Bigfoot know and avoid cameras. Put up game cameras. Yes, they can avoid them, but it’s the deterrent factor you are after, not pictures. Ask the local PD or sheriff to do extra patrols to make sure you are safe from what might be a crazy drifter or a prisoner on the lam. Air horn, flash-bangs, fireworks, loud noise. Got a cannon? LOUD. Do not ever feed them or put food outside or throw leftovers outside in the woods. No trees or plants that produce food. Unintended consequences are a bitch. No deer feeders in the area. Bird feeders either. Store animal food inside. Discourage deer from hanging around. When you see one, use the air horn. Also other small animals, which bigfoot also eat. Do a little target practice around the property, using safety sense. Be armed and let them see that. HOWEVER, DO NOT SHOOT AT THEM except in an extreme life or death situation, because they will escalate their activity and threat level. Empty outdoor freezers or refrigerators. Cut down all weeds, brush, and trees around the house. Shade is nice, but quiet is nicer. Drain swimming pools. Lock up livestock at night, from chickens to bulls. Put big dogs in barn. Do not chain them up. Install powerful speakers outside high up, and, when you know they are nearby, start yelling through them. Etc.
  12. 6 points
    I apologize for my tardy response Hiflier. I have been thinking about how I might answer your questions (and whether or not I could). 1st a disclaimer: I was educated as a paleobiologist. I have studied fossil invertebrate populations with regard to their specific variations (variations within a species due to ontogeny - that is growth from infant to adolescent to adult), parasitism by competing organisms, and evolutionary considerations as they impact our understanding of the genus, family, and order classifications in a particular class of invertebrates. I have taken graduate level courses in genetics and evolution (but a long time ago - invertebrate zoology was one of my two minor subjects), BUT I AM NOT A GENETICIST! So take what I might say with some healthy skepticism - and I welcome discussion from real geneticists (and I am guessing from your questions that you already know most, if not all, of what I am going to say). Some good news: With regard to DNA, hair is amazingly stable in a variety of environments that would be considered risky in other respects. That is mainly due to the presence of cuticle, the outermost hard layer of a three-layered hair shaft (inner medulla, medial cortex, outer cuticle). The cuticle protects the medulla, and the medulla contains a lot of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Some bad news: Nuclear DNA (nDNA or nuDNA) is lost in the process of cornification - in which protein cells become hair. Although many people think that a follicle needs to be attached to a hair shaft for extraction of nDNA, nDNA has occasionally been extracted from the medulla of a hair shaft - sometimes months or even years after the hair has been pulled/shed from a human body - I guess this should be included under the "good news". In most cases the best that one can expect from hair in terms of DNA is mtDNA. mtDNA is not pertinent for ID'ing individuals, but works for ID'ing species (if that species' genome is included in an existing gene bank - and it should be useful as a match for higher classifications as well, such as genus, subfamily, and family). According to at least two hair experts, Sasquatch hair commonly lacks a medulla, and, when present, the Sasquatch medulla is discontinuous and not prominent. A number of mtDNA studies of purported Sasquatch hair have suggested Homo sapiens, and the natural conclusion is human contamination. There are a variety of methods for decontaminating DNA samples, and actually hair, again because of the protective cuticle, is especially prone to successful decontamination. As I have said in other threads, there exist in all know human DNA (ALL HUMAN DNA) genetic markers that are unique to Homo sapiens, so any DNA researcher looking to verify human contamination or to suggest the existence of other than human DNA, must look for one, or a few, of those markers, else he/she is falling short of performing adequate study (trying to be kind here to past researchers - I would rather say #*&@&%$*!). I think study of suspected Sasquatch hair is worth study, without regard to external environmental challenges and without regard to time in environment. I am not like the body of posters on this site (mainly inductive reasoners - some brilliant, some notsomuch) that can run through a myriad of explanations and possibilities addressing a single data point. I am admittedly not brilliant - I am a plodder. I try to gather a lot of data and methodically work through that data to try to understand it (that's a tough thing in this Sasquatch world containing a fair bit of purely anecdotal data). If I were confronted with testing old hair for DNA or making the determination no to do so because conclusive results might be unlikely, I would say do the analysis - one never knows what might turn up (my experience has been the more one learns, the more one realizes there is more to learn). I had planned to address your questions more directly, but I am running out of gas. The subject does interest me, however, and I look forward to more communication with you.
  13. 6 points
    True, but that might be primarily because of the military role they expected the apes to play. Dogs have been weaponized since before recorded human history and they remain in use for multiple roles. We’ve used chimps as human-like guinea pigs in the space race and other scientific experiments. Dolphins are in use currently in several naval roles. Frankly, I don’t see a role for apes or sasquatches that humans can’t do better primarily due to reliability. Dogs and dolphins want to please. Even humans are iffy on that account. Mature apes and sasquatches would as soon blow you off as a bear would, especially males. Even R&R time with the local women doesn’t seem to improve their attitudes and cooperation. They’re like our own Incorrigible1: completely incorrigible..........especially with the local women..........
  14. 6 points
    Oh c'mon! You're selling yourself short! You get mocked for a bunch of other reasons too!
