For Those Who Walk Among Them

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

There's nothing wrong with a spirited debate. I'm sure midnightwalker1 realizes he will have to defend any claims put forth on the forum. Everyone should already know that any claim without supporting evidence will likely receive a pile on and rightly so. As long as everyone can disagree or debate the facts without name calling from either side , everything is the way it should be. Great Topic! Chris B.

[Guest]

I think it would be likely that more land would be set aside for preservation if Sasquatch was identified. It would be one of the most amazing discoveries. I imagine tough laws would be enacted to protect it. There are many new protected areas, but these are not necessarily BF hot spots.

It's elusiveness would still make it very difficult to find. So I don't think documenting the species would spell the end of the creature, especially if their habitat remained protected and left wild with limited road access.

Orang

[Guest]

I believe Sasfooty believes what she's saying.

[masterbarber]

I think we have already been through this at least once, so go look it up.

I found nothing explaining why you think they know what cameras are.

I only found this:

"Been there, done that, have holes in most of the window screens to prove it. Built little shelves on trees out in the woods, covered the video camera with big pieces of bark to camo it, put tape over all the lights on it. They seem to know when the tape runs out, because they just stay away until it turns itself off. I think they could hear it running, but that wouldn't explain why they stayed away from the security camera. It doesn't make noise, but does have IR lights on it. I don't put the video camera & night vision out anymore because the thing was so expensive & doesn't get anything anyway. I got to thinking that they might get tired of avoiding it, & destroy it.

None that I have., & I believe I already stated that I wouldn't furnish it if I had it.

Well, you've already stated that you have it. You claim your avatar is a picture of one looking in the window but you seemed perplexed when asked to explain "how" since it's 17' off the ground.

"I don't think for a minute that it was 17 feet tall. I don't know how it got up there, but it was there. Believe it or not, I don't care."

"There's a tree about 20 feet from the window, but I don't think it's strong enough to hold something that big. There has to be a reasonable explanation, but I don't know what it is. "

How about it cannot be a North American Wood Ape, to start with?

Other members made reasonable suggestions about the possible content of that image, yet you continued to dismiss anything other than Bigfoot.

That is not what I asked.

This is the question.

"What kind of assistance would you need to tell you what you have seen, when you already know, & nobody else does?"

My apologies, let me try again:

If you wanted to convince yourself that there are BF on your property, then you're already there.

If you wanted to present this as BF activity on your property, by sharing these stories on a forum with folks interested in the subject of BF and have those folks take your stories as actual occurances, you would need a person(s) with enough tenacity to obtain the evidence/proof to corroborate your claims.

There are two considerations at work here:

1) The evidence cannot be obtained because it does not exist, on any level.

2) There is evidence that this creature is on your property but the collective group of witnesses are constantly foiled by the BF because they are continuously one step behind the creature's capacity to outsmart them all and hide any evidence of it's existence.

So far, I believe we're still firmly on number 1.

Edited to add:

By the way, I am not one of the skeptics who thinks this creature cannot exist. I simply feel that to date no one has been able to prove it exists--usually under the guise that this woodland creature somehow always seems to foil modern technology and the human mind

Edited November 3, 2010 by masterbarber

[Sasfooty]

I found nothing explaining why you think they know what cameras are.

That's a question that I won't answer. It would just cause more endless questions. Some things you will just have to figure out for yourself.

Well, you've already stated that you have it. You claim your avatar is a picture of one looking in the window but you seemed perplexed when asked to explain "how" since it's 17' off the ground. How about it cannot be a North American Wood Ape, to start with?

I didn't offer it as proof. I just told what it is. Maybe when you stop thinking of them as "wood apes" you can start considering real possibilities. I will agree with you that I don't think there are any "North American Wood Apes", not here anyway. Could be somewhere else, but that isn't what these are.

Other members made reasonable suggestions about the possible content of that image, yet you continued to dismiss anything other than Bigfoot.

Their suggestions are wrong. Should I pretend to accept something that I know is wrong, just to satisfy somebody's ego? What good would that do? Should I just back off so you could all get back to discussing why the PGF is or is not a fake? Is that what you want?

