Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 I hate the way this forum will not cooperate with Internet explorer. We have IE at work and I caanoy quote a reply. The Bolded part are questions from Pragmatic Theorist And John, what is the basic difference between Moorehead/Berry's claim of recording bigfoot and you claiming to have seen one? Absolutely nothing. Why should anyone believe you seen one any more then of they recording them? They souldn't and I do not ask them to. You do know that sasquatch exists right? Yes So what's the inherent difference in their claims vs yours? Nothing at all, they are all just claims. Lots of people have heard them vocalize. Lots of people make that claim, yes. Is it because you haven't? Nope, I have heard and recorded sounds that I BELIEVE may be from Bigfoot. I just don't put them out there as evidence, because they are not. You're chatting with Swamp Bandit asking similar questions, No, I requested to meet him face to face and talk to him. He has not responded as expected. all the while wanting answers you can't seem to find. nope, I am not asking for answers. I am asking for PROOF. With proof will come the real answers Why is it so difficult to believe that Moorehead/Berry actually recorded something that you know for a fact does exist? It's not. But my belief is not what is needed. Why cant you get that? Is it just too difficult for you to believe they Sas be able to communicate with humans when they want, in their crude manner? Again my belief has nothing to do with proof. Is it so difficult to believe that M/B became just as serious back then about this mystery as many people you know have become today? Not at all, but my friends don't try to profit from it. Heck, maybe you didn't see bigfoot and actually saw Bob Heronimous in a suit instead? If that is what you want to believe happened to me, knock yourself out. Maybe its Bobby who is in your dreams, not bigfoot? Yuck, sorry for the image. That was nothing but a attempt (and a lame one) to insult me regarding my nightmares. You clearly have anger issues when someone questions the claims of quasi- Bigfoot celebrities. You clearly do not understand that belief is not proof. If belief is all you need, fine. Don't feel a need to attack me for needing more. Actually, go ahead and do what makes you feel better. I don't care.
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 Sorry the last post is so messed up. I cannot even go back and edit the post. I need to just start waiting until I get home to post.
masterbarber Posted November 30, 2010 Admin Posted November 30, 2010 From what I've seen, any "scrutiny" of the stories is met with feigned hurt and pain that anyone would dare ask for anything to substantiate their stories. Without substantiation, the fantastic stories are doomed to remain just that. You speak of evidence, you speak of scrutiny, you mention allowing the story tellers being allowed to speak freely. Stories aren't evidence, scrutiny leads to the story tellers outrage and self-martyrdom, and I've not seen anyone here prevented from speaking freely. A big ole Plus for that post
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 No attack against you John, did you happen to notice the candor at the end? Don't be so ultra critical about every piece of evidence & statement, and maybe allow evidence to grow instead? Why would Swamp Bandit want to meet when you pursue answers the way you do? Mellow a bit. We can't force information out, we need to nurture the process. Just like we can't force bigfoot to reveal himself. Those who habituate, know the encounters are on sasquatch' terms not ours. Ray, it is a valid point to ask about her credentials but to what end? I wouldn't rely on Ben Radford's conclusions either if you are, he too often has been incomplete as well. He seems somewhat reasonable if he'd give things a chance too. Anyway, Nelson provided his credentials and look how you responded. So it might be that Nancy Logan has gone through the same or would fear that outcome? I won't be the one to out her full professional background unless its something she wanted. At this stage I don't know those details but I may eventually request that information for my benefit.
Guest Spazmo Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 I hate the way this forum will not cooperate with Internet explorer. We have IE at work and I caanot quote a reply. You and me both, my brother. It seems to be an issue with IE6 or older. And the really screwy part is that, 13 years ago when I started at this job, our department built all of the systems. But as the place grew, we ended up getting an IT department. Now we're not allowed to touch these systems, and can't install or upgrade software without admin privileges. I've asked many times, with no results. I sit at work wondering why I can't just take the 5 minutes and fix the problem myself, it's so silly. So, like you, I have to copy/paste text to make a quote, I have to write out the quote tags, I can't give "+" or report posts, and each forum page has a big blank "nothing" at the bottom that is twice the size of the actual page. It's ridiculous. But here at home everything works just fine...
indiefoot Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 If "Dilbert" wasn't true, it wouldn't be funny.
