Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/30/2010 in all areas

  1. 12 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. 10 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.
  3. 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!
  4. 9 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!
  5. 8 points
    Man you just keep banging that gavel on your fingers. You treated me with contempt DWA so don't expect any further respect from me.
  6. 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.
  7. 8 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.
  8. 8 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
  9. 8 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
  10. 7 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.
  11. 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
  12. 7 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
  13. 7 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...
  14. 7 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.
  15. 7 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.
  16. 7 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
  17. 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.
  18. 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..........
  19. 6 points
    Oh c'mon! You're selling yourself short! You get mocked for a bunch of other reasons too!
  20. 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
  21. 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.
  22. 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...
  23. 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.
  24. 6 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.
  25. 6 points
    Bigfoot World Rules: 1) make amazing announcement, details to follow 2) details do not follow/ upon date of revelation; nothing 3) rinse wash repeat Conclusion: just as the suit turned out to be a hoax, so is this. In both cases, were there anything of merit, it would have appeared long ago- for example: "I have the diary and here it is". There is no diary.
  26. 6 points
    In closing I will say this, we proponents have failed to provide proof to science that this creature exists. Its not all our fault as DWA points out from a Bindernagel point of view. We are laymen with jobs, children, spouses, house payments and a giant laundry list of reasons why our time in the forests of NA is limited. Science for the most part agrees with those that say there is nothing left to be discovered here. But as I said before, discoveries are being made, very important ones that advance our knowledge about the bushy tree of primatology today. And I do not see this slackening, perhaps if a fossil discovery was found in Siberia or Alaska that would support that perhaps other homonids made the same trek we did? Science might sit up and take notice, or at least that is my hope. I will continue to pack a rifle in my scabbard in the off chance I run into something interesting, after all its the journey that counts. Later.
  27. 6 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.
  28. 6 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?
  29. 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?
  30. 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.
  31. 6 points
    You don't really read other people's posts entirely, do you? I've already provided you with facts, not assumptions. This makes it very difficult to have a logical dialogue with you when you rant about something, I reply with more than sufficient factual information to counter your argument, and you come back ranting as if you've only read, or perhaps understood, half of the information provided to you. I'll make one last attempt by repeating the information I have previously provided. If you persist in not reading it fully, then I see no further point in dialoguing with you. The three mummified skeletons were discovered in a cave near Walker Lake, Nevada by guano miners about the same time as the mummified skeletons from Lovelock Cave were discovered. Based on the artifacts found with them, they were from the same race of people that occupied Lovelock Cave, referred to by the Paiutes as Si-Teh-Cah. The three skeletons were placed on display at the Mark Twain Museum in Virginia City, Nevada for decades. The display consisted of a male skeleton, well over seven feet tall, a female skeleton seven feet tall, and a juvenile skeleton in the same mummified state, but under six feet tall. Keep in mind that this is two feet taller than the contemporary Paiutes. There were atlatls and atlatl darts displayed with them, as well as other artifacts including woven partially decayed woven baskets, etc. They had decayed clothing consisting of coarsely woven plant fiber. There was still hair attached to the remaining skin, not just on their heads, but also on their arms and shoulders, where it was about two inches in length. The hair was red, as it was with the Lovelock Cave remains. I personally viewed the remains several times between 1969 and 1978. In 1991, I visited the Museum and they were gone and I assumed that they had been repatriated by the Paiutes. In 2011 I decided to try and track them down. I visited the Museum in Virginia City and the Nevada Historical Society adjacent the the UNR campus. I finally learned that the remains were not repatriated by the Paiutes (the Paiutes are adamant that the remains are from the race of cannibals with whom they warred and eventually wiped out). The big revelation was that it was BLM who took the skeletons. I do not believe that the remains are bigfoot remains, but they do appear to be from the same race of people whose remains are reported from different areas the country. These people continued to use atlatls long after all other tribes were using bows, which makes sense because their longer arms would have provided greater power and range with atlatls than the bows used by shorter peoples. Also a large bow, sized to them, crafted from the same materials used by other tribes would not have withstood the force of a longer and stronger pull. Si-Teh-Cah, by the way, means stick thrower people. This is consistent with the use of atlatls. So, in a nutshell. Remains of three large individuals from an uncatalogued race of people two feet taller, on the average (males between seven and eight feet), than the contemporary natives were on display. The government got hold of them. They are no longer available to the public. This is exactly what Thomas Powell, the first Director or the Smithsonian's Bureau of Ethnology, was trying to suppress. The "unwise", as he called it, use of the anthropological information acquired by researchers at the time included links to what Powell referred to as "tribes of antiquity" from the Old World. If this information became widely accepted it would have threatened Manifest Destiny. He was worried that the public may begin to view some of the native peoples as descendants of European tribes mentioned in the Old Testament and that this would bolster the theological assertions of the people settling Utah at the time, with whom the government was at odds.