By the way, I am not one of the skeptics who thinks this creature cannot exist. I simply feel that to date no one has been able to prove it exists--usually under the guise that this woodland creature somehow always seems to foil modern technology and the human mind

So why don't you go out & prove it to yourself instead of expecting somebody else to get it for you? I'm sure they would have no hope of "foiling" you. Then you can come back & brag about being the first to get the coveted proof.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Sasfooty

[masterbarber]

I didn't offer it as proof. I just told what it is. Maybe when you stop thinking of them as "wood apes" you can start considering real possibilities. I will agree with you that I don't think there are any "North American Wood Apes", not here anyway. Could be somewhere else, but that isn't what these are.

Would you accept NA Wood Ninja, because of their stealth-superior intellect and illusiveness? Or possibly NA Human?

Their suggestions are wrong. Should I pretend to accept something that I know is wrong, just to satisfy somebody's ego? What good would that do? Should I just back off so you could all get back to discussing why the PGF is or is not a fake? Is that what you want?

You've in no way established that any of their suggestions are wrong.

So why don't you go out & prove it to yourself instead of expecting somebody else to get it for you? I'm sure they would have no hope of "foiling" you. Then you can come back & brag about being the first to get the coveted proof.

So far, I'm not conflicted in my understanding of what you have presented. I feel you are avoiding reasonable explanations to your claims and instead you are inserting "Bigfoot" to explain what is happening. So you are either unwilling/unable to provide proof or there is no proof. I stand by my assessment that there is no proof in your situation, based on what you have provided thus far.

efc.

Edited November 3, 2010 by masterbarber

[Sasfooty]

Would you accept NA Wood Ninja, because of their stealth-superior intellect and illusiveness? Or possibly NA Human?

I don't think my opinion of what they are would go over very well, so I will just say "I don't know what they are", since that is the also truth. Opinions are a dime a dozen, anyway. If you want to call them wood apes, that's fine, too.

You've in no way established that any of their suggestions are wrong.

I've established it to my satisfaction. I heard an old saying once that said "You can't please everybody, so you may as well please yourself". I'm not trying to convince anybody of what it is so, why are you trying to convince me of what it isn't?

So far, I'm not conflicted in my understanding of what you have presented. I feel you are avoiding reasonable explanations to your claims and instead you are inserting "Bigfoot" to explain what is happening. So you are either unwilling/unable to provide proof or there is no proof. I stand by my assessment that there is no proof in your situation, based on what you have provided thus far.

Why should I show my best piece of "proof" here? Why does anyone here deserve to see it?

(Let me re-emphasize that it is poor quality, not above being picked apart, etc. etc. etc.)

[Guest fenris]

slicktrick

lots of different ideas on this BF business,fleeting glimpses for most,if anything,yet there are those who propose to know more ,& claim to be able to walk the walk & talk the talk with sasquatch.

the common thread with these claims seems to be when questioned the discussion ends at " no need to prove it, trust me " or "doesnt matter to me what you think/believe,im right or "its secret, .. dont owe you any explanation"

well, thats right,they dont owe US anything,but if they do possess these talents,id suggest they might owe it to SAS to provide the world with at least a clear picture/video.

like a spy cam video( can be hidden in a jacket button,ive seen it)wear a wire,something....something to convince the world, evidence, so land could be set aside & laws put in place to make them a protected species and preserve woodland habitat for us to share.

in the last 25 years land i hunted as a kid now has houses & bldgs on it, timber been cut all around, & nobody is making any more land . the landscape is changing & will continue to do so. they may not need our protection ,but wouldnt they need woods??

this could surely be done w/out revealing locations or how to find them, i can understand privacy there, but for those who supposedly could provide solid pics/evidence to refuse seems selfish ,especially if they truly want to help them.

screw the world,but dont they owe it to BF?

