Do You Really Need Proof?

[BobbyO]

Obviously, the first requirement is that the appropriate people need to go out and look to begin with, which is not happening now.

Too true, at least not publically known anyway..

[Guest]

Yup. Do you believe them, Professor?

No. Do you? Are willing to clearly and emphatically state on the BFF that those people who think they're experiencing bigfoots in southeastern OKlahoma are, in fact, not?

[Doc Holliday]

Wow, do topics often get so off-track this quickly?

Maybe I should have edited my first post to ask, "Do those who have seen Bigfoot want scientific confirmation of the creature's existence?".

Best regards,

Lee

yep,sometimes the train flies of the rails , threads taking on a life of their own,sometimes turning into real "post-a -thons" concerning proof etc.

i used to think id come forth quickly if i had hard core proof, now, after seeing/hearing some of the folks involved in the bf community, im not so sure i would,imagine all the potential loonies showing up bothering you, trespassing on land you own/hunt/fish/enjoy......would the headache be worth it?maybe just proving it for myself would be enough,depends on the situation.

[Guest Lesmore]

Why do you think a discovery would make them easier to find? I have been hunting for 20 years in Michigan, I have never seen a bear(other than at the dump or crossing the road), bobcat, elk, albino deer, wolf etc... they are all recognised fairly common animals, and yet I haven't seen them. Unless Bigfoot starts becoming stupid once it's discovered, I think the chances of seeing one will still be miniscule.

I don't know when the hunting season is in Michigan....but I wonder (I don't know) if the season may not be the best time to see animals, especially if there is a fair amount of gunfire in an area.

I've seen (in the wild) wolf, elk, moose, bear, fisher,marten, otter, etc.....during the fall, winter, spring....I'm usually out a couple of times a week walking down forest trails...Boreal, Canadian Shield, Riverine. Not hunting, just walking in these cases.

I find especially during the seasons when the leaves are off the trees, to be the best times for me to sight wildlife...no leaves to hide.

I generally just see wild animals when I'm alone, I find very rarely do I see them (other then the ubiquitous white tail deer) when I'm with others.

Think it's the noise of two or more and I find my attention isn't on my surroundings as much, when I'm with others, as opposed to when I'm alone in the bush.

BTW....I haven't seen any trace of Bigfoot.

[southernyahoo]

There already is a silly eco-industry surrounding bigfoot. Don't people travel to Honobia, OK every fall for their conference and don't these almost always result in some people claiming encounters in the vicinity?

Heh, You'd be hard pressed to find any affect of Eco-Industry in Honobia unless you consider the Logging Industry Eco. The funds generated from these events are barely break even versus their cost, and people claiming encounters generates zero dollars as far as I know. Where would people spend their eco dollars in Honobia? You might do some research before you answer.

[Guest]

Heh, You'd be hard pressed to find any affect of Eco-Industry in Honobia unless you consider the Logging Industry Eco. The funds generated from these events are barely break even versus their cost, and people claiming encounters generates zero dollars as far as I know. Where would people spend their eco dollars in Honobia? You might do some research before you answer.

Well, I thought this was one of the bigger festivals - doesn't it attract at least 100 people or so annually? If so, these people are eating, sleeping somewhere, buying knick-knacks, buying T-shirts, gassing up before heading home. That's all ecotourism. Sure it's nowhere near the scale of canopy tours in the rainforest, but I bet to the local merchants in the area it's welcomed income.

The Talihina Chamber of Commerce seems to think that the Festival generates some income.

[Huntster]

Huntster, on 20 October 2010 - 10:40 AM, said:

Yup. Do you believe them, Professor?

No. Do you?

Nope, but I might be wrong.

Are willing to clearly and emphatically state on the BFF that those people who think they're experiencing bigfoots in southeastern OKlahoma are, in fact, not?

Nope. I'm not a denialist in this case. I just don't believe that there are sasquatches anymore in Oklahoma.

[Huntster]

Well, I thought this was one of the bigger festivals - doesn't it attract at least 100 people or so annually? If so, these people are eating, sleeping somewhere, buying knick-knacks, buying T-shirts, gassing up before heading home. That's all ecotourism.

No, it is not:

Ecotourism (also known as ecological tourism) is responsible travel to fragile, pristine, and usually protected areas that strives to be low impact and (often) small scale. It purports to educate the traveller; provide funds for ecological conservation; directly benefit the economic development and political empowerment of local communities; and foster respect for different cultures and for human rights. Ecotourism is held as important by those who participate in it so that future generations may experience aspects of the environment relatively untouched by human intervention.[1] Most serious studies of ecotourism including several university programs now use this as the working definition.

It is a festival and convention (exactly what it is called):

A festival is an event, usually and ordinarily staged by a local community, which centers on and celebrates some unique aspect of that community and the Festival.

A convention, in the sense of a meeting, is a gathering of individuals who meet at an arranged place and time in order to discuss or engage in some common interest.

Sure it's nowhere near the scale of canopy tours in the rainforest, but I bet to the local merchants in the area it's welcomed income.

Just like other festivals and conventions.

[Branco]

Nope, but I might be wrong.

Nope. I'm not a denialist in this case. I just don't believe that there are sasquatches anymore in Oklahoma.

Huntster: With all due respect, where, how and when did you get data or information that led you to believe there are no "Sasquatches" in Oklahoma????(That's not what they are called there, so is that opinion based on semantics?)

It certainly can't be based on field observations.

