Guest HairyGreek Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 I agree, if those looking in know the facts so to be able to offer an informed opinion. I give up. You are all knowing. I will work on my google skills and faulty deductive reasoning. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) I give up. You are all knowing. I will work on my google skills and faulty deductive reasoning. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. From your past response ... it was your not thinking about using Google to seek out more information on this subject ... not that your Google skills needed work ... I have no data concerning your Google skills. So don't take offense, for we all must set our own standards of research and live with them. Dahinden set his - Steenburg has his - I have mine - and you have yours which is something that we are entitled to. I appreciate any comments you have that may add more information to an issue being discussed. I may not agree with you for my previously stated reasons, but I certainly support your right to say what you like. Cheers! Edited August 25, 2011 by Bigfoothunter
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 From your past response ... it was your not thinking about using Google to seek out more information on this subject ... not t5hat they needed work. So don't take offense, for we all must set our own standards of research and live with them. Dahinden set his - Steenburg has his - I have mine - and you have yours which is something that we are entitled to. I appreciate any comments you have that may add more information to an issue being discussed. I may not agree with you for previously stated reasons, but I certainly support your right to say what you like. Cheers! Fair enough. I will revisit this whole scenario and your final study on the matter IF it makes it onto the EP release or Brisson blows up into the next Bindernagel (I googled that). Sorry that you continue to miss my sarcasm regarding google. As for the rest, you need to understand though that all of this type of thinking is being applied to the PGF 40 years later. Even though most on this board believe that it (at least) may be a Sas, there are still those that feel Patterson could have been going up there to film a hoax when he got the real thing...or that Herrono-whatever is telling the truth and the whole thing is a lie. I believe that truth is self evident and is not subjective. But truth and proof is not the same thing. All you can do without being an eyewitness and recording it for others is provide proof to create a reasonable doubt. The rest is up to the person this information is told to. I am still waiting on that as far as the "stump incident" goes. The rock-throwing issue seems pretty cut and dried if there are several unconected eye-witnesses to this behavior. I am sorry that I don't simply believe everything I read on first review. Thank you for your hard work on this matter.
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) Fair enough. I will revisit this whole scenario and your final study on the matter IF it makes it onto the EP release or Brisson blows up into the next Bindernagel (I googled that). Sorry that you continue to miss my sarcasm regarding google. As for the rest, you need to understand though that all of this type of thinking is being applied to the PGF 40 years later. Even though most on this board believe that it (at least) may be a Sas, there are still those that feel Patterson could have been going up there to film a hoax when he got the real thing...or that Herrono-whatever is telling the truth and the whole thing is a lie. I believe that truth is self evident and is not subjective. But truth and proof is not the same thing. All you can do without being an eyewitness and recording it for others is provide proof to create a reasonable doubt. The rest is up to the person this information is told to. I am still waiting on that as far as the "stump incident" goes. The rock-throwing issue seems pretty cut and dried if there are several unconected eye-witnesses to this behavior. I am sorry that I don't simply believe everything I read on first review. Thank you for your hard work on this matter. Thanks and well stated. I think there will always be those who don't want the P/G creature to be real. I wondered about it myself. However, the more I learned about the mechanics in its movements, read about the inter-membral index, found more information like Patterson having called to have a tracking dog brought in, wanting to stay even if it meant gimlin coming back from washington to get him, the more it because real for me. With doubters, I usually find that they haven't really looked very hard at the evidence. Not ignorant people, but ignorant about the evidence. I can't tell others just how happy I am that Munns is applying an applied science to get true accurate data from the film. This will be far better than looking at body alignment illustrations that do not have the views of the subjects on the same planes and so on. For instance, the bulge on the leg ... some say its car keys in Bob Hs jeans pocket ... so I look at the possibility and find that the bulge appears lower on the leg than the pockets in a pair of jeans. In fact, it shows up just above the knee. I consideedr Bob H saying that the legs were covered in hair over what appeared to be rubber lined hip type waders. that scenario that some of come up with just doesn't wash. I watch the shock wave move through the leg when the weight is applied to the muscle during the foots impact to the ground. I listened as a body builder spoke of how the musclers on the subject don't just move, but move in conjuction with what is supposed to happen during particulat movements. I guess what I am saying is that with understanding comes knowledge. It is the applied knowledge that ends up being all we have to go on. To someone who hasn't looked at the specifics of the subjects movements, then I can certainly see why they see it as just some guy in a monkey suit ... after all, thats the easier approach for some. I can say this much ... the animal I saw looked a lot like the one in the P/G film with the exception of it having a narrower waist which made its upper body mass look even bigger. The head sat down in the shoulders and the arms long. The face I never saw as its back side is the only view I got. Its these kinds of pieces to the puzzle that have come together to allow me to believe the subject in Roger's film is real. Bill Edited August 25, 2011 by Bigfoothunter
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 Thanks and well stated. I think there will always be those who don't want the P/G creature to be real.... Bill Bill, I look forward to your analysis regarding the final EP cut as well as your thoughts to the conclusion of the DNA project also coming to a head in (hopefully) the near future. Dimitrios aka HairyGreek
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 Bill, I look forward to your analysis regarding the final EP cut as well as your thoughts to the conclusion of the DNA project also coming to a head in (hopefully) the near future. Dimitrios aka HairyGreek The DNA is certainly something of interest ... I only hope there is a chain of evidence that shows from where it came with images so we can finally link whats always been an unknown class of primate to now proving a known class of primate.