These people are part of a uniquely online problem, but they are only one portion of it. As I see you have the following:

- The Storyteller habituator; he will continue to tell his stories and will either have excuses for never providing proof, or simply say they owe you nothing, yet at the same time they they feel the name to tell their stories nonetheless. Without substance they are stories and bull puckey or both. And the suckers online who encourage them only add to the crap. Those have may have a situation might never bring it to a forum like this, in such a situation I certainly wouldn't, a shut in in desperate need to attention on the other hand.....

- the youtube know it all ***********: The folks on youtube who attack everyone while claiming to be attacked by everyone, and yet know more than everyone else, but beyond fuzzy red cirles and arrows, never produce anything other than their specialty, ********. Some even shut down youtube commentary so they can't be question. They're just a variation on the *********** theme

- Alledged field guys who see something EVERY time and have the evidence but get pissed and storm away from here or the forum of your choice once the hard questions begin. Their definition of discussion is believe everything Isay, but don’t question me. ******** is still ********. They know and so do we.

Splash7

Slick, the problem with your argument is that you concede the reality of these claims.

Again, no offense to Slick in paticular, but the suckers who feed the claims of the ******** artists. Again no offense slick, you may just have wanted to raise the question. Noone said you would like the answer persay. Sadly a much ignored truth in footery is the existence of bullshitters and their victims, those whom can be rightlyt called willing suckers.

I am with you, gigantor.

I believe bigfoot romantics do more harm for the bigfoot community than hoaxers.

And, slicktrick, it is not the ability to get video or a photo that they will argue. They will argue that the bigfoot won't let them get a photo. They know this from some kind of bigfoot mind meld.

Or the creatures won't appear if they know you have a camera, just like they supposedly won't appear if you have a gun.

How do they know these things?......bigfoot told them, of course.

Which is still ********. It would serve a greater good to call the BS what it is. ANd to those would make the claim that doing so would stifle discussion, are YOU a sucker hearing what you want to?

Sasfooty, on 02 November 2010 - 07:35 AM, said:

It's easy to sit at a computer, mocking & calling someone crazy because they try to explain what they know. After you've seen & heard things over & over for years & compared it to what friends & neighbors have see & heard, you realize you're not imagining things.

And it's just as simple to sit at a computer making up BS stories and feeding those who hear what they want to until they have the perfect exit strategy which is to crybaby off into the sunset because you were picked on. But the ******** remains ********.

I offer again the following:

1) Someone habituating for real would likely never bring it to the attention of a place like the BFF.

2) If Squatchy is paranormal, say a Native American spirit critter then every effort made on the flesh and blood assumption is pointless because that's not what you're dealing with and frankly you might never find it if it's spirity.

3) Someone coming to forum telling stories is 99% likely doing just that, and stupid if they expect to not get asked questions.

Are there any other darkforces in footery? Yes, those would be the folks who not only have by live vicariously for themselves through their blogs and radio shows. Not everyone is guilty of this but there are those who live with a delusional state of celebrity they don't have or deserve, and over the years their ego driven ******** has caused it's share of issues to, but that is a tirade for another day.

[Guest fenris]

Sasfooty

masterbarber, on 02 November 2010 - 06:42 PM, said:

The issue, from my perspective at least, isn't so much what you claim but the fact that you have no corroborating proof that BF exists on your property, coupled with the fact that you seem unwilling to consider any other option that might explain what you are experiencing.

For me, there is no other option. I have more corroborating proof than any reasonable person would need in my position, but it is not something that I can show someone else. I have seen them up close, smelled them, (they don't all stink), heard them talking,(somewhat) made friends with a couple of them. It is a distant friendship, but I'm willing to take what I can

All proof can not be "furnished".