[Guest]

Sorry, but that restrictive definition is not what we're calling ecotourism, and we're actually doing it. I'm heavily involved in birding festivals which absolutely focus on and stress to local communities the benefits of ecotourism. When people travel to an area to partake in non-consumptive enjoyment of its natural resources, that's ecotourism. There doesn't have to be any of that kum-bay-ya, carbon-neutral stuff, although those are fine ideals where and when appropriate. Ecotourism is about creating incentive for communities to manage land and resources that support the things ecotourists are willing to travel to experience. In the case of our birding festivals, people travel to our festivals to enjoy breeding warblers, migratory waterfowl, "rivers of raptors," etc. The festivals have vendors with arts and crafts, food, t-shirts, etc. The participants pump money into the local economy by buying those wares, filling up campgrounds and hotels, eating at local restaurants, buying gas, etc. That's ecotourism, and I'd bet that the Talihina Chamber of Commerce would call it that, too.

The only thing that would make it (Honobia bigfoot festival) not ECOtourism would be an admission that there're no real bigfoots out in those woods in Southeast Oklahoma. Then, the festival would be more of a culturo-tourism deal.

[Guest]

Huntster: With all due respect, where, how and when did you get data or information that led you to believe there are no "Sasquatches" in Oklahoma????(That's not what they are called there, so is that opinion based on semantics?)

It certainly can't be based on field observations.

Shhh. Don't tell anyone, but Huntster only believes in a PNW sasquatch. He thinks there might have been bigfoots at one time elsewhere in the Lower 48 states, but that they're all gone now. Therefore, you folks in Oklahoma, Ohio, Florida, Kansas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Kentucky, Virginia, Arkansas, Texas, etc. - you're not really seeing bigfoots down there. As he likes to say, he's a skeptic.

[Huntster]

Huntster, on 20 October 2010 - 02:30 PM, said:

Nope, but I might be wrong........

......Nope. I'm not a denialist in this case. I just don't believe that there are sasquatches anymore in Oklahoma.

Huntster: With all due respect, where, how and when did you get data or information that led you to believe there are no "Sasquatches" in Oklahoma???? (That's not what they are called there, so is that opinion based on semantics?)

It certainly can't be based on field observations.

There is no "information" that leads me to believe that there are no longer sasquatches in Oklahoma. That "belief" is primarily an admission to skeptics in order to try to reduce the use of "sasquatches in the open Great Plains" game that is so common from them. I openly stated that I could be wrong (and I could be), and that it is a belief, not a statement that I claim is fact. Again, semantics in order to reduce skeptic games.

You are correct; there are plenty of reports from areas of Oklahoma, however, I truly believe that if sasquatches are still existing in the Oklahoma area, they are a remnant population cut off from other areas where larger populations of sasquatches might exist.

But in all honesty, I truly don't think many sasquatches are left in existence at all, and the last great stronghold for them is in the PNW, and that range as well is shrinking. I base that belief on the low number of overall reports, the unknown number of those that are manufactured or misidentifications, and the differing regional report densities.

[Huntster]

Sorry, but that restrictive definition is not what we're calling ecotourism, and we're actually doing it. I'm heavily involved in birding festivals which absolutely focus on and stress to local communities the benefits of ecotourism.

That's neat. Perhaps your birding groups can conduct some ecotourism along with your birding festivals.

When people travel to an area to partake in non-consumptive enjoyment of its natural resources, that's ecotourism.

And when people travel to an auditorium, park, convention center, or other facility for a "festival" and "convention", they enjoy a festival and convention.

Ecotourism is about creating incentive for communities to manage land and resources that support the things ecotourists are willing to travel to experience.

And bigfoot festivals and conventions are conducted to discuss and share things regarding bigfoot.

In the case of our birding festivals, people travel to our festivals to enjoy breeding warblers, migratory waterfowl, "rivers of raptors," etc. The festivals have vendors with arts and crafts, food, t-shirts, etc. The participants pump money into the local economy by buying those wares, filling up campgrounds and hotels, eating at local restaurants, buying gas, etc. That's ecotourism, and I'd bet that the Talihina Chamber of Commerce would call it that, too.

Your birding festival includes actually going out into the field in non-consumptive bird watching? If so, then yes, that would be ecotourism.

Do participants at the Honorobia sasquatch festival and convention go out into the field and look for sasquatches like BFRO expeditions (which are clearly ecotourism) as part of their program?

The only thing that would make it (Honobia bigfoot festival) not ECOtourism would be an admission that there're no real bigfoots out in those woods in Southeast Oklahoma.

Not necessarily. Even if they admit that there are no bigfeet, but went out into the woods to non-consumptively look anyway, that would still be ecotourism. But if they don't go into the field, and instead stay at a venue discussing and sharing things, that would be a festival and/or convention, not ecotourism.

[Huntster]

Shhh. Don't tell anyone, but Huntster only believes in a PNW sasquatch. He thinks there might have been bigfoots at one time elsewhere in the Lower 48 states, but that they're all gone now. Therefore, you folks in Oklahoma, Ohio, Florida, Kansas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Kentucky, Virginia, Arkansas, Texas, etc. - you're not really seeing bigfoots down there. As he likes to say, he's a skeptic.

Thanks, especially for the key word there: believes.

[Guest TooRisky]

There already is a silly eco-industry surrounding bigfoot. Don't people travel to Honobia, OK every fall for their conference and don't these almost always result in some people claiming encounters in the vicinity?

I would not know, I have never been to this or any other conference where lurkers and computer researchers seem to go to find T-Shirts and buy books...