  15. 6 points
    It seems consistent with SOME Native American beliefs. I have no problem with that. However, it's not the whole answer. As much as folks .. maybe like you, or maybe not .. might wish, what I saw was real. Process this: delusions and illusions do not leave castable footprints nor produce recordable vocalizations. While there is no proof they are "bigfoot" since we lack proof of bigfoot, **something** made them and it is not any known animal. Something "unknown" **is** out there. That is fact. You, or others, may deny, but will be wrong if you do. MIB
  16. 6 points
    I managed to get out yesterday (Sat.) as well. None of my local guys were available to go, but my wife surprised me by saying "yes" when I asked her to come along. It's no easy task for her, as she's currently wheelchair bound by severe arthritis, but she put up with about 5 hours on the rough Chehalis Lake logging road, where we went 35 km (about 22 mi) in to the Skwellipel Creek Forest Service campsite, near the decade old rockslide that created a huge tsunami on the lake. We had a nice lakeshore lunch break before heading back out. One of the branch roads that heads west from the Chehalis main towards the area where I had my sighting nearly 40 years ago, was gated with a very large and sturdy looking steel gate, so I couldn't explore up there, which I had hoped to do on this trip. We saw no interesting tracks, and zero wildlife bigger than squirrels and chipmunks, but it was a great day to be out in the woods.
  17. 6 points
    I agree this thread might get more traction under the paranormal section. Simply, that there may be more leeway to talk about what it "might be" over there, and not just what it's not. Apologies if i wade into taboo areas. Personally, I don't know why BF can't be Flesh and Blood, while still having abilities that we don't yet understand with our own flesh and blood limitations. Really, our Human prejudice is what's holding most research back. For example, they have an incredible ability to hide and elude us. That's hardly up for argument. Some have put forward theories of "cloaking," but such notions are typically dismissed out of hand. Why? Because it makes us uncomfortable due to the fact that we (as Human flesh and blood) can't understand it. And that always cracks me up. We're talking about a completely unclassified animal, and yet we focus on what it CAN'T be for our own sense of security. Admittedly a weak analogy, but not so long ago we had no idea how bats did their bat thing at night. People (I'm assuming here) likely thought bats could see (optically) at night to find their insect prey. Or in ancient times, that they might be "magical." It was only through the advancement of science and (open minds) that their sonar was discovered. Yet it's a physical ability that we do not possess. This is all just a long-winded of saying that yes--I agree that the Big Fella is flesh and blood. But there may be numerous abilities they possess that we do not share. That does not mean those abilities are beyond the realm of possibility. I think this whole field is paralyzed by Human prejudice. To Hiflier, I think you nicely illustrate the Human prejudice I am referring to (not intended to be a barb, btw). You suggest that because their shape resembles ours, that they are somehow lesser because they don't exhibit technology. Last I checked, our technology is polluting the very air and water and total environment we depend on. No, I suspect their intelligence is extremely high. But in ways that we do not appreciate, or care to. Good topic! I just feel handcuffed trying to talk about it here. We're trying to put a very big Bigfoot into a very small box. Not gonna work...
  18. 6 points
    Wow you're a special one. I think you're absolutely full of it personally as I've seen this "professional of data analysis" in action don't forget and have only just cleaned up the absolute train wreck you made of the data you added in the SSR. And by the way, you haven't just elimated the BFRO in one analysis and you even thinking you have let alone saying that you have just shows an unhealthy self obsession of yourself and a probable fantasy land that's being lived in.
  19. 6 points
    The only people for whom Bigfoot is real are those who have witnessed one. The rest of us are voyeurs, and stand like the spear carriers on the back row of the chorus of the opera while the large lady out front in the horned helmet sings her aria....we know something is happening, we just don't know what it is, do we Mr. Jones? Most of us with half a brain understand it is rude to appear to know it all when we haven't done the homework. Naish appears to be of the other kind. That you could get a piece published by Scientific American by trotting out all the old tropes and bundling them up as authority because, you know, you are a SCIENTIST! is not too surprising at all. But, (As DWA would remind us all...) Science is as Science does. A million Naishes spouting that view is no more valuable to science than a million bee-lee-vers spouting the opposite. They are cut of the same cloth, and neither help get at the truth. And I'll say it again, if this all a social construct, THAT headline renders the idea of BF ho-hum. But let's play that game for a second, Mr. Science Man: You have your hypothesis, now tell me how you test it. I'll tell you how, and this where every one of these poseurs shirks their responsibility to their discipline: You make a serious effort to prove existence, pull no punches, take no prisoners. (Don't waste your breath telling me that has happened already...HA!) Failing to find it after that is done? Well, I'd switch my bet, I can tell you that. Until then, blog away.
  20. 6 points
    I'm glad that B.H. is being called to account for this, I think it's well past time in fact. He has repeatedly "moved the goalposts", attempted to derail/redirect conversations and let us not forget about his claims regarding his certainty about bob gimlin's drinking habits. It's consistently poor manners/behavior.