If you are not ready and able to share proof, noone here has any reason to believe that's anything other than a wonderful campfire story and you know it. To that part, can't because it isn't had.

midnightwalker1

I'll do you one better. How did the sas know that my nano video cam wasn't on as he/she probed the recorder? I had set it down to record them and a scout began probing it and even breathed into it. Or better yet, I placed my nano on my head rest on my car. My intent was to walk away from my car and I knew they came to my car based on prior recordings. I wanted to see them up close and personal for my own purposes and not to show any of you folks. Well I tested my nano over and over before I drove in. It was recording fine. I then set it up and double checked that the vid was recording. I began driving into the area then went down the dirt road and stopped at the end. I got out and hiked then hung out through the night. Mind you, I had driven in during broad daylight. When I got home, I looked at the recording. It was filming the road as I went in. All the sudden maybe 300 feet from my stop, the video goes black but the audio is still recording. I can hear myself leave the car and walk away (I left the window open). A few minutes later I hear the boys come down and start playing with my door handle and making some noise. No video and just audio. That was when I said screw it. They win and I lose. BTW, the video worked just fine when I got home and tested it. I've used it many times since with no prob. How did it happen? I have my suspicions but the bottomline is that it did. Could they simply have avoided the camera? Sure. I almost think that was a little message to me. This was the same location where I recorded that Pallyup type call and consider it one of my main areas to visit.

That's a wonderful campfire story, but you have nothing more than that.

[Guest midnightwalker1]

midnightwalker1,

You mean the Sas didn't explain all that when it mindspeaks to you?

efc.

Dude, do you really think that bothers me. I just look at you as some person that doesn't know how to read. Telepathy is well documented, although you may not BELIEVE it. Your belief means zilch to me. The big factor is whether you think the sas are human. If you don't it tells me you've had little to no time in the field amongst them. Oh, you may have seen one but don't know them. No different than JC or some other joker that watched them cross a road. Would love to go out on an outing and maybe you can teach me your wisdom out there. Let me know because you're in Georgia. I'll find out just what you're made of in the field.

[Guest midnightwalker1]

There's nothing wrong with a spirited debate. I'm sure midnightwalker1 realizes he will have to defend any claims put forth on the forum. Everyone should already know that any claim without supporting evidence will likely receive a pile on and rightly so. As long as everyone can disagree or debate the facts without name calling from either side , everything is the way it should be. Great Topic! Chris B.

Chris, I wish I still had that video. It was 2 hours long and I couldn't upload it to my apple at the time. I ultimately had to delete it when I was visiting with Rance down in Florida so I could video tape. I do have the audio of them doing the reconnaissance on my nano. That's at my YT. The video was pretty wild though. I've heard people having their batteries drained but never heard of that stuff. All I know is that my nano worked fine. The video going out had nothing to do with shading of the area or anything like that. It simply went black as I finally got close to the area.

[masterbarber]

Dude, do you really think that bothers me. I just look at you as some person that doesn't know how to read. Telepathy is well documented, although you may not BELIEVE it. Your belief means zilch to me. The big factor is whether you think the sas are human. If you don't it tells me you've had little to no time in the field amongst them. Oh, you may have seen one but don't know them. No different than JC or some other joker that watched them cross a road. Would love to go out on an outing and maybe you can teach me your wisdom out there. Let me know because you're in Georgia. I'll find out just what you're made of in the field.

Is telepathy the issue or is a Bigfoot using telepathy to communicate with you the issue? I've never had an encounter, they don't like inquiring minds with a decade plus of LE experience apparently.

I'm certainly interested in looking at your activity claims.

Use the PM function, we'll chat, I'll look at what you've got, meet with you for an interview and if you agree to all my terms(which will involve total transparency relating to any investigation conducted(apart from revealing the location and any personal information)- we'll go from there, fair enough?

[masterbarber]

Why should I show my best piece of "proof" here? Why does anyone here deserve to see it?

(Let me re-emphasize that it is poor quality, not above being picked apart, etc. etc. etc.)

Why does anyone here deserve to here your story in the first place? You must have had something in mind when you posted it. Did you expect folks to just nod and say WOW, that's great? You don't appear to want any outside input that doesn't match your preconceived conclusion. Help me understand the purpose, if I'm missing something.

[Sasfooty]

You don't appear to want any outside input that doesn't match your preconceived conclusion.

This kinda seems to apply to a lot of people, doesn't it?

[masterbarber]

Regarding your claims? We are talking about those. Did you mean in general on this forum?

If so, most of the folks that will engage a person making claims seem to be reasonable folks who'd just like a little meat with the potatoes.