When Will Bigfoot's Existence Be Proved?

[bipedalist]

Topic/OP doesn't say "proved to whom".

So, I've got my personal proof. Sounds like other respondents in this thread do to.

Lots of evidence out there, and those interested in it can start by reading a couple hundred sighting reports across the web including many right here on the BFRO sightings RSS.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I have the tendency to write as if bigfoot were a known fact, and I have to remind myself that not everyone on the forums knows what others know...It does get annoying that some people cannot just accept the fact of their existence, but I suppose that I can understand their reasoning.

But, even before I saw a bigfoot, I believed they existed because although I cannot trust just one sighting report, I can trust the thousands upon thousands that have accumulated over the decades.

In my opinion, I think the existence of bigfoot will be proven relatively soon. Within 2 years is my guess. I just have a feeling that we are close, and I have never had that feeling before. I should also state that in the past I only read reports, and never did any investigating on my own. Even now, I have been out in the woods, but not really looking for bigfoot signs, rather surveying the natural placement of items. There aren't any bigfoot around where I live anyway. I have to travel an hour or two to get into good territory, which isn't far.

I have gathered people and equipment for a small expedition, but we postponed it until winter passes. We actually debated pretty heavily on whether to go mid-winter, but after much arguing we decided to wait for warmer weather. But really, winter around here doesn't necessarily mean it will be extremely cold. We didn't know how that would affect the behavior of the bigfoot, and more importantly, the behavior and availability of their food sources.

[Guest Twilight Fan]

@ Bipedalist - that is true. The OP did not specifically say, "when will BF's existence be proven to the world?" but by his phrasing, I assume he meant it. Because like you said, for those who have their personal proof, no more is needed. I think he meant when will BF be proven to mainstream science as a new species.

@ Encounter - That's interesting what you said about the aboriginals not being recognized as humans at first. I did not know that. But, the people who encountered them still knew they were real and existed. That would be like if anyone were able to see Bigfoot, but they disagreed about what he was; his species. Not if he was actually there in the first place. Those are two different types of circumstances.

I have seen (and responded to) quite a few of your posts in the past, Encounter. I think it's safe to say we have very different ways of thinking. My mind is actually very open to new things, and new discoveries. (But nothing can be proven without evidence! Not the existence of a physical creature, that is). I think that your views might be a little too "out there" for me, but I understand the point you're trying to convey. Even so, I don't agree with it.

Edited February 18, 2012 by Twilight Fan

[Guest]

Well Twightlight Fan I actually do know you are open to things as I have watched you begin to change views within the short time you have been on the forum. In this thread alone you have begun to shift your views which is great, and noticeable. First you say ..

@ indiefoot & Encounter: No, Bigfoot's existence has not yet been proven by anybody. Not westerners or anyone else. If they had proof, the rest of the world would by now accept (100%) that there is an ape in North America.

and...

^You're not? Then what do you mean? It's obvious BF has not been proven to exist in the United States (or anywhere else). At least not to science or the majority of the world.

but now you say ...

"for those who have their personal proof, no more is needed. I think he meant when will BF be proven to mainstream science as a new species."

So you first said it hasnt been proven for anybody, while it has indeed been proven for a great many, but now you have changed (which is great but it would be good if youi acknowledged this as it is clear for others reading to see). You earlier decided that the majority of the world doesnt recognise proof though I mentioned other cultures who take the hairy hominid as reality, (with populations all together greater than those westerners who dont believe in BF).

Im glad you are changing your views . I apreciate your belief that my views are too out there for you, but bit by bit if you look through your posts you have expressed similar views, when initially you had said the opposite. Just good for you to recognise this and know its OK to recognise it.

I am amongst those who have encounters but in any case I dont take what science comes up with or scientific reports as proof, or the authoritative word concerning truth or reality.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Encounter

[Guest]

Im hoping we will have at least some high definition footage within the next few years. I think that the day they are accepted by science should become a national holiday to make up for all of the ridicule and suffering that people have been put through for talking about them. That would be great.

[Guest Docwos]

Think of our realities. We as a society(civilized peoples) have science to tell us what is fact and fiction. Yet, also woven into our civilized culture is faith. Faith in a variety of things, such as Religion or Love.

How would you answer another cultures question on your proof of faith?

I believe it would be hard to provide evidence. Most people would more than likely respond with, "I just know."

My whole point is that certain cultures, certain societies, certain peoples, have very different ways of providing proof. Our society is an example of both fact and faith. Others may be solely based on faith, with no need to prove through evidence, while others may differ entirely.

Is it our right to hold different cultures in our own structural belief system?

Who is to say our way is the right way and theirs is the wrong way?

How can we say to another cultural system that their belief in bigfoot is incorrect, unfounded or unproven?

Perhaps, we can look in ourselves and find appropriate answers to these questions.

[Guest]

Seeing something for myself is all the proof I would need, to me it wouldn't be necessary to prove it to the world. Of course I'd hope to get a snap shot to show the wife!

[Guest Bipedal Ape]

i personally think it is not going to be any time soon, but would love to be proved wrong!

[Guest]

Yes, I meant proven to mainstream science and the public.

I'm convinced they exist, but I can't say 100%, because I haven't seen one yet.

I really hope that there will be some kind of breakthrough evidence, because solving this mystery is very important. People would become more open-minded, and textbooks would have to be rewritten.

[Doc Holliday]

publicly proven to mainstream science?......maybe never , if past build ups are any indication.

seems that a good number of the folks that claim to know dont really give a rip about proving anything, at least not publicly.

[Martin]

Should be with in the next few weeks if everything goes as planned.

M

[Guest ajciani]

After reviewing old literature, it would seem the existence of bigfoot was proved a very long time ago. In western cultures, the existence of bigfoots is simply forgotten and re-learned, with new names being given to them each time. This seems to be a theme which has been repeated for multiple topics, not just bigfoots.

In general, if you find an article about a "wild man", it might be one about a human gone feral, or it might be one about a bigfoot. They certainly knew about trolls and the like. Hairy people were an oddity. Lots and lots of words that seem to have origins in describing hairy people of the woods.

[Guest]

As technology gets more advanced and the more people (also squatchers) go into the bush, how long will it take? It could very well be within the next few decades, so I hope I'll survive until then.

Depends on who you are and your experiences. It's been proved over and over to many, many people over hundreds of years. Or, proved to someone in particular, maybe never.

[Guest Twilight Fan]

@ Encounter - My views have actually not changed at all. I think you and I often misunderstand eachother. I was trying to level with you, by saying that some people have personal proof, which is good enough for them. But I was under the impression that the OP was speaking of proof on a wider scale. Basically, poving something exists to someone else requires evidence to be 100% sure, if it's something like a new species of animal. If someone else keeps their proof to themselves, then it is ONLY their proof. Not proof to the entire world. I think this is what we were confusing - you meant proof could be personal, which it can. But on a scientific/majority level, it cannot.

(I hope that makes sense! lol)...

[Guest]

I do understand Twighlight Fan.

Whole cultures have not kept the knowledge of the hairy wild man to themselves. Indigenous peoples tried to tell new comers about these others, in the US and in Australia. The Tibetans, Nepalese and a range of other folk believe in these beings as fact. There are centuries of stories, literature and verbal histories on these beings. Many people have had encounters with them throughout the world including myself.

I pointed out and quoted you on saying that the majority of the world doesnt feel they have proof, I hope you note now this may not be true at all. I pointed out that proof is different things to different people.

Our current scientific viewpoints will not remain for long, but the stories and encounters with such beings will live into our future as it does right into our most ancient past. No need to ask when there will be proof, just a need to understand the deeper nature of reality.