  21. 6 points
    The Jacobs photo is interesting. I don't know what it is. I grew up in a bear preserve. It does not look like any of the literally thousands of bears I've seen. I don't necessarily think it's a sasquatch either. I think it best to toss it in the "hmmmm" pile. Jumping to premature conclusions **of either sort** is .. premature. I don't understand why people can't leave puzzles as puzzles and instead latch onto answers that can't be defended with integrity. Recently an animated gif I'd never seen before surfaced. The first pic is new, the middle one seems to be the Jacobs photo we're all familar with, and the third is clearly a bear. That first picture puts the "bear-ness" of the Jacobs photo into greater doubt ... at least for me. It seems to be the same figure but turned a bit. Like I said, I grew up in a bear preserve. I also hunt them other places. Bears ears are cartilage. They don't grow much so as a bear ages and gets bigger, its ears appear progressively proportionally smaller and smaller. They also seemingly slowly relocate from right on top of the head down to the upper side of the head. As a hunter, if you're after a trophy bear, look for bears that have very small seeming ears mounted relatively low on the head. So, relative to the photos, if this is a baby bear, the ears should be quite prominent and mounted high. I don't see them. The pictures aren't clear but they are clear enough. Unless this is a very old bear, the lack of prominent ears is a giant red flag. The other thing that is missing is a rostrum ... a prominent, protruding snout. If the head is turned away so we can't see the snout, the ears should display clearly. If the head is turned to the side so the ears are hidden against the head, the snout should be prominently displayed. Neither case seems true. I think calling this a bear demonstrates no knowledge of bear anatomy whatsoever. None. That doesn't make it a sasquatch. However, putting your "weight" behind a shaky claim it's a bear just to prove it can't be a sasquatch reeks of a wizard-of-oz -style "pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain" ploy. It's a puzzle best left as a puzzle. MIB
  22. 6 points
    I will not hesitate to totally discredit the bloke in a suit claim. In my book, chapter 11, page 287, (the Conclusions chapter), I wrote "The inescapable conclusion, however, is that the PGF is simply not a fake, not a hoax, and Patty is something biologically real, as she appears, and is not a human in a fur costume and face mask." I can't imagine anyone failing to understand that statement, but some people obviously fail at reading comprehension. Bill
  23. 6 points
    Whaaa...??? It's sentences like this one (and they are quite common in your posts) that make it very difficult for me to take you seriously, Gumshoeye. I truly hope you managed a bit more refinement and coherence when writing your reports as a detective. Do you mean "psyops", perchance? For someone who tries to speak authoritatively on the subject, I'd expect you to at least spell it correctly. These common lapses in the mechanics of your communications do not instill much confidence in their content. You know, attention to detail and all that...
  24. 6 points
    One thing that frustrates me about the Bigfoot community (or I should say a small faction of it) is the folks who make the unwarranted leap from believing in the existence of the animal to professing to know all about it, what it really is, how it behaves, etc. I'm not trying to rile anyone or point fingers, but honestly, you have people writing books and doing publicity saying that they know this creature is mostly human, likes to give gifts, has special powers, etc, etc, and it all seems more than a bit presumptuous to me. I want to say, "well, you may THINK this is true and you are perfectly welcome to say that, but you cannot KNOW it is true because there is precious little at all known about this creature at this point." There is not even a single specimen in capivity or on a forensic lab to glean any real evidence from; all else is total speculation. And that is fine, but just SAY it is speculation, not fact. Again, I strongly believe this creature exists. Thousands of witnesses are not ALL misidentifying, hoaxing or lying. They just...aren't. But beyond that, I have no clue what is going on, for certain. And really, neither does anyone else. We're all just guessing; educated guesses, to be sure in some cases, but guesses nonetheless. I think it's important to be able to dwell in the uncertainty before you leap to conclusions. That way your mind is kept open and isn't stuck defending positions you were 'sure' about, when and if the real truth comes out.
  25. 6 points
    It's everybody's business as long as they continue to post about the 10+ years ongoing investigation on a 10 acre property with no proof (photo, video, DNA etc) whether it is posted here, on Facebook, or even on their website. How long would it take you to professionally investigate a 10 acre property for evidence of a troop of wood apes? How many clients would continue to pay you after 10 years of searching their 660'x660' property with no definitive results? You do this professionally correct?
  26. 6 points
    Seriously dude, just drop the ruse already. You're doing nothing but wasting space and time here. Remember, according to you, we're all a self absorbed clique here who has no interest in the "truth" as you declare it, so perhaps a different playground more to your liking would be in order. So far as I can tell, you have yet to post on any other topic on the BFF, therefore we can conclude you have no interest in the subject of BF whatsoever...except to do damage control for Todd Standing. Nobody but nobody puts as much effort into a single-minded mantra as you have without being personally vested in the situation. You have contributed absolutely nothing to the BFF as a whole. Even the most hardcore skeptics and proponents alike engage on a variety of topics, yet curiously you haven't. With that in mind, we can safely conclude that either 1) you are Todd Standing himself; 2) someone very closely associated with Todd Standing or his organization; 3) a follower of Todd Standing who appointed themselves as chief defender of the faith here on the BFF; or 4) an individual who gets his jollies off of kicking the hornets nest to watch the stir. So which is it? If you are Todd Standing, wow! Not even Rick Dyer went to this extent around these parts, but I think there are some members around here who would like some answers to some serious questions. If you are a close associate, be sure to tell the boss man that the campaign isn't working on this forum. If you are a mere follower, you might want to consider if the Toddster is happy with you handing his PR in an unauthorized fashion. If you are a nest kicker, well, I'll leave forum business up to others... The upshot is that anyone who was sincerely seeking the "truth" as you state would have already moved on down the road in disgust at the ignorance the rest of us exhibit. You haven't done that, so it becomes obvious that you have a far different agenda.