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 Pragmatic Theorist said: "No attack against you John, did you happen to notice the candor at the end? Don't be so ultra critical about every piece of evidence & statement, and maybe allow evidence to grow instead? Why would Swamp Bandit want to meet when you pursue answers the way you do? Mellow a bit. We can't force information out, we need to nurture the process. Just like we can't force bigfoot to reveal himself. Those who habituate, know the encounters are on sasquatch' terms not ours. " I will be as crtitcal as I like about all the Bigfoot evidence presented for review. It stinks. If you are happy about 40 plus years of anecdotal crap then fine. I am not. Why do you think I don't submit my personal evidence? Because it also stinks! I do not feel a need to parade bad evidence in public like a little league trophy. You are confusing my indifference for anger. Don't expect me to be appeased or quiet. Belief only gets us so far. You can't get answers unless you ask questions.
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 I saw Nelson speak a year before the OSS at his first presentation at the Bigfoot round-up. Where have you seen someone belittle Nelson in this thread? The problem is not that Mr. Nelson is deciphering a "unknown language" . It is the claim that he is deciphering Bigfoot language from the Sierra sounds. When there is zero evidence to prove that the Sierra sounds were created by Bigfoot. If Mr. Nelson's work interests people fine, but his findings are not evidence of Bigfoot regardless of how interesting some people find his work. John, My post was self-explanatory. If you did not understand it, I invite you to read it again. Hint: The string of questions I cited that were posed by Splash, based on the untruth that Nelson is claiming to decipher any language, is belittling. I never heard Nelson claim that the samurai chatter is bigfoot language. He only claims that the sounds are language and inhuman. He hypothesizes bigfoots are making the sounds, but this is his assumption. Note: it is perfectly okay to assume if one lets it be known that one is assuming. It is only when one assumes without disclosing that one is assuming where one makes an ass of u and me. Pteronarcyd
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 Also, there is no witness in this thread that is getting questioned or bashed. The subject person is Scott Nelson, who so far, has not come to this forum and posted a witness report. Splash, While it appears to be true that Nelson has not shown up and posted a report herein, you do not know if Nelson has visited the BFFs or not. The old timers here have a nasty habit of freely bashing anyone with a position on bigfoot and justifying the bashing on the grounds that the person being bashed is not known to be a member. When the BFFs and moderators afford respect to everyone, that is the day the BFFs will become a respectable online forum. Sincerely, Pteronarcyd
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 Here ya go John, another linguists conclusions about the validity of the recordings itself. Originally concluded with absolutely no connection to Nelson. http://www.bigfootsounds.com/logan.asp PT, Interesting post. Thanks, Pt
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 I never heard Nelson claim that the samurai chatter is bigfoot language. He only claims that the sounds are language and inhuman. I never heard Nelson claim that the samurai chatter is bigfoot language. Not that it matters because it is only like you said assumption, but I have. In Naches Washington May 15, 2009. I also heard Morehead make that claim. He only claims that the sounds are language and inhuman. If they are so inhuman, then why was he able to speak the words during his presentation?
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 PT, I don't care how many linguists have the opinion that the Sierra sounds are from a Bigfoot.
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 (edited) In regards to the post above, I was speaking about the recordings in general, not the "samurai chatter" specifically. Edited November 30, 2010 by JohnCartwright
Guest RayG Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 Ray, it is a valid point to ask about her credentials but to what end? To find out whether or not she has the credentials/qualifications to draw the conclusions she has. Being fluent in another language doesn't make one a linguist. Being fluent in multiple languages doesn't make one a linguist either. Anyway, Nelson provided his credentials and look how you responded. I responded like someone who questions whether or not the resume he provides equips him with the credentials/qualifications to draw the conclusions he has. You may have missed my query the first couple times, so I'll ask yet again: Would you like to see Nelson's work validated by professional linguists? Yes or no? RayG
Guest Posted November 30, 2010 Posted November 30, 2010 Splash, While it appears to be true that Nelson has not shown up and posted a report herein, you do not know if Nelson has visited the BFFs or not. The old timers here have a nasty habit of freely bashing anyone with a position on bigfoot and justifying the bashing on the grounds that the person being bashed is not known to be a member. When the BFFs and moderators afford respect to everyone, that is the day the BFFs will become a respectable online forum. I don't see it that way. Nelson hasn't made a report to this forum. I don't see anyone bashing him. I see people discussing his work and questioning his expertise and ability to perform that work, given the media he is using for his work, namely the Sierra Sounds. Just because a few are incredulous of Nelson's work does not make them disrespectful.
Recommended Posts