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

[Guest]

Quick. What do Native American cultures and European eyewitnesses both agree on about sasquatch?

They are.

You think sasquatches exist in Europe?

[Guest DWA]

What would make you think that? "Europeans" has been used for centuries to distinguish people who came from there from the natives they found when they entered new lands.

[Guest]

So your referring to white Americans/Canadians. If thats the case then why is it hard to believe that American Indian stories might have an influence on white people.

[Guest DWA]

That's pretty much the viewpoint I had shortly after I started following this mystery some 40 years ago.

RayG

No reason for your mind to change, then.

I haven't seen one either. But "personal incredulity" isn't a good rationale. There isn't scientific proof, but I know why that is. Thousands of people have seen them; and there is no reason for me to think they're all wrong.

So your referring to white Americans/Canadians. If thats the case then why is it hard to believe that American Indian stories might have an influence on white people.

Because they simply don't. They haven't from first settlement. The "charming native legend" is how whites pass off what natives think. They see no need to investigate what must be superstition. Period.

To advance that as an excuse for sasquatch encounters simply doesn't wash. It's a naive take by someone who isn't acquainted with the evidence, assuming something to deflect what they don't want to hear.

[Guest]

And that's where you and I differ.

There are too many records over too long a time in too many places that are too consistent for me to believe that it's either (the most likely possibility) a concerted conspiracy of experts or (almost impossible to conceive) a random concatenation of all kinds of false positives that conform to what one would expect if the reports were authentic encounters with an animal.

Well..over that *too long a time* not a SINGLE body or body part. Yes...this is the mantra of skeptics...but it says a LOT.

One would think a sick/wayward/reckless/*teenager/older/ BF would meet their demise in an accident or at least get caught. They do live out in the middle of *no where*..BUT..they also are purported to live within miles of civilization. Add to this, the fact that *WE* are being VERY PROACVTIVE now in seeking them out through technology...and..ZIP.

Nada..ZIP. You can show me ALL the footage in the world...footprints up the Ying Yang... *DNA*...Show me da money

Edited January 2, 2013 by ronn1

[Guest]

Because they simply don't. They haven't from first settlement. The "charming native legend" is how whites pass off what natives think. They see no need to investigate what must be superstition. Period.

Thats quite a broad statement.

The fact bigfoot is a cultural icon now and his folklore can certainly explain the sightings that occur in the modern time. The idea of the "wildman" is something that appeals to all cultures and bigfoot is a modern manifestation of that.

Edited January 2, 2013 by Jerrymanderer

[Guest DWA]

The most common and wrong misconception about bigfoot is that WE (who?) are looking for them.

I am not; you are not; name a person at random, he/she is not. (Keep naming for months. Won't get one.)

("Finding Bigfoot" is not looking for bigfoot. They are looking for ratings.)

Other than a very few people, spending almost zero time and all their own too-limited money, no one is. Why do people keep thinking we're scouring the country for sasquatch? What kind of utter departure from common sense would it be for people who know something isn't real to LOOK for it?

Read the Operation Persistence thread. TBRC are the best. Now look at how often their site gets updated.

That's how much time they are spending.

At the current rate, barring incredible luck, we should have scientific confirmation for sasquatch by 2224.

Thats quite a broad statement.

The fact bigfoot is a cultural icon now and his folklore can certainly explain the sightings that occur in the modern time. The idea of the "wildman" is something that appeals to all cultures and bigfoot is a modern manifestation of that.

Nope. Test. How does the wildman appeal to you?

Same way it does to everyone: charming, but not real. And not what people are seeing.

[Guest]

To advance that as an excuse for sasquatch encounters simply doesn't wash. It's a naive take by someone who isn't acquainted with the evidence, assuming something to deflect what they don't want to hear.

Its also naive to have complete trust in eyewitness anecdotes.

Nope. Test. How does the wildman appeal to you?

Same way it does to everyone: charming, but not real. And not what people are seeing.

What, you don't think BF is popular with the public and numerous people would what to see one?

[Guest DWA]

Its also naive to have complete trust in eyewitness anecdotes.

It is even more naive to presume they all are wrong because, well, you don't have a reason.