  27. 6 points
    Spare me the patronage. "A non believer is a non believer" ... <?> Please. I've been around the creatures, I've recorded them, I've seen their footprints, I've seen their handprints, and I've seen one at a long-term research area I've been a part of since 2006. It's not that I don't believe they exist. My issue thus far in this thread (as several others time to time) has been "evidence by consensus" that would never stand up to scruitiny in the real world outside of a bigfoot forum. It's been said a couple time by others that no one is trying to prove anything to anyone with this thermal video, but putting photos and captions about "the big guy" / "The Ridgewalker" and having a URL with the word *bigfoot* in it isn't exactly trying to conceal one's convictions that this is exactly what the thermal *is*. It can't be both ways. If this kind of evidence were so self revealing and self explanitory, we ought to call CNN right now and get a presser scheduled, but no one here can possibley believe anything about what's been shown in this thread would begin to pass scientific judgement were it released. Bigfoot forums are a great place to shoot the breeze about "what ifs" and "ain't it cool that" kind of stuff, but in the end, consensus about undefinable evidence is one of the more damning self-inflicted wounds we can give ourselves. And sadly, it seems to be the norm now that bigfooting is such a popular thing as it's become in American culture.
  28. 6 points
    I usually just read this thread, since DNA studies are far outside my expertise and I wisely don't pretend otherwise. But what I wish to comment on is human nature and the complexities of science or research trying to function in a media driven world. I do not have any "inside information" at to how powerful, sweeping or earth-shattering this final report will be. But everything I do know about the event, both public discussion and private discussions, suggests to me this event is a sincere effort to do something unpresidented (used in the manner that the event is not common and thus common procedures do not suffice or apply) and that the principles, especially Dr. Ketchum, are making a good faith effort to navigate uncharted waters. The talk about her lawyers, the often described NDA from hell, this recent spate of DVD media comments and the various gossiping about people hooking up or breaking away, all of it appears to me as people here just trying to reinforce their own biased agendas. She and the people connected with her effort are likely having to improvise some of the steps in their process, simply because of the potential for this endeavor to rock so many boats (depending on the form it finally takes) and people walking a new path make occasional mis-steps in the process. Add to that the fact that real life is messy and imperfect, and these can easily account for the conflicting reports and announcements, the delays, and the somewhat erratic way partial bits of information get released. Maybe we should just dial down the speculation and the rush to declare ourselves winners of the betting pool, and simply let Ms. Ketchum and her team do their work, and when something is released, we take a hard look at that reality instead of rampant fantasies and apparitions we see in the factual bits and pieces that occasionally surface. If it's for real, it'll surface in proper form at the appropriate time. if it's a big con, the people involved will themselves try to hype it up to make it fly. So if I may offer my personal advice, let the principles do their thing, and let us simply observe and be patient, with no expectation. I think it's our fabricating our own expectations and talking them up which is churning the water to a muddy mess where nobody is seeing clearly. My two cents. I'll go back to observing and being patient, with no expectation. Bill
  29. 5 points
    Hey guys, I am new here and have a little bit more information as to where they are and also was looking for a place to vent about this show. First I do believe there is substantial evidence showing something is out there but without actually encountering one it is hard to say for sure. The area they are in is on private property, it is known as Antone ranch here is a link to their website www.antoneranch.com So either Antone ranch got a hold of someone to report a bunch of sightings and bring them in to search or the production is paying a lot of money to be there because the ranch looks like people pay to go hunting, fishing and other things on it. The airstrip to the north is so clients can fly in and hunt and fish. Now for the venting.... If you are going to make a show about something as controversial as bigfoot and be authentic you had better be accurate with everything you say on the show. As others have said their distances are way off they say something is 4 miles away when it's actually only 1 mile, for example the clearing they are investigating they said it was 2 miles long when it's about a half mile long. If the reason they are doing all this is to try to hide where they are then DON'T SHOW THE LAKES. Between the big lake and the small one that looks like a bear, which was shown on the lidar scans in the first episode, I was able to find this place in 5 minutes on google maps. Besides that I do enjoy the show but I find myself doubting more than I should. Ok now I feel much better thank you for letting me do that.
  30. 5 points
    I don't think that is a correct analysis. Not for the person who has observed one. A person who has truly studied the evidence .. in detail .. will, without exception, conclude there is something going on worthy of further inquiry. It is circular logic, absolutely: a person who does not conclude that IS NOT, despite their possible claims to the contrary, sufficiently familiar with the evidence. The process of scientific discovery necessarily includes looking for things before we have proof they exist. Anything less requires all discoveries to be made by accident. MIB
  31. 5 points
    Nah. The only negative responses I've gotten in person were from people who were afraid of ridicule themselves if they didn't ridicule me. That shows weakness of character I find pitiful. Online I've gotten some crap but some of the same people who publicly gave me crap, again apparently out of fear of being ridiculed for not ridiculing me, came to me privately and asked for input on situations they've found themselves in. All in all, for me, standing up for what I've seen has been more positive than negative. Even if it weren't, it's still the right thing to do. MIB
  32. 5 points
    Back to the Book Cliffs, near the Reservation, escaping 100+ degrees by getting up to 9700 feet. Cool nights to low 50s. Only saw one Muley. Beginning to think there isn't enough water up there to keep a Sas happy. A very quiet night, not even insect sounds, sleeping in the Rover with rear door and windows open. Camp was perched with a panoramic view and again, spent time with binocs watching clearings in the forest below and walking along old trail and forest rd after dusk. Lots of open sagebrush out there too. Camp, facing S : Just below the sagebrush "rim" in font of the truck: Some of the acres sagebrush: Scanning the forest below: And to the N: On the way down:
  33. 5 points
    gigantor, Here it is, really no comparison to the PGF sasquatch. Just another example of a man in a suit lookin' nothin' like the filmed sasquatch seen in the PGF. Even the few steps he takes wearin' the suit, he seems to have trouble with. Pat...
