Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 RayG - "may" means, "may".. Does not mean "is" or "absolutely". I know there are those who refuse to think, I and others, should even consider the possibility that bigfoot may have been involved, but alas, I and others, are bigfoot researchers. We consider every possible explaination - to include what "may" or "may not" be bigfoot related. I'm not playing word games, and that is exactly what this is. Lets not do this. Besides, If I and the rest of the bigfoot researchers, threw out the possibility of bigfoot as being the culprit, what would you do with all your time? LOL. We would miss you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Still not seeing how this moves the research forward. We can stop and cast a print or keep walking in the same direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 RayG - "may" means, "may".. Does not mean "is" or "absolutely". Correct. So would you agree that, 'may be real bigfoot dermals' and 'may contain actual dermal ridges' don't differ in any significant manner? Would you also agree there's an unspoken implication that bigfoot may be responsible for the dermals, just as I said? If so, I really don't see what you're getting defensive about. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Still not seeing how this moves the research forward. We can stop and cast a print or keep walking in the same direction. John, it doesn't matter if you stop and cast the print, or keep following the tracks, they are both leading you to the same result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tirademan Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 John, it doesn't matter if you stop and cast the print, or keep following the tracks, they are both leading you to the same result. Yep... tirademan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Correct. So would you agree that, 'may be real bigfoot dermals' and 'may contain actual dermal ridges' don't differ in any significant manner? Would you also agree there's an unspoken implication that bigfoot may be responsible for the dermals, just as I said? If so, I really don't see what you're getting defensive about. RayG Ray, I am not in the woods, looking for a leprechaun. So, yes, there would be an "unspoken implication" that bigfoot may be the culprit. I already said that though. So, I am not sure why you are getting defensive. I (for the life of me) can't figure out, after 5 years, why it is such a crime to consider the possibility that this animal may be in the woods, when I (and others) call ourselves bigfoot researchers.... Im not being defensive, just cutting through the political correctness that does not help this conversation at all. When "bigfoot" stops being a "possibility", wouldnt you say it's time to maybe look into another mystery or move on with life? And, bigfoot is a possibility, until we prove it's not out there. You can't remove that from the equasion. I suppose you could, but what's the point? Right now we can't prove it is, and we can't prove it isn't. Thus, the mystery we all discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Yep... tirademan I don't get it. Are you citing a letter to the editor as evidence that following tracks will help you find a wildman? Cool story though. I like the 'muscles like twisted cables', Kenneth Robeson stole that when he wrote Doc Savage, that is exactly how he describes Doc's muscles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolftrax Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I have copies of the Heryford casts, but I have yet to see any "Dermals" on them. However seeing the trackway where the tracks are close together leads me to believe the person that made them wasn't the size the tracks infer they would be... and considering that human causes is a more prominent possibility I have my doubts... Elkins Creek cast has human dermals on it, but the longitudinal lines on the side are what lead Chilcutt to believe the cast had squatch dermals, but they look very geometric like burlap, which is used to reinforce plaster, and it's interesting to see the dowel that was also used to reinforce the cast... http://monsterscience.org/wordpress/?p=105 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I think this site clearly outlines all the issues I discuss, and well worth the read. http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/papers/elkins.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Ray, I am not in the woods, looking for a leprechaun. So, yes, there would be an "unspoken implication" that bigfoot may be the culprit. I already said that though. So, I am not sure why you are getting defensive. I have nothing to be defensive about. I sought clarity and eventually you provided it. And, bigfoot is a possibility, until we prove it's not out there. While I agree with the first part of that statement, the second part is illogical. One cannot prove bigfoot is not out there. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I provided clarification a number of times - yet here we are. No, it's not illogical. When people stop filing reports, I would guess the hunt is over for a live specimen. Does it mean we will never find remains? I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolftrax Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I think this site clearly outlines all the issues I discuss, and well worth the read. http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/papers/elkins.html Notice that Area A has the human ridge pattern, Area D has the human ridge pattern, yet these are allowed an accidental application. Area B and A are considered legit because of their placement where the toes meet the foot and dont have the creases that should exist there, even though A exhibits a human pattern. The only real indicator that this is "Squatch dermals" is from Area C, which actually shows the geometric pattern found in burlap and pictured here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Drew, How I choose to spend my time, (or even waste it if we go by your theory), is none of your concern. But thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I provided clarification a number of times - yet here we are. No, it's not illogical. When people stop filing reports, I would guess the hunt is over for a live specimen. Does it mean we will never find remains? I have no idea. Yes, here we are, on two completely different pages of the same book. I think. Your eventual clarification amounted to -- I didn't say that, don't be all defensive, I did say that... And like it or not, trying to prove a negative is as illogical as your explanation. Ceasing to submit reports won't prove bigfoot doesn't exit, nor will finding remains. :blink: RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 (edited) IF there was nothing to this then JC would not be here. IF there IS something to this then it is reasonable to assume (yeah, I know, I know) the big ones make tracks. IF so, then there is value in reviewing what is up with that. If not, I am going home and gonna find something else for fun. Nyah. And maybe it will have 'muscles like twisted cables'....and I can put my hat on it. & Ray, it is sure lookin' like a lotta pages in this book. Edited January 3, 2011 by treeknocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts