Guest Cervelo Posted October 16, 2010 Posted October 16, 2010 I'm new to the world of Bigfoot fourms. I noticed a thread got started on BFRO about comparing woodknocks to gunfire and it got shut down pretty quick. What's that all about it doesn't seem very "scientific" to not rule out the know sound sources first. What I've listen to so far reminds very much of gunfire from a distance when I hunted in my youth. I've never heard a woodknock (or maybe I have) has this ground already been covered? Thx
Sasfooty Posted October 16, 2010 Posted October 16, 2010 I've noticed that sometimes I hear something & wonder if it was a knock or a gunshot. In my experience, knocks can't be heard from very far away without a listening device, & it's easier to get confused about what the sound is when using one. Some are very clearly knocks, though. Naturally, it's easier to tell if it is close than if it's farther away. It shouldn't be something for people to get in an argument over. They both happen.
Guest fenris Posted October 16, 2010 Posted October 16, 2010 I'm new to the world of Bigfoot fourms. I noticed a thread got started on BFRO about comparing woodknocks to gunfire and it got shut down pretty quick. What's that all about it doesn't seem very "scientific" to not rule out the know sound sources first. What I've listen to so far reminds very much of gunfire from a distance when I hunted in my youth. I've never heard a woodknock (or maybe I have) has this ground already been covered? Thx If you've heard enough of both there's a difference in the sound between a handgun, shotgun, muzzleloader type rifle, and wood knocks, they are subtle differences, but they don't all sound the same.
Guest Greldek Posted October 16, 2010 Posted October 16, 2010 On the other hand if you haven't heard enough of both, you may not have any idea how to differentiate between the two. It's not hard for me to believe someone heard a distant gunshot and mistaken it for wood knocking, especially if they have never before heard wood knocking, and have just read about it second hand.
Guest Posted October 16, 2010 Posted October 16, 2010 On the other hand if you haven't heard enough of both, you may not have any idea how to differentiate between the two. It's not hard for me to believe someone heard a distant gunshot and mistaken it for wood knocking, especially if they have never before heard wood knocking, and have just read about it second hand. I believe that last year, myself and another researcher could have possibly heard both. It was muzzleloader season, and we were walking a trail into a remote location. There were a series of what we think were... shots, and then what we thought sounded like wood knocks. There was a distinct difference in the sound. Have no idea, if the knocks were in response to the shots, or just coincidence that the knocks followed.
Woodslore Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 I'd say another question to ask is what is the possibility that some of the wood knocking sounds heard are really someone cutting down a tree with an axe, or simply splitting through a dead downed log? I know there is the room for a difference of sound between the two sounds but whats not to say it could be something like this as well? I can see some people getting confused between gun shots and wood knocking. I once had the cops called on me and my friends as a kid about gun shots. We were simply smashing rocks together just being dumb kids having fun. Now where I was, is only a 5 - 10 minute drive from a rifle range open all year round and it is used by the military. So people in the area would have a knowledge of what a gun shot sounds like. Also in the same area about only oh say 3 years back the cops were called about the sound of gun fire again. When they went and looked it was a county work crew using axes to chop down some trees in the area. So again there is room for confusion.
Guest fenris Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 On the other hand if you haven't heard enough of both, you may not have any idea how to differentiate between the two. It's not hard for me to believe someone heard a distant gunshot and mistaken it for wood knocking, especially if they have never before heard wood knocking, and have just read about it second hand. agreed, it took me some time to tell the difference, like I said the differences are subtle.
Guest rockinkt Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Who has had the pleasure of using woodknocks to find an honest to goodness giant hairy bi-pedal primate that is uncatalogued by science? What is the physical evidence that you have?
Guest Greldek Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Nobody in this thread has said that they have lured an unknown hominid towards them by knocking wood together. The debate here is if someone could mistake other sounds, such as gunshots or chopping wood with an axe, for the sound made by two pieces of wood being hit together.
Guest rockinkt Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 (edited) Nice try. In the world of bigfootery - "woodknock(s)" is a term used to denote the sound an unknown to science creature supposedly makes by hitting a tree with another piece of wood. Since there is absolutely no valid evidence available that such creatures do anything of the sort - I was hoping that someone could perhaps bring some forward. Edited October 17, 2010 by rockinkt
Guest Cervelo Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Do we know if anyone has recorded gunfire of various types and distance to compare to woodknocks? I have had some personal experince in the past and more recently that has made me go what the heck was that but I still fall into the "if I hear hoof beats think horses not zebras" line of thinking. But I can understand if you've seen one why all this type of dicussion seems mute.
Guest Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Nice try. In the world of bigfootery - "woodknock(s)" is a term used to denote the sound an unknown to science creature supposedly makes by hitting a tree with another piece of wood. Since there is absolutely no valid evidence available that such creatures do anything of the sort - I was hoping that someone could perhaps bring some forward. So, since Bigfoot isn't proven to exist that means we can't look for it? We can't use whatever information we deem credible as a tip in an investigation? Just realize that I'm not a big fan of woodknocking. Whether the knocks are indeed made by a sasquatch or even using woodknocks to try and get a response. I'm dubious about the whole woodknocking thing. Aren't discoveries made by people using whatever information they have and feel are valid? Most of the discussions on this board are about an as yet unproven North American primate. Should the site just be shut down because we can't prove anything?
Sasfooty Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Nobody in this thread has said that they have lured an unknown hominid towards them by knocking wood together. The debate here is if someone could mistake other sounds, such as gunshots or chopping wood with an axe, for the sound made by two pieces of wood being hit together. I won't say that I have "lured" one with wood knocks, but I will say that I have spent a lot of time exchanging knocks with "something" in my yard. I hit the metal part of the window with a metal flashlight, & within usually a minute or less there will be a knock from outside. Sometimes they are really loud, other times they aren't, depending (I think) on whether the knock(er) is hitting the building directly behind the house, or a tree farther away. Sometimes, instead of being answered with a knock, a rock will hit the roof. There is no doubt that these are not gunshots, but sometimes, if I haven't initiated the knocks, I will hear something & wonder which it was. And I do have recordings of both.
Guest Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Who has had the pleasure of using woodknocks to find an honest to goodness giant hairy bi-pedal primate that is uncatalogued by science? What is the physical evidence that you have? With all due respect rockinit, there is no need to squash conversation by demanding evidence catalogued by science. You know there is none at the moment. So do I and everyone else here. But, why try and limit the debate for some with demands for such? Some people just want to come here and talk about or relate their perceived experiences they associate with BF. And, the main purpose of this forum is to present to them the opportunity to do so. Every thread can't resolve to a *show me the body* or *demand for physical evidence* standard and foment conversation. In fact, it actually inhibits it. I'm beyond being miffed that each and every thread here has to devolve into a debate between evidence and proof. Can't some people just come here and relate their experience or discuss the subject at hand without calls for proof that those of you more skeptically inclined know full well doesn't presently exist?
Guest Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Thanks HRPuffinstuff, you're absolutely right. We all know that there isn't a bigfoot display in the Museum of Natural History, so we should be able to get past that and let those with experiences discuss those. Also, it's pretty clear when a thread is about "proof" and when it is about personal experiences (yes, sometimes those experiences are proof for individuals). So, let's tone down the rhetoric and let people speak for a bit. If you wish to start a thread to discuss the proof that woodknocks are related to bigfoot, I think you'll have a very short thread rockinit.
Recommended Posts