  34. 5 points
    For anyone interested, here is a basic primer on some of Google Earth's functions. My son introduced me to the program 13 years ago this month, shortly after we migrated from dial-up to broadband internet. Since then I have spent uncounted hours using Google Earth, including looking for our elusive bi-pedal primate. While I do use the mobile version of the app on my phone and tablet, it is much more limited in function and can be difficult to navigate at close range compared to the computer version. The following info is for the PC computer version, not sure if or how it may vary on a Mac. A year of two ago, Google made the Pro version available for free to replace the standard version. To ensure you have the latest version, click the Help button in the menu bar and select about. The dialog box should match the following image, if it doesn't just go to the Google Earth home page in your browser and update to the latest version: A quick way to determine if an object is a living creature or a landscape feature is to use the Historical Imagery tool; it is the small clock face icon with a green arrow wrapped around in a counter clockwise direction. To demonstrate I'm using an angled view of Yosemite Valley from about 2,000' above the valley floor. The first image is what shows without activating the function and is from 5/26/14. When you begin using this function you will notice, as in subsequent images, that the newest image may not be the one generally displayed when not using the historical imagery, which is generally the best of recent images. Also, for whatever reason, the views are sometimes out of order with a newer one showing up in an "older" spot on the slider, and sometimes the dates are inconsistent with the image, i.e. an image of a deciduous forest may appear with no leaves showing in an image dated in mid July, or vice-versa. On all but one of these images, I'm using the Snip tool in Windows to save the images rather than the Save Image button second from the right in the tool bar above the image area in the program. The reason is so that all of the tools and information show, which they do not if using the Save Image button as below: This will allow sharing a wider overview of an area without disclosing the actual latitude and longitude, which the OP has expressed a desire to keep confidential. The following are some representative examples of the historical images for this location, though there are many more not shown, more than in less well known areas. Notice that the newest is from 2017, but is of poorer quality than the default 2014 image. The 2012 image, as well as the oldest image from 1987 are both monochrome: The button fifth from the right is a ruler and opens a dialog box that allows measuring distances in miles or kilometers, or the size of smaller objects using meters, yards, feet, inches, etc. It allows straight line and path measuring, as well as some geometric functions I haven't explored: The next image shows a random line measured across the valley floor in feet; note that the result is shown in Map length (point to point), Ground length (accounting for terrain covered) as well as the compass heading of the line: There is an option for saving the measurements which allows the line color, width and transparency to be adjusted. Using the push pin icon in the toolbar allows a location to be saved in the same way. The next two images show the dialog boxes for identifying the location and setting the color of the marker pin and the legend appearing on the screen. You can also change the color of the pin or even select a different icon as I did with the tent icon in the second image. Note on the bar to the left of the image area, there is a box for Places. The last entry now shows the location I just saved highlighted in blue. While I have over a hundred saved locations and paths, they only show up in the image area if the box to the left of the item is checked. Things would be pretty crowded on my screen in some areas if all of the saved locations and paths were showing at the same time. The last item I'll cover is the Photorealistic 3D option (this is also available in the mobile version though the operation is a bit different). This option is relatively recent and new areas are added all the time. The 3-D images are created in a separate operation. The area selected is overflown in a grid pattern by a specially equipped aircraft using eight Hi Def cameras each pointing down at a different angle. The images are compiled by computer algorithm and are pretty spectacular (there is a youtube video explaining the process but you'll have to find it on your own). The option is selected in the Layers section at the bottom of the left hand sidebar. The next image shows the same area in Photorealistic 3-D: Hope this is useful. There are many functions I've never used in Google Earth, but if anyone has questions I'll try to answer.
  35. 5 points
    Folks, I don't know about you but this SSR effort is just hands-down a monumental achievement. The concept and subsequent execution of such a task has not been only about classifying the source data- it has also been about working out the bugs in the program and system along the way to which GIGANTOR (and the name SHOULD BE in all caps ) can take the credit as he patiently took in all of the notifications of glitches in the SSR and worked through them in order to have the data perform as desired. BobbyO, who worked diligently in every spare moment he could muster, and RedBone who has been nothing short of a juggernaut who has been unstoppable on getting report after report pigeon holed into the dataset. We owe these people a immense tip of the hat and I personally thank them for what they have done though my thanks falls way short of what they deserve, Thank you guys for staying with your goals when I fell behind, and for doing it all so incredibly well.
