Science needs facts before so called animals like bigfoot are considered to be real or simply proven to exist.

[Backdoc]

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

It doesn’t matter if you are impressed by them. Your premise is that we have too few videos for a viable breeding population to exist. And yet we do have tons and tons of videos. No video will ever convince science. We know what it will take to convince science.

 

 

There are a few things to my premise, but the biggest point has to be quality of videos.    If there are tons and tons of videos out there that's great.  However, what are the top 3 or top 5 most convincing out there?   I am assuming the PGF is the mount Rushmore.   It's #1.   What are the others? 

 

1- PGF

2- ?

3- ?

 

 

What are those top 3?  Top 5?

 

Most of us know we want a body.  A body on a slab would convince everyone.  Since we lack such a body, the PGF is a pretty good second option.  Even then I'm guessing the PGF doesn't even convince 50% of those who view it.  

 

 

 

 

 

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

There are roughly 2000 Grizzly bears in the lower 48. They are still listed as endangered. Do we know they exist?

 

We cannot know how many Bigfeet are out there.  I'm guessing there are very few on their way to extinction.  If bigfoot exists it elusiveness is probably based on population density not a government cover up.   To me that is a safer bet. 

 

 

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

You’re committing an error here when you’re comparing a rescue mission with not knowing a species exists. It’s apples and oranges. Just because we cannot find one specific human in a very narrow time frame? Does not mean we don’t know humans exist. Right? How long has the Border Patrol been watching our borders with technology capable of recording foot traffic at night? We had seismic sensors and night vision during the Vietnam war. 
 

 

 

 Which is more likely:   

 

1) The tech has revealed proof Bigfoot exist and the government keeps it quiet.

                    - Consider every additional thing needed to make that true.

2) This same massive excellent nowhere-to-hide tech has yet to see a single bigfoot at a level of the PGF?  A single hit/ or sighting would direct teams of wildlife people to this Bigfoot?   

                     -if there are enough fishing lines in the water, enough depth finders out there and you catch no fish the lake may just not have any fish. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

OK so for 70 years the Border Patrol has watched our borders with advanced enough gear to detect Sasquatch. Now multiply that by an endangered population of some 2000 individuals. 2000 individuals who are foraging, hunting, mating, birthing, fighting, trekking, fishing, etc. Now draw a line through their territory and call it the USA-Canada border and cut a 100 foot wide swath through the forest. Plus open natural features and clear cuts in close proximity to the line. How many times a year are individuals crossing the border? Times by 70 years?

 

It has to be in the millions of events. This isn’t a lone human with a balloon one time event. No. This is a viable breeding population going about its business. And a hyper sensitive surveillance system operated by a world super power. And our cousins to the north are also watching the border.

 

And these agencies don’t take a break or fumble with a camera like Bob and Ethel do. This is their JOB. They are out there 365 days a year.

 

With that many real and electronic eyes, we don't have a Bigfoot hit.  If not, I choose the few number available over 1,000s able to keep quiet.   They couldn't keep quiet about an entire exhaustive list of confirmed government secrets, but all involved somehow can keep quiet about Bigfoot.

 

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

Now add in the military. Now add in the coast guard. Now add in law enforcement. The Yakima proving grounds. Ft. Lewis. The coastline of Washington and Oregon. There is way way more surveillance being conducted that just the USA-Canada border by many many agencies.

 

As far as people being killed? You don’t need to kill people to silence them. You just have to make the subject ludicrous. And everyone associated with it look like clowns. Which is exactly what they have done. And not just with this subject.

 

 

This more favors Bigfoot not existing at all instead of Bigfoot being an obvious known entity our government keeps quiet.  

 

I'm fine with the truth being in the middle.  There are few bigfoot if real.  The assumed territory is expansive.   Scientist work in the government.  Those scientists generally think Bigfoot is not proven.  To the extent they may believe or disbelieve is on a continuum in flux made up with all kinds of people with different levels of complex belief.   They have bigger fish to fry and worry about Bigfoot until one drops into their lap.

 

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

As to why? We can all speculate. You say that Sasquatch would never be a national security risk and that may be true. But it could certainly be a threat to their control over the land and its resources. And most importantly it’s a definite threat to their control over the TRUTH.

 

 

 

 

Doesn't look like a very secure border to me.

[norseman]

Really? BP did 2 million intercepts last year.