Backdoc Posted January 23 Posted January 23 Well said. I agree. It is nice when a skeptic and believer can have a grown-up dialog. The viewer can learn something, and it seems she learned a lot from it. Meldrum moved the needle. I don't say that because I am any Meldrum fan (and have nothing at all against Meldrum) it just was a great effort professionally handled.
Watcher Posted January 23 Posted January 23 Is there a media source that typically is considered legitimat source, one that makes an effort to bring the best BF stories and then vet them? Or is it hit or miss?
MIB Posted January 23 Moderator Posted January 23 15 minutes ago, Watcher said: Is there a media source that typically is considered legitimat source, one that makes an effort to bring the best BF stories and then vet them? Or is it hit or miss? Media? No. Media does not treat this topic with respect. No vetting, no effort, just ridicule. There are some BF groups who make considerable effort to vet the stories they publish ahead of times, others that don't, and you're kind of on your own to decide which "kind" any specific group is.
Trogluddite Posted January 24 Posted January 24 2 hours ago, Watcher said: Is there a media source that typically is considered legitimat source, one that makes an effort to bring the best BF stories and then vet them? Or is it hit or miss? Yes. These Forums, if we as a group maintain them as such. There are many aspects of Bigfoot and Bigfoot evidence (the Skookum cast, the PG film, the DNA collection effort in ... Kentucky? ... that went horribly south) that are discussed here in a (reasonably) civil way (perhaps less civilly in the Tar Pit) and where the evidence for and against has been thoroughly examined. That doesn't mean that everyone agrees on what the evidence means or demonstrates, but these Forums are simultaneously the least controlled (no one person who owns the website / brand who can say, "this is what we're saying as a group") and the most controlled (people on both sides of most arguments willing to make rational arguments for or against a given proposition) source of Bigfoot information that I think we'll find.
7.62 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 (edited) On 1/18/2025 at 11:51 PM, RedHawk454 said: I’m a firm believer, not a knower though. Like a lot of believers on this forum I want to be “chosen” by them. I want to be the one that they choose to reveal themselves to. we can’t rely on tv shows or other media to confirm it’s existent. We need to Be out in nature and be lucky enough to have a specimen from the species “choose” is to know they are real and in fact, EXIST. I don't think it has anything to do with being chosen by them its just dumb luck if you see one thats it . This is why most who see them are never looking for one and the ones who look for one never see one ....just luck ...and just a side note little people are older than bigfoot in lore Edited January 24 by 7.62
7.62 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 (edited) On 1/18/2025 at 11:18 PM, NathanFooter said: Redhawk is in my estimation correct, the majority of the content out there is fake or misrepresented and as you noted expanded to other realms to stay relevant. It makes people both here and in our circles sick as we then get slapped with being in the " community " and therefore guilty by association. I personally will state on record that Expedition Bigfoot is entirely fabricated, that is my opinion. agree and have posted the same . They were exposed several times by members here but its the only bigfoot show on tv so I watch Edited January 24 by 7.62
Northern Lights Posted January 25 Posted January 25 While I agree that the vast majority of the content out on YouTube is garbage, I see it as a positive feedback loop. AI generates a video that appears interesting on the face, we click on it, realize it's garbage, and move on. The AI tabulates the views, determines there is overall interest in the topic, and creates another. We see it on our recommended list, click on it, and so on, and so on...... On the bright side, it does show there is an interest in the subject way outside the scope of this group in the forums. The bad news it is driving the quality way down, focusing on quantity instead. I don't think there is any real way of besting the system other than using this platform to call out to good ones, which are few and far between.
7.62 Posted January 25 Posted January 25 (edited) 2 hours ago, Northern Lights said: While I agree that the vast majority of the content out on YouTube is garbage, I see it as a positive feedback loop. AI generates a video that appears interesting on the face, we click on it, realize it's garbage, and move on. The AI tabulates the views, determines there is overall interest in the topic, and creates another. We see it on our recommended list, click on it, and so on, and so on...... On the bright side, it does show there is an interest in the subject way outside the scope of this group in the forums. The bad news it is driving the quality way down, focusing on quantity instead. I don't think there is any real way of besting the system other than using this platform to call out to good ones, which are few and far between. dude I just wish there was something I could believe posted on there that really is a Bigfoot caught on camera let's say in the last 10 years or so . I see a lot of people that post distant screams which can be explained or tree structures tracks etc.. Just a recent sighting in the last 10 years or so where one was really filmed . I have one friend on another forum who I trust who told me there's one group he went out on multiple times and they have a clear drone video of one that they finally showed him. He said it was incredible watching it move and the size of it . Not a thermal video but a daytime one . He told me the group will not release the video to the net . I guess some groups just feel that way . I know a couple of members here have said the same about pics they have . With this mindset the only way this will be accepted by science as being a real thing is a body by a hunter out there that happens to see one and gets scared and just kills it. Edited January 25 by 7.62
MIB Posted January 26 Moderator Posted January 26 4 hours ago, 7.62 said: He said it was incredible watching it move and the size of it . Not a thermal video but a daytime one . He told me the group will not release the video to the net . I guess some groups just feel that way . I know a couple of members here have said the same about pics they have . With this mindset the only way this will be accepted by science as being a real thing is a body by a hunter out there that happens to see one and gets scared and just kills it. I think that mindset plays in a couple of ways. First, if a person doesn't want existence proven, yep, keep your evidence to yourself. Second, if YOU want YOU to be the one that proves existence, you have to keep your evidence to yourself. Most of have a network of sorts and SOMEONE will recognize the background. When that happens, you'll have many other people in your spot and your chance .. and likely theirs .. to prove existence vanishes when the traffic increases. I have pictures I wish I could share, not of bigfoot, but to illustrate stories / accounts I've shared here in writing several times. Sure as heck, if I post those pictures, someone will recognize the location 'cause there are a couple fairly clear identifying land marks and when that happens, my chance to get audio again, or to see anything, vanishes like "stink" in a tornado. 3
Doodler Posted Saturday at 01:16 PM Posted Saturday at 01:16 PM I've enjoyed a few others. "A Flash Of Beauty, Bigfoot Revealed" is good, "thinker thunker" with his body part proportion analysis is good.
wiiawiwb Posted Sunday at 01:25 PM Posted Sunday at 01:25 PM On 1/25/2025 at 9:57 PM, MIB said: I think that mindset plays in a couple of ways. First, if a person doesn't want existence proven, yep, keep your evidence to yourself. Second, if YOU want YOU to be the one that proves existence, you have to keep your evidence to yourself. Most of have a network of sorts and SOMEONE will recognize the background. When that happens, you'll have many other people in your spot and your chance .. and likely theirs .. to prove existence vanishes when the traffic increases. I have pictures I wish I could share, not of bigfoot, but to illustrate stories / accounts I've shared here in writing several times. Sure as heck, if I post those pictures, someone will recognize the location 'cause there are a couple fairly clear identifying land marks and when that happens, my chance to get audio again, or to see anything, vanishes like "stink" in a tornado. I have varying thoughts about sharing a valued location or hony hole. In a collegial sense, it would lend a helping hand to those who may be new to sasquatching. I remember well when I didn't have a clue where to start or where to go but, at least, had decades of hiking, backpacking, and bushcraft/survival to fall back on. Nowadays, like MIB, I try not to include pictures as that may unmask an area I value and enjoy. The good news for me is that just being in the woods is my ultimate reward so success is not measured by what I find or don't find. I've never left disappointed after a day's adventure wandering around in the forest. If all you ever seek is the prize, particularly one that is profoundly elusive, the odds are you'll end up discouraged and will seek other endeavors. 1
Recommended Posts