  36. 5 points
    “One indicator of the solidity of the science...the skeptics/"critical thinkers" won't go anywhere near it. They cannot refute, or even deal with it. Hence...it's solid.” If your using the reactions of internet message board skeptics as validation for your “science” I kind of hardly doubt it is real science. Then again some of the “science” you speak of is posting pics of Patty next to basketball players......
  37. 5 points
    Check this out. http://www.foxnews.com/science/2016/03/22/bear-bone-found-in-1903-alters-story-ireland.html?intcmp=hpbt4 A single piece of evidence, obtained decades ago, re-examined using modern forensic techniques, rewrites history. That's the scientific process. But our resident skeptics insist that: The PGF, obtained decades ago, re-examined by NatGeo using modern forensic techniques and determined to depict a non-human subject, isn't part of the scientific process. The scientific process is the scientific process no matter what subject is being examined. I think our resident skeptics make up their own version of the scientific process to suit them. And it changes by the post.
  38. 5 points
    Date: 2013 Season: Late fall/early winter Time of Day/night: Mid day 1300-1400 hrs Weather: Snowing, medium to heavy. Sky slightly over cast. Location: East Coast, Canada Number of people present: 1 Details: I had gone hunting, was my second last outing of the season. I arrived to the location set up a small blind watching a clearing and a small deer trail. Remember there being good sign on the ground. Tracks ranging from a few days old to fresh. Also some droppings, fairly fresh. There was no sounds in the woods, which is very odd for the area. No birds or squirrels. It was just a dead quiet. I set my scent lures out and checked my line of sight from the blind. Gave a few grunt calls and rattled my antlers. every so often thought I'd hear like a clapping sound. Like someone just smacked their hands together. Like smack - - - smack. Than stop. Went on for a while. Around 11:30 a family friend showed up. It was snowing, big flakes, by this time off and on. He walked up to my blind and we talked. He asked me if anything was moving. Told him no. He than asked me if I was with anyone else, was my father or uncle with me. Told him no I was alone. He said he thought he saw a guy in a black coat and pants darting off the trail a ways back towards the road. Odd to us both as family only ones given the go to hunt there. Both thought little of it and he left. I sat for a bit, hoped the sound of an engine might stir up something. Gave a few more calls and again thought heard some clapping. Little while later I decided I'd walk down the trail and check my uncles set for him. If there was a person around thought check the trail cameras. By this time the snow was coming down more heavy, still big flakes and hard to see clearly. I moved down the trail and took the side trail to my uncles set. As I rounded the bend and started down the hill I saw something black in the trail. It was big, thought it might be a bear so I stopped ( I had been walking quietly in case of deer.) and took a look. Again snow coming down and hard to see clearly but not so bad as to not be able to identify things. Noticed the object was standing on 2 legs. I first thought is this the guy my family friend had seen. They were walking away from me. Thought it was weird the person was wearing all black in the woods during hunting season as law states must have blaze orange on head and upper body (visible from all sides). I kept going down the trail. I gave a call out "Hey" and raised one hand (had my rifle across my chest). The figure stopped turned slightly side ways. I called again, the figure turned their upper body, leaning back a bit to look my direction and walked into the brush. I walked to where they were standing wondering why they had done that. Got to where they had been standing and noticed marks on the ground, faint marks. Snow was coming down pretty good and ground was white. Heard a noise in the woods, like a grunt. I called out whose there. Growl sound followed. By now I thought it could be a bear in the woods. I called again and said something like if you are a person come out now. I'll count to 3 than I'll fire a round. Was a grunting growl sound and a clap. I started to count and a loud cracking sound with a clap was heard. Crack sounded similar to a tree breaking. Still thinking it might be a person (though bear was winning out) in there I did not want to fire. Clapping got louder and more cracking. Felt a sense like fear and at this time thinking it might be a bear fired one round into a large dead stump just in front of a small bank of earth (no pass through). Please note I am not proud of this, I have a hard time knowing I did than. No sooner did the bang of the gun die down a loud wailing howl came from the woods, seemed like a tree shaking as well. I ran, could hear the sound of something in the woods to my right moving. I tried to ignore it. IT either worked or it stopped. I got to the T section to the trail and tried to catch my breathe. Brought rifle to my shoulder and looked down the trail I had come from. figured if it broke the tree line I'd get a good look. Heard clapping in front of me followed by clapping close behind me. I ran got in my truck and left the area. I know sounds crazy but that is it. Figure in question: Roughly 6-7 feet. Black in colour. Wide shoulders. never saw a clear view of the face. Kept it's head slightly forward (like one does walking into the snow). I know it was not a bear. Fairly certain it was not a person. Other info: Still hunt the area. Mostly farms around the woods, close to the coast. The sound scared me pretty good. Had a hard time sleeping from it for a few days. Still a little nervous to tell the truth. Though cannot say for sure what it was. If a Sasquatch or a person. Any help would be great. Clapping was the weirdest part for me.
  39. 5 points
    One can insist that a cryptid is just a wishful manifestation of myth or folklore, but consider this: If a cryptid exists and has been encountered by mankind, then it must also exist in folklore.
  40. 5 points
    Would you people please quit making those mile long posts that forces others to scroll forever to get past them!
