Jump to content

Conspiracy Theory And Bigfoot


Recommended Posts

Guest Darrell

Ok, using the word stupid might have been too strong. Maybe plebeian would have been better. But you need to read some of the stuff your posting. Does the old "I know there is a conspiricy because my friends uncle worked for a govt agency 20 yrs ago and said a co-worker saw guys working on a UFO" kind of thing really make sense? If your conspiracy theory on why the govt is keeping bigfoot secret is valid why is my theory that bigfoot proponents are keeping the phenomena alive despite evidence to the contrary any less valid? Ok so I know this is a very pro bigfoot camp, but I did read here that skeptics and our point of view is welcome. Is that true or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BFSleuth

While skeptics are certainly welcome and encouraged to engage in debate, we do strive to keep the forum debate positively on issues and arguments rather than devolving into belittling or personal attacks.

I would question your "evidence to the contrary" statement. What evidence are you talking about? Would you care to expand on that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Darrell

^ Well I point to the published works Bigfoot Exposed, Anatomy of a Beast, and Making Bigfoot to start. All have compelling arguments and evidence that support a counter argument. I would also add the podcasts Monster Talk and The Bigfoot Show which both have provided a scientific and common sense counter argument. And of course there are the many TV shows about finding a bigfoot that cant. Are any of the counter arguments and evidence any less creditable than the pro arguments and evidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

I'm a skeptic who previously gave BF a 1% chance of existance. Recently I've changed that to about a 10% chance. I would love to know they're real.

Don't count on that. When you find out that they are real, its not guaranteed to be a fun-filled day of flowers and rainbows. And if that day comes, what you think right now will not amount to a hill of beans. Nothing wrong with not knowing!

Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn

Darrel

No, the counter arguments and evidence are not any less creditable than the pro arguments and evidence. Thats why they are so difficult to prove because the more they study us the more they seem to reject what we have to offer and can you blame them. Being a skeptic does not make you any less then being a believer or a proponent who has actually seen these creatures. If I had one wish in this life that i could make it would be that i had never seen these creatures.That I would still be in the shoes of a skeptic and be here making the same argument that you are trying to convey. Being a skeptic is the most healthiest thing a human can be and i admire that and wish that i could be back in the shoes of a skeptic.

The one thing that i am skeptical of is those UFO'S only because of the things that we do not know what our gov is building and using those UAV that have been going since the 70. Our skunk works are always ten years ahead of our time so what we seem to know now might of been what we have been seeing ten years earlyier. Just my opionion

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BFSleuth

The evidence to the contrary cited by Darrell each seem to focus on a few incidents of positive BF evidence that are either weak or have been exposed as hoaxes, therefore casting doubt on the entire body of evidence of BF. While they are good skeptical reviews of BF evidence, their arguments don't negate a large body of evidence that has been growing over the years. Glickman's essay speaks to this very well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

Julio126, sorry if you already posted the account of seeing a bigfoot, I am interested in your story !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pukyu

while i wouldnt say conspiracy, silence perhaps, but has anyone considered connections between bigfoot and the "kenniwick man" remains and the remains of 'red haired giants' found in the lovelock caves in nevada. local indian legends , from what i have read, tthere own oral history tells of tales of reducing the populations of these red hair giants and their final extermination in the lovelock caves. the remains have been squashed in the "legal" system and the remains, from what i understand, are being held by the some division of the US goverment.

the huge issue here would be to counter all the claims of all "natives" to land, pehaps. would it not change if the themselves exercised genocide on a native "bigfoot" population?

maybe this has been covered / discussed to death , sorry if so, but i am new to this and figured this might fit under this topic.

look forward to comments.

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

pukyu,

I have mentioned the skeletons found in a cave, not sure how tall the red haired ones were (7-8'), but also I'm aware of a similar find here in PA where they were even taller (10-12'). In the latter case, the individual who found them on his property naively contacted his local authorities and not long after that the skeletons were gone. This is an example of why some people believe there could be an agenda on the part of powers that be, to hush potential contradictions to the status quo. When talking about giants; however, you have to tread carefully because the subject can turn religious or political and this is taboo on the BFF...personally I have no problem talking about them for what they are; giants, and possibly sasquatch carcasses. In any case, with evidence conveniently missing, the account is reduced to an interesting story :(

Edited by AaronD
Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been multiple threads on this and I find the search engine frustrating because the thread i'm looking for always seems to be omitted from the results.