  32. 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.
  33. 6 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
  34. 5 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!
  35. 5 points
    They know your mind and they know your heart. "Worthiness" is why 99.99% of persons attempting an encounter will fail. ShadowBorn, it never occurred to me that 'ShadowBorn' could be an Indian name. I am 100% anglo, but if I had an indian name it would be " Slower traffic keep right".
  36. 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...
  37. 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.
  38. 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......
  39. 5 points
    Squatchy: A few things you fail to notice or acknowledge: 1. When one offers analysis and conclusions based in part upon personal experience and knowledge, it is generally acceptable, indeed necessary, to establish what that experience is and how that knowledge was acquired. Any expert witness in an evidentiary proceeding would first be asked for a description of experience and training as a foundation for the subsequent analysis and conclusions. 2. Roger's "backstory" is mostly other people trying to recall incidents with Roger 25-30 years before the interview, and in most cases no empirical evidence is offered to corroborate (such as photographs from the recollection). Recollections of one person talking about experiences with another person is vastly different from one's talking about their own experiences. And because the PGf controversy has been a public topic throughout this time when those interviewed about roger were recalling, we must factor in how the public discussion may have modified or altered their recollections. Memory studies seem to verify this phenomenon occurs. What is worst about the PGF backstory is people offering exact statements of "Roger said this. . . ." when I have no confidence in the exact words anyone said 25-30 years ago. I can recall events, yes, and some interactions with people, but I have no confidence anyone recalls exact words spoken from that long ago. People who rely on the backstory however, hang on those claimed quotes with "But Roger said" (followed by a quote from some anecdote). Unless you've got it on audio tape, expecting an anecdotal quote to be accurate is wishful thinking. 3. I have explained many times, that empirical evidence is far superior to anecdotal evidence, and if you have both, all reason and scientific protocol will expect you use the best evidence, not the worst. With the PGF, we have both. So I choose to rely upon the best evidence, and avoid the worst evidence because it is unreliable, imperfect, and ambiguous. The backstory material is the worst anecdotal evidence. 4. Finally, the book is a chronicle of my research effort. So yes, I'm in the book, and I draw from my experience, my knowledge, and my research activities. I respect my accomplishment and I present it with confidence. But the truth is, you, like my other detractors, just plain hate to read anything which describes me as knowledgeable, experienced or successful, because it keeps getting in the way of your delusion of me in the more negative perception you are trying to embrace. 5. I long ago ceased to be concerned with your opinion of me and my work. That said, have a nice day. Bill xspider1: Yep, I'm looking for the truth. Always have, always will. I'll take it in any form it comes in, whether it makes me happy or sad, whether it's confirming what I expect or totally astonishing me with something I never expected. If it's the truth, I'll take it.
  40. 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.
  41. 5 points
    Giganto asking people to trust him because he is a certified photogrammetrist, over the last 4+ years. I haven't said that term until yesterday. If you are asking someone to trust your work based on credentials, and you don't provide that, then no. Just no.
  42. 5 points
    I think this whole argument is a giant black hole. Some people believe, some don't, neither one will ever convince the other of their position. Think for yourself and believe the way you wish and let others do the same.
  43. 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.
  44. 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
  45. 5 points
    You nailed it UPs! Congratulations! This image was taken at our local winter fair, which is the third largest fair of its kind in Canada. The lady is a veterinarian chiropractor and allowed me to take the picture of the Clydesdale show horse and her. She had detected the horse's left rear hip out of alignment. After taking the image and showing the increased inflammation of the hip to her, she was quite amazed how it confirmed her diagnosis. But not as amazed as I was with her, on how she manipulated and realigned the huge hip! Here's the next image for a 4th Premier membership giveaway. This image is a tad tougher. I did not include a temperature palette, and I changed up the color palette of it. Think thermally, not photo shop, and it will make sense. Thanks Chele. Its a lot of fun and I don't mind helping out where I can. Mom and Dad were givers and passed that trait on to my sibs and myself. Merry Christmas to one and all, and you. Funny RA! Plusses for Chele and you.
  46. 5 points
    At this point those that NEED to know where X is KNOW! Why do we have to keep beating this topic of disclosure and revelation of research areas. I oppose this line of questioning on the grounds that if Branson wanted us to know he'd send us the plat to post up personally.
  47. 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
  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
    BS. It's simple negative reinforcement in most cases. You experience something extraordinary, share it, and get shot down by folks who are certain that you're somehow mistaken. After a while you keep it to yourself for the most part and only share with those who are sincerely interested. Debating skeptics, IMO, is nothing more than a waste of time. At some point you simply decide that they're no longer deserving of your time and effort.
  50. 5 points
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
  • Create New...