I don't have 'complete trust' in them. This is why I want them investigated. Because it's naive and unschooled to presume they're all false.

I'm wondering how many more times I am going to have to point out the difference between evidence and proof.

[Guest]

It is even more naive to presume they all are wrong because, well, you don't have a reason.

I do have reasons

1. Bigfoot's cultural status

2. How memory is recontructed and how it can be influenced by the folklore of bigfoot.

3. No speciman.

Edited January 2, 2013 by Jerrymanderer

[Guest DWA]

Those aren't reasons. Not legitimate ones. They're excuses to not look. And not excuses anyone of scientific bent should accept.

[Guest]

Those aren't reasons. Not legitimate ones. They're excuses to not look. And not excuses anyone of scientific bent should accept.

Look where? The forests of Ohio and Indiana? The garbage dumpster behind the casino?

[Guest]

The most common and wrong misconception about bigfoot is that WE (who?) are looking for them.

I am not; you are not; name a person at random, he/she is not. (Keep naming for months. Won't get one.)

("Finding Bigfoot" is not looking for bigfoot. They are looking for ratings.)

Other than a very few people, spending almost zero time and all their own too-limited money, no one is. Why do people keep thinking we're scouring the country for sasquatch? What kind of utter departure from common sense would it be for people who know something isn't real to LOOK for it?

Read the Operation Persistence thread. TBRC are the best. Now look at how often their site gets updated.

That's how much time they are spending.

At the current rate, barring incredible luck, we should have scientific confirmation for sasquatch by 2224.

Nope. Test. How does the wildman appeal to you?

Same way it does to everyone: charming, but not real. And not what people are seeing.

The technology afforded *US* today far exceeds what was available 30 yrs ago. You now have a MUCH more concerted effort today than ever before. So far>>BUBKISS..ZIP. These aren't Giant Squid 5000 Ft under the ocean (which we have found BTW). They are supposedly BULKY 8ft.. 800 lb behemoths roaming within miles of civilization! AND>>>we can't>>FIND ONE. We can film em...hear em...see their tracts...feed em treats...BUT...low and behold...we can't FIND ONE dead or alive. Of course they are illusive..so illusive they can live among us and go UNDISCOVERED. Undiscovered in a civilization that can spy from space and pic up the #s on a license plate!

[Guest toejam]

That's pretty much the viewpoint I had shortly after I started following this mystery some 40 years ago.

RayG

40 years Ray and still no personal proof? I think maybe a different approach might be in order.

It's really not that difficult to encounter them. Just have to utilize your sources to their maximum potential and persist persist persist.

[Guest toejam]

The technology afforded *US* today far exceeds what was available 30 yrs ago. You now have a MUCH more concerted effort today than ever before. So far>>BUBKISS..ZIP. These aren't Giant Squid 5000 Ft under the ocean (which we have found BTW). They are supposedly BULKY 8ft.. 800 lb behemoths roaming within miles of civilization! AND>>>we can't>>FIND ONE. We can film em...hear em...see their tracts...feed em treats...BUT...low and behold...we can't FIND ONE dead or alive. Of course they are illusive..so illusive they can live among us and go UNDISCOVERED. Undiscovered in a civilization that can spy from space and pic up the #s on a license plate!

Pretty amazing that they're able to still evade us eh?

Once we get over our own ignorance (as a species) and humble ourselves enough to admit that we could very well be getting duped by a large bipedal species that roams our forests, maybe then we can start to gain some ground as far as classification and having an understanding of how they move around us. Closed minds get us nowhere.

In the meantime, many of us will continue our endeavors and work towards contact with them.

Media has created a wall of ridicule and silenced many from conveying their encounters.

Science has created a wall of ridicule and silenced their peers from talking openly about it.

I think the powers that be, the ones who hold the reins are just reluctant to let the truth be known because it changes everything.

Call it conspiracy, call it what you want but it's news that will change much of what we've been taught.

That's a slippery slope.

There's enough of us out there right now doing the deed of fieldwork, gaining momentum towards contact and hopefully more evidence for future analysis to one day reveal the truth.

Truth is inevitable. Only time stands in the way.