Guest bsruther Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 I have hope that there are no flies in the ointment, but I fear it's false hope. Could it be that Erickson felt that he needed some Canadian evidence, so he could represent? Like maybe this is his Bigfoot Olympics and he's going for the gold. And when Standing was booted out, he settled for the next big ego to come along. IMO, anyone that's even been slightly suspected of being a hoaxer shouldn't be permitted to be anywhere near research that might prove a new species...especially an alleged species whose history is filled with far more fakery than factual evidence. As far as I can see, Brisson is more than slightly suspected. He's been publicly accused and seems to offer no defense.
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 26, 2011 Posted August 26, 2011 (edited) I have hope that there are no flies in the ointment, but I fear it's false hope. Could it be that Erickson felt that he needed some Canadian evidence, so he could represent? Like maybe this is his Bigfoot Olympics and he's going for the gold. And when Standing was booted out, he settled for the next big ego to come along. IMO, anyone that's even been slightly suspected of being a hoaxer shouldn't be permitted to be anywhere near research that might prove a new species...especially an alleged species whose history is filled with far more fakery than factual evidence. As far as I can see, Brisson is more than slightly suspected. He's been publicly accused and seems to offer no defense. I am glad that someone else is posting the concerns that so may of us have had about not wanting the integrity of Sasquatch research being damaged more than it already has due to crackpots and hoaxers jumping on board., Brisson offers no defense because there is none. Furthermore, I believe that he was banned from this forum long ago for getting caught using multiple names so to make it appear he had support for his claims. Some may recall that I mentioned one Bruce McDonald doing the same and getting kicked off Westcoast Sasquatch. If someone wants to consider motive, then this pretending to be others so to praise himself may offer a glimpse as to the man's motives for always seeing Sasaquatch, being the one they only wish to show themselves to in GEP, and yet the only one who seems to have rocks thrown in his direction as if to not want him there (at least when Brisson has gotten into position where he thinks he won't be caught). Go figure! The link below takes you to another Brisson sighting claim even though the person with him saw nothing. Even comes with a Brisson photo of an alleged Sasquatch. http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/bc-sas-photo/ Hrere is another sighting claim by Brisson that came out of the woodwork in response to a topic about animal behavior. Because Brisson claims the Sasquatch to be human, its easy to see why he has gotten the blind faith support of those like-minded individuals who prefer not to check and double check ther man's history and stories. Brisson post as 'Hiker 11' : hiker11 No life here! member is offline Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 46 Re: Critical Thinking.... « Reply #23 on Oct 16, 2008, 6:56pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well I would have to say Sasquatch is not a animal, If he was he would have been hunted and caught like other animals, They do twist trees and bend them, They do have beds but not in the open, on rocky cliff areas, And yes I have seen these, and My friend and I have seen a juvunile make the whooping sound, So if you belive or not who cares, If you dont get out in those mountains all the time, Then your out of luck they wont come close or let you know there there unless they know you better, Also if you dont belive they make rock stacks and do other things then give up Squatching. They do gifting back and forth if they want, and if you leave apples and they only take the red ones and leave the green ones, It is a squatch not a bear, a bear will eat them all, as other animals do, Squatch is smart, Not a dumb animal. Edited August 26, 2011 by Bigfoothunter
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 26, 2011 Posted August 26, 2011 (edited) Hrere is another sighting claim by Brisson that came out of the woodwork in response to a topic about animal behavior. Because Brisson claims the Sasquatch to be human, its easy to see why he has gotten the blind faith support of those like-minded individuals who prefer not to check and double check ther man's history and stories. I have two things to say about your post. 1) I am starting to feel very concerned for the mental health of Brisson and I must admit, a little bit of pity is surfacing. I understand he is most likely a big-bad hoaxer, but this is all kind of sad if true. I like law and philosophy, I am not a scientist, so my arguments and emotions tend to gravitate from these two areas. 2) BFH - what will you do if the DNA shows a human or human-like relative as opposed to an ape (you know what I mean, let's not argue semantics)? Will you be disappointed? Disbelieving and feeling that something went wrong? Edited August 26, 2011 by HairyGreek
