Bigfoot And Trains

[Guest AllSport]

Jeez.....you guys are really bored or something..

All we are trying to do is discuss it? Is that okay, on THE BIGFOOT FORUMS? You guys are like a bunch of little kids in the sandbox hogging the shovel, and telling everyone else how to use it.

Who is being sanctimonious Cervelo? I just like discussion, and Puff framed his post, and sprinkled it, with lots of condescension, and generalization.

The point is it's all conjecture! Okay?

I don't think Puff should selectively focus on certain forum members, it's a pattern not an isolated incident. It get's personal, and that's unfortunate.

Not one of us has a Sasquatch behavioral manual. I understand some have a higher threshold for what can be termed evidence.

What's troubling is their presumption, that no one else should be able to talk about it, without some ridicule, and derisive critique.

FYI Cervelo, my skin is awful thick, but I'm not a fan of bullying anywhere.

Edited May 5, 2012 by AllSport

[Guest]

Bigfoot behavior is full of speculation, controversy, and conjecture. As is their very existence. How can one piece of evidence be preposterous, but another is not? What do we base that on? They can whistle, mimic, even talk, but they can't jump on a train? If they have the physical capabilities of other primates, rather than being the wimps Humans are, it would be pretty darn easy to hop a train.The reasoning that it is a ridiculous claim is no more valid than the claim itself. Constantly we see "judgments" on their intelligence, or lack of it, and behaviors, all based on our own, or what we conceive as guidelines to such things.

Stan feels he saw something on the train, and there are numerous reports of them interacting with area's around trains. Suddenly we see a whole bunch of self proclaimed experts step up, and ridicule it, or support it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? I agree, how about, extraordinary claims of Bigfoot knowledge, require extraordinary evidence?

[Doc Holliday]

Look,stans one of the good guys, & maybe it was BF,maybe not.I wasn't there looking over his shoulder.

If it was a hoax,I'm sure he'll nail the bum.

But really, is it any suprise when all of a sudden multiple folks claim the same?

I would like to see this be taken a little more seriously in the public eye,but the "me too" tendency shoots us in the foot.

I can't speak for bro puff,but I think his motivation may be simply wishing to provide a quality forum & attempt to lend at least a little credibility to an incredible subject.an uphill effort,yet one I can appreciate.

[Guest Cervelo]

Allsport,

Those are your issues not mine or this fourms and have nothing to do with biggie riding trains

[Guest]

Credibility with this might come easier if we did a better job of weeding out the crap,if thats possible....imo & all that.

Well one would think slicktrick but so long as folks are willing to accept the unbelievable and extraordinary claims sans proof we are all going to be lumped into the *loon* bin.

Sort of why I try and speak out as I do not want the subject to suffer and the extreme elements be laid on all of us who are proponents.

Of course I know of at least a dozen who have already left the forum due to such claims as well as another 12-14 that are close to walking.

Dunno, in my role I speak out to try and keep them around. Doesn't seem like a fair trade to keep 2-3 members and lose 25 or so.

Basic math and all.

Thanks for the clarification Puff, it wasn't clear what your intent was and yes you are entitled to your opinion.

I believe Stan saw what he says he saw, now whether mistaken or not, I don't know. I don't have an opinion, one way or the other, on the other two stories as stated above.

No worries Jodie. I believe but there are limits to my belief.

I know Stan to be of the utmost character. I believe he believes in what he stated as well. And, there are few in the community I trust more than I do him.

He's just well respected and has earned a certain measure of deference.

Do I think BF hops freight trains? Nope not at all.

I think it is silly.

I can't speak for bro puff,but I think his motivation may be simply wishing to provide a quality forum & attempt to lend at least a little credibility to an incredible subject.an uphill effort,yet one I can appreciate.

I want the subject to be taken seriously. I find myself inundated with PM's from members, all proponents, who feel we are becoming a *tabloid* site. Again these are proponents. The skeptics just laugh at this crap and do not waste their time.

So yeah, it is an uphill effort and numerous researchers have walked due to the incredulous and unsubstantiated claims and multiple others say they will if something isn't done to reel in the insanity.

So, do I cater to the 3-4 on the extreme end or the 25 or so in the middle?

I'd like to maintain both but that might not be possible.

I don't think Puff should selectively focus on certain forum members, it's a pattern not an isolated incident. It get's personal, and that's unfortunate.

Who's zooming whom here? You've made all of 29 posts and been a member since June of 2011.

Earlier in this thread, the parkie asked...

Can anybody point me to Sasfooty's original account re trains? I don't remember reading it and I would like to.

Many thanks

I just quoted from my memory that she said she could have told us they rode trains several years ago.

Not my fault that she also is the one that claims they zoom around at 40-45 mph, might smoke, wear overalls and be coiffed in ponytails.

There is a pattern of incredulousness but it isn't from me.

If you think there is I have some ocean front property in Nebraska to sell ya'. Interested?

[Guest MikeG]

Just to drag this slightly off-topic for a second........

I agree wholeheartedly with most of HRP's concerns about the wilder claims made for sasquatch, but would just take a little closer look at two. Firstly, the 40mph speed claim. The fastest humans can reach 28mph. We're a skinny little endurance athlete in animal terms, so I don't find it inconceivable that a powerful and large primate might be able to run a bit faster than us........Frankly, almost every large mammal on the planet, including hippos, can run faster than us, so I'd be rather surprised if (assuming they exist) sasquatch can't outrun us fairly comfortably.

