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

[Guest John]

I don't 'believe' anything. But people will insist on trying to convince us anyway.

[Guest RayG]

As if any insurance agent or adjuster wanting to keep their job would write up a payout for "vandalism by bigfoot"... :rolleyes"

But there's nothing stopping them from concluding that it was done by a bears or humans, both of which happen to live in the area. However, since neither of us have seen their final report, we don't know what they concluded.

Still waiting on the records of some guy turning up with a mangled foot, Ray.

What do you mean by 'records'? Second-hand anecdotes, passed along as though they're factual, or actual patient information, which is considered confidential here in Canada?

Besides, stepping on a nail is no big deal, it's something a lot of us have experienced one or more times without any doctor/hospital visit.

RayG

[Guest thermalman]

I don't 'believe' anything. But people will insist on trying to convince us anyway.

Yup. In both directions. I tend to drift towards, evidence proven reality, but with an open mind. It eliminates those who chirp away with nothing at all to show for all their talking.

Edited August 25, 2012 by thermalman

[Guest]

But there's nothing stopping them from concluding that it was done by a bears or humans, both of which happen to live in the area. However, since neither of us have seen their final report, we don't know what they concluded.

I know what they would NOT have concluded, whether it occurred or not, if they wanted to keep their jobs, and so do you.

What do you mean by 'records'? Second-hand anecdotes, passed along as though they're factual, or actual patient information, which is considered confidential here in Canada?

Besides, stepping on a nail is no big deal, it's something a lot of us have experienced one or more times without any doctor/hospital visit.

RayG

Ah, no...

That is definitely NOT simply "stepping on a nail". That's stepping on a whole LOT of SCREWS that would have torn great big holes in the foot (and what a big foot it is indeed).

[Guest RayG]

I know what they would NOT have concluded, whether it occurred or not, if they wanted to keep their jobs, and so do you.

No, you can speculate all you wish, but I don't ~know~, which is exactly why I'd love to see their report.

That is definitely NOT simply "stepping on a nail". That's stepping on a whole LOT of SCREWS that would have torn great big holes in the foot (and what a big foot it is indeed).

Hardly a life-threatening injury. People lie on beds of nails for entertainment. Bottom line, Snelgrove Lake did nothing to lay to rest the bigfoot mystery, and no amount of excuses will change that.

RayG

[Guest BFSleuth]

Seems like speculating may be happening on both sides of this fence, Ray. Speculating that because humans are within 10 miles of the cabin that it therefore follows that humans did the damage and somehow managed to step on a rather obvious screw board set up on the porch (a common bear deterrent in the off season in cabins up north)... and the guy that stepped on the board has feet larger than Shaquille O'Neal.

[Guest]

No, you can speculate all you wish, but I don't ~know~, which is exactly why I'd love to see their report.

Hardly a life-threatening injury. People lie on beds of nails for entertainment. Bottom line, Snelgrove Lake did nothing to lay to rest the bigfoot mystery, and no amount of excuses will change that.

RayG

Now who is making "excuses"? I thought you were against that sort of thing...

The critter stepped on at least a dozen nails (at the same time in the same foot) hard enough to leave blood and tissue behind. That's not a "little injury".

[Guest Gilbert Syndrome]

Your post was well thought out and explained your position very well, a +1 from me. I agree that for those of us who are proponents without personally seeing a BF ourselves, that we also need to bear in mind the idea that we can be proven wrong.

I quoted this part of your post as perhaps the thing that might "turn the tide" for me personally to consider that BF does not exist. You noted that millions has been spent over the course of a 20 year search for rediscovery of the Ivory-billed woodpecker, with teams of trained scientists in the field from one organization. If that level of research and funding was done in research regarding bigfoot and after a similar period of time it was fruitless and could establish the origin of phenomena such as trackways in remote locations, vocalizations that don't match existing known animals, etc. I think I would reluctantly have to give up my proponent stance. It would be refreshing to have a similar level of interest and effort from established scientists in this field and would do much to resolve the issue.

The problem here is that people will always find their "evidence," no matter how poor it may be, it'll serve its purpose of supporting their belief.

I find it hard to see people talking about how no'one has really searched for Bigfoot properly, or spent money on it, 5mins research on Google will show you that way too much money has been spent in my opinion, and nothing gained, as far as Bigfoot goes.

With regards to the "inhuman vocalisations," they aren't inhuman and nearly anyone can make the same sounds within their cupped hands. If Finding Bigfoot is anything to go by, that bunch of people communicate with Bigfoot vocally with great ease and constant success.

Trackways in remote locations don't mean much, these locations are obviously not that remote.

