What Will It Take To Prove There Is No Such Thing As Bf?

[Guest]

It's true you can't prove a negative. They can't even prove Patty was fake or most of the evidence so it will be a never ending legend even if it's not real. That's one reason I don't understand the hardcore skeptics, they can't stop Bigfoot and when they try it just gives it more publicity, they actually keep the topic alive most of the time.

[AaronD]

Yup, at best you can prove there are no BF's in a particular area, region, etc. And the more a skeptic tries, the more attention BF gets

[Guest WIWolfman]

All over the world there are remnants of ages long past, pockets— and there, anomalies that are physically real can exist in less modernised or rather inaccessible areas, animals more so than humans. But, yes they can exist.

Humanly, you could also find an 8-9' giant (or several) with hereditary thyroid over-production, who live alone in hills somewhere with giant footprints... or others with hirsute issues and thyroid and who shun the public. We have a growing other problem though, and that is creatures and humans who have been subjected to genetic interference by humans, not the greys, and they are the next batch of monsters people will point to and give monstrous explanations.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

We have a growing other problem though, and that is creatures and humans who have been subjected to genetic interference by humans, not the greys, and they are the next batch of monsters people will point to and give monstrous explanations.

Is there any evidence for that you can share?

[yowiie]

No one will ever be able to prove they do not exist simply because they do exist.

Its that plain and simple

"They are here"

[ShadowBorn]

I think being skeptical of something is a very good thing and can be protection for us in many ways.

M.O.

Being skeptical is a healthy way of wanting to know what these creatures are.For proponents who have seen these creatures it is very hard to not say that they do not exist.But to proponents who have not seen these creatures well ,it will take nothing to say that they do not exist.

[AaronD]

Well said, Julio

[steenburg]

I had an idea some years ago. But unless I win the lottery I have no way of seeing how this could be done. I called the idea 'THE COQUIHALLA PROJECT'. The Coquihalla highway runs between the town of Kamloops to the north all the way down to Hope in the lower main land of B.C. It was built during the 1980s for the expo 86 event in Vancouver. And it go's through the heart of Sasquatch country. I have looked into several reported incidents along the route since it was opened to the public. The whole length of the highway on both side are lined with wildlife fences. So wildlife wishing to cross the highway have to use 1 of 18 tunnels cut under the road made for safe passage thus avoiding collisions with the fast moving veh traffic. My Idea was if game cameras with solar power panels could be mounted on ether the east or west side of these tunnels, also all the river and creek tunnels large enough for a man to walk through. And monitored 24/7 for what ever amount of time it takes to confirm that all large game, man size or greater, known to be in the area are video taped using the tunnels. If in such a time no footage of a single Sasquatch passing through is found. Than that for me personally would argue that it is likely that there is no Sasquatch to film. It would be a great stretch for people to say, "Aw gee maybe none happened to be there during the one or two years it took to get footage of everything else known to be there". Of course this project would have to carried out in secret so no moron would be temped to dawn a suit to play games. Also not a single camera could be allowed to be off line for more than 48 hours or less or critic's would say' "That's when the Sasquatch went through". If such a project could be done than that would convince me at least that the Sasquatch is a creature of mythology and not flesh and blood.

Thomas Steenburg

[Guest]

I had an idea some years ago. But unless I win the lottery I have no way of seeing how this could be done. I called the idea 'THE COQUIHALLA PROJECT'. The Coquihalla highway runs between the town of Kamloops to the north all the way down to Hope in the lower main land of B.C. It was built during the 1980s for the expo 86 event in Vancouver. And it go's through the heart of Sasquatch country. I have looked into several reported incidents along the route since it was opened to the public. The whole length of the highway on both side are lined with wildlife fences. So wildlife wishing to cross the highway have to use 1 of 18 tunnels cut under the road made for safe passage thus avoiding collisions with the fast moving veh traffic. My Idea was if game cameras with solar power panels could be mounted on ether the east or west side of these tunnels, also all the river and creek tunnels large enough for a man to walk through. And monitored 24/7 for what ever amount of time it takes to confirm that all large game, man size or greater, known to be in the area are video taped using the tunnels. If in such a time no footage of a single Sasquatch passing through is found. Than that for me personally would argue that it is likely that there is no Sasquatch to film. It would be a great stretch for people to say, "Aw gee maybe none happened to be there during the one or two years it took to get footage of everything else known to be there". Of course this project would have to carried out in secret so no moron would be temped to dawn a suit to play games. Also not a single camera could be allowed to be off line for more than 48 hours or less or critic's would say' "That's when the Sasquatch went through". If such a project could be done than that would convince me at least that the Sasquatch is a creature of mythology and not flesh and blood.

Thomas Steenburg

Great idea, I have a ticket for the lottomax tonight, if I win I will sponsor this project, before I board a plane and go into my own elusive existence.

Cheers

[AaronD]

If the gas company drills on my property before their lease is up (sept 2015) I should have some capital, so get back to me on that idea.

[Guest FuriousGeorge]

My prediction... (sorry if you have heard me rant about this before)... it will always be a matter of personal acceptance if we don't find one.

With our advancements and more importantly our desire to have better surveillance satellites, cameras and lenses of different variety for those satellites, and computing power, it's only a matter of time before we will be aware of everything that is walking on the surface. We are probably not too far away right now. We would only need those three things to find everything that walks on the surface in a region. It will be effortless. Just plug the parameters of what you are looking for into the computer, sit back, and let the satellite and computer do the rest. Ten years after that, the home version will be available.

Either we spot it this way or we don't. If we don't find one then, there is no bf IMO. We will have proved a negative. Unless Bf's camera super-spidy-sense works all the way up into orbit and it ducks into a cave . If this happens and we then next have a sensor that gets a reading straight through to the core of the planet, bf will be then supernatural. There will always be a counter-argument. No matter how irrational that counter-argument is, there will always be one.

[AaronD]

Furious George, are you sure we ever landed on the moon? Seriously? LOL

[xspider1]

I heard that some of the Google share holders have started a project to harvest gold and platinum from the Asteroids. I believe that can be done and I'm also sure that we walked on the moon. Just like our Rovers on Mars, it can be done. It's sort of funny to think that at some point in time, we will know everything because that will never happen. It just gets stranger and stranger and we'll probably never know how deep the rabbit hole might get.

: | : D

Edited April 29, 2012 by xspider1

[AaronD]

That was kinda my point, even 40+ years after the moon expedition there are skeptics that have fashioned their "rationale" to support that there was never a moon landing. Likewise, years and years after a body or other "unrefutable evidence" for BF is attained, someone, somewhere, will still be saying "nooooooo, not true"

[Guest]

The biggest problem for disproving it for me has always been the eye witness reports. You can explain away everything else (very very easily in most cases), but the shear numbers become a problem when dealing with eye witness sightings. There's more happening every day, and even if you can dismiss 99.9% of them with misidentifications, hoaxes, hallucination, or whatever...what about that other .1%, or indeed even if just one singular sighting is truthful. As numbers continue to grow how likely is it that every last one of those people is just wrong? That's the problem with disproving sasquatch.