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 26, 2011 Posted August 26, 2011 name='HairyGreek' timestamp='1314377295' post='95122']2) BFH - what will you do if the DNA shows a human or human-like relative as opposed to an ape (you know what I mean, let's not argue semantics)? Will you be disappointed? Disbelieving and feeling that something went wrong? If it is found that the specimen known as Sasquatch has human DNA, then I will be happy that the animal has finally been proven beyond all doubt of its existence. Do I believe that this will be the case - no. Because if it was found to be human, then the science concerning the inter-membral index will not only be flawed, but the eye-shine found only in noctornal animals will certainly turn anthropology on its head for I have been told by two independent anthropologist that there is nothing in the record that shows than man has this capability. Great question by the way.
steenburg Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I will be to busy dancing for joy that the existence of this creature is finally confirmed. Than later shaking my head no doubt as we hear so many in the scientific community who always dismissed the idea claiming they actually believed they were there the whole time. Ape or human is really a moot point though as in a Anthropological sense humans are apes. Thomas Steenburg
steenburg Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 On thinking more about HarryGreeks question to Bigfoothunter. Ether way the DNA tests go I still want to know the history of the sample and that it actually came from what someone claims it came from. You see I still can not see how any expert can say, This is Sasquatch DNA. Since there is no confirmed sample of this creature to compare it to? Under the present circumstances the best I think we can hope for is a declaration that DNA of some new and unconfirmed species has been discovered. Thomas Steenburg
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 On thinking more about HarryGreeks question to Bigfoothunter. Ether way the DNA tests go I still want to know the history of the sample and that it actually came from what someone claims it came from. You see I still can not see how any expert can say, This is Sasquatch DNA. Since there is no confirmed sample of this creature to compare it to? Under the present circumstances the best I think we can hope for is a declaration that DNA of some new and unconfirmed species has been discovered. Thomas Steenburg Well, it is my secret hope that they can connect one of the samples tested to some sort of video evidence so it won't be as open-ended. This thread is starting to shake my belief that this is correct. Heck, this forum over the last several days is shaking my belief that it is even possible to get any substantial evidence tied to them at all. I certainly do not think these are apes anymore after reading so many points. Again, I won't get into the semantics of apes vs. men. Please remember not everyone subscribes to this belief as hard science and let's not belabor that point. I think, at best, we could agree that they are possibly a species of hominid. I happen to think they may be smarter than us in some ways. I'm carrying on. Leave us say that your final sentence would at least be a start and further than we currently find ourselves, yes?
steenburg Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 Well, it is my secret hope that they can connect one of the samples tested to some sort of video evidence so it won't be as open-ended. This thread is starting to shake my belief that this is correct. Heck, this forum over the last several days is shaking my belief that it is even possible to get any substantial evidence tied to them at all. I certainly do not think these are apes anymore after reading so many points. Again, I won't get into the semantics of apes vs. men. Please remember not everyone subscribes to this belief as hard science and let's not belabor that point. I think, at best, we could agree that they are possibly a species of hominid. I happen to think they may be smarter than us in some ways. I'm carrying on. Leave us say that your final sentence would at least be a start and further than we currently find ourselves, yes? Thomas Steenburg
Guest believer Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 So the Kentucky site is Crittenden? That is from the previous Lindsey website info. I went to Kings Island with family and eyeballed every stretch of woods from Louisville up to Cincy. The Kentucky river runs throughout there and deer plenty. I imagine eastern sasquatches have to be on their toes more than out west. Is woompas cat another name for a squatch?
Recommended Posts