Bottom line: When the remains were found, there were quite a few of them. The find was split up and various groups grabbed portions of the find. Most of the remains have since been lost or destroyed. The Mark Twain Museum in Virginia City, Nevada used to have three of the mummified skeletons on display from the late 60's to the early 80's. I viewed them several times. A prominent uranium miner in Reno had one of the skulls, which his son (a geology student at UNR at the same time as my father) used as an ashtray.

The mummified remains were a foot or two taller than the average person today and were probably more than three feet taller than the average contemporary Paiute.

The remains were taken from the Mark Twain Museum at some point by the BLM, and the last I heard some of them are now held by the Hearst Museum in California. Whether or not this is the set taken from the Mark Twain Museum, or other remains from the site, I can't say.

I did visit the Nevada State Historical Society and they later sent me articles detailing the archeological investigation of the site. Excavation of the layers revealed that the cave had been occupied by people using atlatls for centuries. Both darts and atlatls were found. Arrows were found in the topmost layer, but no bow fragments. There was evidence of a fire in the topmost layer, so overall the evidence backs up the Paiute legend of trapping them in the cave, lighting a fire at its mouth, and firing arrows into the cave as it burned.

The giants were named the stick-thrower people. This is consistent with the use of atlatls. Why would a people use atlatls when other groups were using bows for centuries? The most logical answer to me is that they were, indeed, taller as a race. Short bows are easier to make than longer bows from available materials, unless you have specialized high strength, high tensile woods. For a people with longer arms, and proportionally greater strength, the atlatl would have remained a more powerful weapon than the short bows used by Native Americans, with greater distance and felling power.

There are published articles that ostensibly debunk the original archeological report, but they examine a very limited number of bones from the remains and then insinuate that the original investigator was mistaken.

Given that a 7'-8' tall race of red haired people (this was the size of the remains I viewed) did, in fact, exist in Nevada, I pay a little more attention to reports of mound excavations in the Midwest that describe similar remains. It is clear that a race of such people did exist and that the race, as a whole, has gone extinct. It is not a stretch to assume that they were not confined to Nevada.

Edited by JDL
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

Thanks JDL for that article! very good reading and a lot of great facts and perspective! I clicked the green up arrow for ya :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
chelefoot

Ok, using the word stupid might have been too strong. Maybe plebeian would have been better. But you need to read some of the stuff your posting. Does the old "I know there is a conspiricy because my friends uncle worked for a govt agency 20 yrs ago and said a co-worker saw guys working on a UFO" kind of thing really make sense? If your conspiracy theory on why the govt is keeping bigfoot secret is valid why is my theory that bigfoot proponents are keeping the phenomena alive despite evidence to the contrary any less valid? Ok so I know this is a very pro bigfoot camp, but I did read here that skeptics and our point of view is welcome. Is that true or not?

Absolutely the skeptics point of view is welcome here! If fact, I think having that point of view is extremely important to the validity of the discussions we have here on this forum. I guess I was simply reacting to the wording... I would have reacted the same if it had been a proponent responding to YOUR viewpoint.

Edited by chelefoot
Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

Skeptics and the believers kinda make the yin and yang loop. One present without the other often results in a non-productive vaccuum, but there's a rule here on the forums (and anywhere adult maturity is expected) to attack the arguement; not the opponent. In Darrell's case it might be agreeable to point out the obvious rediculousness of the tale of the uncle who worked for the government and saw someone working on a UFO because it's 4th, 5th person report and seems storybookish; but to call the teller of the story names isn't so nice :( They may be faithfully relaying something told to them--no harm. Likewise, proponents of conspiracy theories bear the brunt of redicule when hoax after hoax is revealed. But think about it, if there is an agenda of the powers that be perhaps hoax after hoax is all we will be able to discover. True, the government does appear to be "all thumbs" in certain instances (most likely where there's no motivation to be efficient) but none can deny the possibility that things we don't know are successfully guarded secrets...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kronprinz Adam

Ok, so a lot of folks seem to think there may be some concerted effort on the part of the goverment or other "sanctioning" entities to limit the information available to the public concerning evidence for Bigfoot. I have always wondered about this but kept my thoughts to myself until I have read a lot of posts by folks here, who I am assuming, have greater knowledge on the subject than I. Is it possible the government has something to hide? Or something to loose if Bigfoot were proven to exist? If so, what possibly?

Hi Aaaron!!!

I have my own theory!!! What if the Government has already the information about the creature, examined it for some time and concluded was no major threat to national security....anyway, the creature evades humans!!! In other words, a strong, but primitive creature!!!!

Greetings.

K. Adam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...