Bigfoot Research – Still No Evidence, But Plenty Of Excuses To Explain Why There’S No Evidence

[Guest RayG]

Absolutely no doubt? Where in those 1,700+ posts in that 58 page thread does TJ go from:

"I don't know what it is. They don't exactly show themselves doing it." -- toejam, page 1, post #3

To leaving no doubt in my mind? What evidence has toejam presented that will knock me completely off the fence? A body or DNA would certainly do it, anything else, not so much.

RayG

[Guest toejam]

Sorry but we're not turning this into an attack toejam thread. Cheers

[Oonjerah]

Check out SA3 thread. TJ's got all the evidence over there. It'll leave no doubt in your mind.

My secret code ring is broke. What's SA3?

[Guest RayG]

No attack, I haven't even participated in that thread. I used to be convinced, once upon a time, but the lack of sufficient evidence for bigfoot now leaves me unconvinced.

RayG

[Guest toejam]

No attack, I haven't even participated in that thread. I used to be convinced, once upon a time, but the lack of sufficient evidence for bigfoot now leaves me unconvinced.

RayG

I wasn't talking about you. Cheers

Edited December 23, 2012 by toejam

[Guest]

The day of the big crow feast is coming.

I would think it's more likely that 50 to 60 years from now, BF would be credited for knowing how to refract light when there is still not a single unambiguous image and that he absorbs sustenance through his skin using a mammalian form of photosynthesis to explain how large populations of sasquatches can exist without having any impact to the food cycle, let alone why these things never poop.

[Guest thermalman]

Sorry but we're not turning this into an attack toejam thread. Cheers

No we aren't. Simply presenting references of further BF evidence and commentary.

Oonjerah..SA3

Edited December 23, 2012 by thermalman

[Guest]

No attack, I haven't even participated in that thread. I used to be convinced, once upon a time, but the lack of sufficient evidence for bigfoot now leaves me unconvinced.

RayG

Couldn't have said it better myself...

I'm glad to see people like yourself here..as opposed to those who have bought into BF *HOOK LINE AND SINKER*.

Edited December 23, 2012 by ronn1

[Guest]

Some of us actually saw them first, with no buying in necessary. I hadn't done so much as a single google search on bigfoot before that day in 2007. I'm kinda curious as to why I waited 32 years to subconsciously decide to participate in this mass hallucination.

It's very satisfying to see some people so absolutely certain about their position on the subject . . . and be completely wrong.

As far as proof goes, whatever, I'm not a scientist. I could have shot the one I saw and no, it did not infrasound me into sparing it's life. I flat out couldn't squeeze on something walking away like a man. Sorry that my thinking wasn't, "Holy crap, this is the most amazing thing I've ever seen in my life!!! I gotta kill it!!"

I did think about it afterward though. It certainly would have changed my life a lot more than it did letting it go.

[Guest]

Some of us actually saw them first, with no buying in necessary. I hadn't done so much as a single google search on bigfoot before that day in 2007. I'm kinda curious as to why I waited 32 years to subconsciously decide to participate in this mass hallucination.

It's very satisfying to see some people so absolutely certain about their position on the subject . . . and be completely wrong.

As far as proof goes, whatever, I'm not a scientist. I could have shot the one I saw and no, it did not infrasound me into sparing it's life. I flat out couldn't squeeze on something walking away like a man. Sorry that my thinking wasn't, "Holy crap, this is the most amazing thing I've ever seen in my life!!! I gotta kill it!!"

I did think about it afterward though. It certainly would have changed my life a lot more than it did letting it go.

Only you will really know..for all of us others...your *experience* is just that..YOUR EXPERIENCE. Untill a BF is brought in..or remains found...anything else means nothing to all of *US*.

[Guest]

Maybe bigfoots are just blurry. That's why we can't get a single clear photo of one. They are just blurry out of focused creatures.

[norseman]

Maybe bigfoots are just blurry. That's why we can't get a single clear photo of one. They are just blurry out of focused creatures.

The PGF is very clear......and it's not just a photo. Same goes for the Memorial day footage. In other words in both of those film clips it's pretty easy to make out that they are not charred stumps, odd shaped rocks, black bears, etc, etc.

So then the next logical question is..........is it a hoax? Or is it a real animal?

And I do not think that this is a question that ANY photograph or film clip can solve. Nor should it.

[Guest crabshack]

Is Bigfoot hair really hollow? Would that not do strange things under certain lighting conditions?

[WSA]

Greetings to all. Looks like I now have my settings issues ironed out and can now participate in this discussion. Sorry to be so late to the party. I contemplated reserving a sign-on I.D. of "Sock Puppet", given all the ghost postings DWA made for me while I was working up the gumption to address my computer issues.

Now where were we...?

Oh yeah...this whole proof vs. evidence thing. I'm suspicious of the binary cul de sac of that, so let me just propose the tertiary approach.

On this subject, I prefer to stay away from absolutes. In my line of work, we have an idea of "more likely than not", our you could call it a preponderance. I guess you could say I'm a member firmly of (at least) the "51%" club on the subject of the animal. Although I'm not as well read as DWA on this subject (And let me just say...although he gets a lot of blowback for stating that he is...he is. Believe me. He is. And I'm just not talking about the subject we're addressing. You have to be an omnivorous reader to make any kind of sense of this world, I think, and native genius is way overblown) I do share with him an aversion to walls and ceilings surrounding me. This raises an underappreciated point, I believe. That is: If you seriously want to address a natural history mystery, you have to put in time "out there." I'm not just talking about BF hunting. In fact, I think if the only time you spend out of doors is looking for BF, your natural vocabulary is probably going to be a little stunted. This is why I pay particular attention to the folks who DO spend inordinate amounts of time out of doors. I'm thinking mostly of the folks in the rural areas... hunters, farmers, ranchers, linemen, timber workers, etc. In my estimation, these people, especially locals with connections spanning multiple generations, deserve a large benefit of the doubt regarding what they are seeing, hearing, smelling and, yes, the second-sense impressions we are all so quick to discount. At a minimum, they deserve to not just have their accounts dismissed out of hand. My personal belief is what is underlying the typical attitude towards these people is the whole "country bumpkin" prejudices we've done a very good job of promoting in our entertainment and popular meme. Obviously, that goes way back. Also, as an American Southerner, I'm even more attuned to these attitudes. They really do get in the way.

[bipedalist]

Is Bigfoot hair really hollow? Would that not do strange things under certain lighting conditions?

http://it.stlawu.edu/~koon/mar_ref.html

http://wildpro.twycrosszoo.org/S/0MCarnivor/ursidae/ursus/Ursus_maritimus/05Ursus_maritimusAMPelage.htm

For your perusal. Focus on the colorations obtained, the UV light absorbing properties and the guard hair issues among many. Funny the only coloration that polar bears seem not to be able to obtain relative to bigfoot is black and red according to these references.