  41. 5 points
    I think a lot of the "denialists" as the OP names them find it amusing to debunk most of the crazy claims made by some proponents. They are here for the fun of challenging the implausible claims, it's easy trolling for sure, but they do provide a form of check/balance against the veracity of some stories. The BFF has a plethora of threads containing claims debunked by "denialists". It keeps the forum real and I for one am happy to have them. That is what makes the BFF unique IMO, you can't come here and tell fairy tales without being challenged. They will be examined. It's a good thing.
  42. 5 points
    What you know is your own experience but not the experience of others. If I understand you correctly you spent a long time rejecting anything that strongly suggested your opinion was wrong. Now we are to believe you are not like that any more. Roll the irony.... Backdoc
  43. 5 points
    No burn. Only deliberate curiosity. If you take this approach, and keep your expectations in check, you do not make yourself vulnerable at all. I keep my eyeballs peeled when I am out of doors anyway, always. If I spot something that fits my understanding of what this animal is, I will have chalked up another experience of the kind I hope to have plenty of by the time I croak. If I don't, I'll still have lots to reflect on that is pretty special too. I think we call this outcome a "win-win", am I right? No timetable. Low expectations. Look for consistencies in the evidence and follow it. Do that, and you're playing the long, smart game, I believe. I"m astounded at all the mind-blowing discoveries that have been made in my short life. None (Repeat: NONE) of those were my due, or anyone else's. They could just have easily not happened. I'm just grateful to my fellow humans that they expended the calories to make them, or were paying attention when those were dropped in their laps, and had the presence to document them when they did. I'm thankful for all those adults and teachers who steered me right as a kid to pay attention to that kind of knowledge, and who stoked my energy to stay curious, to this day. Life would be a pretty grim undertaking without that... for me at least. I try to find a down-side to this field of inquiry, and I'm frankly unable to ever see any.
  44. 5 points
    Where to begin...... 1) From day one you have attacked the NAWAC, Project Grendel and the pro kill stance in general. And while you were not able to dig up any dirt on me, you and I traded barbs in my Kill Club thread quite a while ago philosophically. But for the NAWAC this isn't true...... You have done your best to undermine public opinion against the NAWAC! 2) Specifically? Area X ! You openly admit you do not know where area X is.....but you SUGGEST it's Mr. Branson's 10 acre plot. That's simply slanderous....... 3) The Echo incident. STOP! You feel pro kill proponents are bad people, bad people shouldn't carry guns.......fine! That's your opinion! The bill of rights disagrees with you! Get over it!!!!!! It is not illegal for me to carry a gun in the woods because I believe in Bigfoot, Zombies or the Mothman. 4) Pro kill proponents are in it for the money? What money? You would be better off taking your money and playing powerball! 5) There are no squatches in area X? Again you have no idea where area X is! Do you deny that reports come from this region of Oklahoma? 6) What about you? What did the tribal leaders teach you about them that made you shuck your evil ways?
  45. 5 points
    I was aware of that fact, but was sorely disappointed when he decided that he wouldn't address his claims regarding the "tree break" incident and took off down the road. So, claiming that a slab monkey would be the only proof he'd provide substantiates the claims made along the way? Really? Somehow I doubt that Bipto and the credentialed members of the NAWAC would accept claims presented to them without proof based on a promise, or at least they shouldn't. At any rate, he has and continues to slam the BFF for allowing questions from skeptics and proponents skeptical of his claims. Why is that? All we did is provide him with his own thread to post his observations in. If he can't handle questioning or those that don't believe his claims, that's not our problem. It's his problem.
  46. 5 points
    Well folks the witness which myself and a fellow researcher have been trying to track down has responded to a few questions. He has also asked for confidentiality so i will not post his name. I will just post some of his key answers here. He was asked the date footage was shot? (Summer of 2011) He did not remember the exact date. He was asked how many people were there? ( two) Asked how long long they observed it? ( about 5 minutes) Asked how far away they were from it? ( 500 meters) Now I personally feel the distance was far greater than that but I was not there he was. Asked about camera? (small Pentax point and shoot) Asked if he felt it was walking upright? (he felt that there is no way that this could have been a four legged animal and as far as he is concerned it was walking on two legs) In my opinion he could be wrong as I still think the distance was far greater then he he thought. But again it is what the witness states that matters. Did they attempt to go to the location of the subject? (No) Asked who in the party noticed the subject first? (He did) Asked if they had binoculars? (No) Asked why they were there? (Summer Scramble) Spent some time trying to get clarification of this term. Found it means to climb mountain passes and faces which are not difficult enough to require mountaineering equipment. Asked how old he is and is he a BC resident? (30 years old and yes he resides in BC Canada.) Since he has gone to Alberta for awhile He has little time to think about all this however I will be sending more questions and hope to have some more answers soon. Thomas Steenburg
  47. 5 points
    Since I'm posting about forum rules and reports, this is a staff statement. The ignore function is a wonderful tool. Unfortunately, the staff can't use it because we have to be able to see and review every post. However, that's nearly impossible on a forum this large. This is why we have a report function on the forum. If you see a post that doesn't keep with the rules you can, and should, report it. Having said that, both sides of the proverbial fence are welcome to participate in the discussion. Note the term "discussion." Members are free to question statements and conclusions made by other members, but they're not free to do so in a disrespectful manner. They're also not free to keep pounding the same question(s) at another member repeatedly if the member doesn't answer, or if the member doesn't answer the question to their satisfaction. That's antagonistic behavior, which is trolling. No member of the BFF has an obligation to answer any question, particularly when the question is intended to imply misdeeds or wrongdoing by those skeptical of their efforts or of their intentions. We welcome skeptics on the forum, but not when they are cynical about it. To constantly pound a member because you want to imply that they're somehow wrong or hoaxing is not cool. If you find proof of this, then yes, it's fair game, and a member can actually be removed from the BFF if the evidence shows that they were involved in a hoax. My staff hat is now off. These statements are my own. It's perfectly legal to apply for and benefit from a tax-exempt status. Your standard of what should be tax-exempt isn't necessarily that of the government. I fail to see how this even comes into play in this discussion other than to attempt to imply that the member is doing so in a fraudulent manner. This is nothing more than an attempt to cast doubt onto someone's character, which I find to be rather weak and underhanded. If someone is abusing their tax-exempt status, that's between them and the government. How it has anything to do with the member and the validity of their claims and evidence is beyond me.
  48. 5 points
    I understand why you may feel that way, but it's not that simple. We have to pay the forum's expenses somehow. Premium Membership Plans benefit every member of the BFF in that regard. That's the only way to keep the forum going without annoying ads, soliciting donations, or some generous member(s) providing the money from their own pockets. The other alternative is to let the forum go out of existence, and I don't think that anyone wants that to happen. Ads have been shown to frustrate forum users, thus driving down traffic which affects ad values. Although it's been claimed by many members that they'd gladly donate the needed funds, that's hard to budget because you don't know how much or even if members will donate at all, or if the gifted amounts will be sufficient for the needed funding. Expecting anyone to pay out of their pocket (as was done routinely before the implementation of the Premium Access Forum) is unreasonable, especially in this economy. So, allowing free access to the Premium Access Forum doesn't solve any problems. It causes hard choices such as those listed above. The General Forum is provided free to all members due to the appreciated support of our Premium Members. For only $20 dollars a year, it's a lot of bang for the buck. A Premium Membership Plan purchase helps to ensure that all of our members can enjoy the BFF for the foreseeable future. For that support, the BFF offers two forums (The Tar Pit and General Bigfoot/Sasquatch Discussion) as a place to allow our valued supporters to express themselves as they wish to a huge degree. This is a product we can offer to those wishing to help support the entire forum with their hard-earned money. In addition to those two forums, there's the BFF 1.0 Archives, The BFF Virtual Library (including the late, great Tirademan's Historical Archives), The Sightings Database Project, uncensored news feeds, and much more. I'd like to take a moment to thank our Premium Members and to encourage our regular members to consider joining them by purchasing a PMP. If you choose not to purchase a PMP, you may continue to enjoy the General Forum free of charge because of the generosity of our Premium Members. If you're interested in supporting the entire BFF, you may sign up today by visiting this link - http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/30015-important-news-premium-access-memberships-are-now-available/ If you have any questions or need help with your application, contact an Admin. They'll be happy to assist you.
  49. 5 points
    Does this include those that ask questions of TJ, or just him? You did say "everyone." TJ wasn't exactly accepting of others that had questions of him or that wanted to offer other possibilities for what he was experiencing. He wasn't very respectful, either. Just as you claim that everyone should be treated with respect, I claim that those that present extraordinary claims should expect to have those claims questioned. They should also remain civil with those questioning those claims when it is presented in a respectful manner. Let me assure you that TJ was treated as he treated others. If you didn't accept his findings exactly as presented, you were called names and slammed for lack of experience. He was all-knowing, and anyone that might have disagreed or questioned him was a dunce. The staff - including myself - worked very hard with this member to help him curtail his posting behavior. Yeah, I suppose that all of that extra effort we spent on him trying to help was disgraceful. Yep, poor ol' completely innocent TJ was treated disgracefully. I swear... Some folks just want to blame everything and anyone else for the consequences suffered by those they choose to align themselves with. If anything, TJ was treated with an extra measure of respect on the forum and by the staff, yet he's still gone due to his behavior, not because of what others said. Everyone's responsible for their own behavior, including TJ.
  50. 5 points
    parnassus: You are obviously a strong advocate for the idea the film is a hoax, and the Bob Heironimous story is true. I am a strong advocate for the idea the film is authentic, and Bob Heironimous is not in the picture (and neither is any other human in a costume). The chances of either of us convincing the other that we are correct is probably close to zero. But the goal is not that either of us will change the other's outlook. The goal is to achieve a consensus of the world at large, scholars, scientists, media and the general populace ideally, as to one final and factual conclusion so the story can be closed and archived as "solved". That solution, whatever it may be, will take funding. I'm not having much luck finding it right now, so my efforts are impeded by that reality. Research costs money to be done right. Smilarly, for all your internet discussion activity, I do not see you making any progress or impact toward a true and final solution. Maybe you should try publishing some form of report, formal analysis or document of research and conclusion. Bottom line, you apparently don't take me seriously, and I can assure you I do not take you seriously. That is probably the one thing we have in common. Maybe one day the world at large will decide one of us is serious. It'll be fascinating to see which one of us that was. Bill
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...