Secondly, the riding on trains thing. It sound ridiculous, but as people have pointed out, lots of different animals ride on trains. Monkeys do it routinely, both in India and Africa. Dogs and cats do it....you'll find stories everywhere if you search. I have even heard of a cow that used to do it. Trains often stop in completely wild areas, and if a sasquatch happened to come across a stopped train, and climbed on it, and maybe hung on for a few seconds before jumping off after it started moving, then why couldn't that be extended to learned behaviour , or just be understood as a game? I mean, animals do the weirdest things. There are goats in Morocco who climb around in trees. There are lions which have learned to climb trees. I've seen a giraffe lying down to sleep. There are whales which all but beach themselves to capture seals.

So, personally, whilst I find stories of smoking, wearing clothes and the like to be frankly ridiculous, I'll give some credence to the idea of a 40mph top speed, and about a 5% chance of the occasional sas learning to ride on a train.......given the proviso, of course, that they exist in the first place.

Mike

[indiefoot]

I have said this before and believe it to be true. There are two extremes that are really the same thing in the end.

The first is "If I don't believe it you can't believe it."

The other "I believe it and you have to believe it too."

Edited May 5, 2012 by indiefoot

[Guest]

That is so true indie, and we see it here, everyday, on every level. My personal opinion is, if Bigfoot exist, then it must be more intelligent than generally accepted, and it must have a basic knowledge of us and our society to go undetected for so long. From my point of view, going on the assumption of existence, that anyone who thinks this is just another "animal" or "monkey", is dead wrong. Would I pm administrative staff because I am offended others disagree, and threaten to leave? Come on, if I did, I would hope the admin would be wise enough, to say, hey, see you later.

[indiefoot]

I wonder how many good folks have left over the years because of frustration with hard core scoftics? Hundreds?

[Guest]

I have certainly found many scoftic related posts on here very offensive. But it is a forum, and you have to take the good with the bad.

[Guest MikeG]

Look at it this way, Indiefoot.

For decades, geologists and geomorphologists were hounded by extreme sceptics regarding the meteor strike which ended the dinosaur's tenure on the planet. They picked away constantly at every little bit of evidence the scientists put forward. In the end, their arguments drove the scientists to fill every tiny little gap in the picture, prove everything to the nth degree. In other words, those damned nuisances, who were so wrong all along, made the science better......to the point now where the meteor strike and associated KT boundary and iridium layer, is universally accepted as the explanation for the demise of the dinosaurs. The case was effectively made bullet-proof by the intervention of the nay-sayers forcing a higher and higher standard of evidence.

So, suffer the scofftics, I say, because in the end they will force the proof to be stronger. This isn't about the health or otherwise of a forum, so much as the proof or otherwise of the existence of a large unrecognised mammal. Grind them down with evidence and argument!!!

Mike

[Guest]

I have said this before and believe it to be true. There are two extremes that are really the same thing in the end.

The first is "If I don't believe it you can't believe it."

The other "I believe it and you have to believe it too."

Plussed indie.

Pretty fair synopsis and worthy of recognition.

The heck of it is that we are all individuals and capable of making up our own minds related to what we can/will believe.

My way isn't the way by any stretch.

It is what works for me.

Others might have higher or lower standards.

I wonder how many good folks have left over the years because of frustration with hard core scoftics? Hundreds?

No denying at all that there have been a few.

Funny thing is that the skeptics/scoftics pay little attention to the subject. The just do not believe. There are those that they do run off though. No denying that.

The toughest group by far is the proponent/researcher group that feel their efforts are diminished by the uncorroborated and extraordinary claims.

[indiefoot]

Some people are adamant that if BF exists, it is in the PNW, anything else defies logic. This reminds me of inmates fighting over how to properly wear foil hats.

[Guest AllSport]

hang on a second....I have no problem with skepticism, and critical discussion.

I voiced a concern over what is obviously a certain number of forum members, Puff said 4 or 5 I think? that are consistently targeted and singled out, in an effort to silence them....

that's not a forum, that's not discussion, and that's not the way I thought this forum was administrated...

I think some claims regarding bigfoot are 'out there' to say it nicely.

Now do I think lumping the train sightings in the with smoking, ponytails, and overalls is fair? No I DONT! It's an insult to Stan, and his sharing of this incident on the forum.

If member posts are removed for getting personal and attacking the poster, not the post, what kind of example is Puff setting.

BTW, I left this forum in the past because of the same sort of thing. I came back when I heard things had changed for the better. So much for that.

It really is a shame, that individual models for bigfoot behavior, and the limits of their own personal acceptance, governs what is acceptable for this forum. The targeting of members for their personal view on Sasquatch, the subsequent dogpiling of said members, and the stifling of those who sympathize with them, is immature, and ignorant.

The word 'Forum' typically implies that an exchange of ideas and views take place.

Edited May 5, 2012 by AllSport

[Guest MikeG]

Guys, I don't want to stifle any discussion at all, but we're straying somewhat.

Can I make a gentle suggestion to drag this back to the thread title, and take other discussions elsewhere, please?

I'll happily hear any gripes about the way the forum is administered by PM, and will deal with them honestly and fairly. What I don't want to see is a thread about BF and trains deteriorate into a discussion about the perceived ills of the forum.

Many thanks

Mike