Evidence shouldn't be hard to garner, if this creature is as real as people on Monster oriented tv shows would have you believe, then finding it can't be as hard as finding some of the other creatures we've found over the last 50 or so years.

I'm willing to bet that people will still be discussing this in 10 more years, much like Nessie, with no real evidence to offer.

Edited August 26, 2012 by Art1972
to remove word "weird" used to describe others..

[Guest RayG]

Speculating that because humans are within 10 miles of the cabin....

A couple minutes of investigation shows that it's a fact, not speculation, there are humans within 10 miles of the cabin. We have no such fact concerning bigfoot.

Now who is making "excuses"? I thought you were against that sort of thing...

You're confusing facts for excuses. First, unless you have something that shows otherwise, stepping on nails (or screws) is not something usually considered to be life-threatening. Painful, certainly... life-threatening, not so much.

Second, a quick google image search for 'bed of nails' resulted in over 41 million hits. Many of the people pictured are clearly engaging in entertainment purposes. That's a fact easily verified. What part of either of those statements of mine is confusing you?

The critter stepped on at least a dozen nails (at the same time in the same foot) hard enough to leave blood and tissue behind. That's not a "little injury".

Ah, good, good, then this blood and tissue was easily DNA tested and resulted in a clearly identified, entirely new species, correct?

Sorry, what? No? How can that be?

RayG

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

I assume this is the Snelgrove Lake sample? If I remember correctly they had a lot of trouble analyzing the DNA, but Dr. Nelson finally did and it came back as something very human. But there was a variant that is found in chimpanzees.

"Great apes share nearly identical DNA with man except for a 35-base-pair deviation. The Snellgrove DNA sample has only 1 deviation. According to Nelson, there is only a 1 in 5,000 chance this is human DNA."

[Guest Darrell]

So what will everybody be saying in 10 years when the "evidence" is no more convincing than it is now. I remember Peter Bryne, Grover Krantz, and Robert Morgan taling about how actual proof would happen any time, no more than several years away. That was in the 80's.

[bipedalist]

...I am not convinced that anyone here - likewise Roger Patterson, Albert Ostman, William Roe - has ever encountered a "bigfoot."...................................

Then as an educated person I can only assume that you are sadly mistaken. There are a considerable number of members here with valid sightings, some with graduate degrees and some on their home turf.

Because you do not accept their personal experience of evidence as your evidence matters not in the big picture of their personal proof.

Said by one *on the right side of the phenomenon* as there is no debate for witnesses with sightings under the strictest of conditions, but then I'd be repeating Mulder here wouldn't I. So be it.

Edited August 26, 2012 by bipedalist

[Guest Gilbert Syndrome]

Then as an educated person I can only assume that you are sadly mistaken. There are a considerable number of members here with valid sightings, some with graduate degrees and some on their home turf.

Because you do not accept their personal experience of evidence as your evidence matters not in the big picture of their personal proof.

Said by one *on the right side of the phenomenon* as there is no debate for witnesses with sightings under the strictest of conditions, but then I'd be repeating Mulder here wouldn't I. So be it.

This is something that continues to baffle me: people constantly insinuate that it's unintelligent to disgregard Bigfoot or it's many supposed witnesses. I also don't understand why a witness becomes more credible if he has a degree....

In my personal opinion, it is highly ignorant to assume that there aren't creatures on the earth that we haven't found, but in contrast, I find it highly nonsensical to even remotely consider Bigfoot as being one of those creatures. Common sense should dictate the debate and give you your answer, but I guess it all depends on whether or not you WANT to believe.

All I see here is a bunch of people who want to believe in something that clearly doesn't exist. I'll gladly eat some crow if it ever arrives..... but I imagine i'll be waiting a while, like Patterson, and Krantz etc....

[bipedalist]

My degree is in a field making me a qualified observer of behavior. Yes, you can be uneducated and a good observer or you can be educated and an excellent observer. To tell someone that has seen an unknown bipedal like this at six feet ignorant or anything else along those lines is at your own peril though.

I am a knower Sir I am no longer a mere unqualified believer. Good luck to you in your pursuit of knowledge. But I rather think your motivations belie your desire for further information on the subject matter personally.

I'd be surprised you would hang around long enough on this forum to eat any crow, perhaps a "to go" box might fit the bill in due time I'd imagine.

Further, how many people do you think have a clue what your forum name means without Googling it? Well, I for one do, it is a chronic hyperbilirubinemia and a genetic syndrome which is benign and causes routine blood-tests for bilirubin to read elevated.

Edited August 26, 2012 by bipedalist

[Drew]

No. that might be in the show. But is not what happened