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

[Guest]

Why should anyone need huge amounts of money, to go out and find verifiable evidence that a HUGE animal has been wandering around North America for the last several thousand (or million) years? That didn't stop people from discovering every other large land mammal in North America.

It would seem that Bigfootry has painted itself into a corner with the idea that Bigfoot is a human, by attributing all of these amazing abilities, that can only belong to a human(or a being of higher intelligence).

Those studies took place over many years, and collectively cost millions and millions of dollars. Full-time research efforts don't come cheap. There is a world of difference between a 6-month, fully outfitted field expedition by a fully-credentialed research team and a weekend trip by a gaggle of ameture enthusiasts, however well-intentioned. YOU know that Drew. WE know that Drew.

The only reason the "why haven't we "found it yet" (which, by the way, CONTINUES to beg the question about all the incidents where someone has "found it" (or signs of it), keeps getting brought up is so that you can perpetuate the meme of "no evidence, haven't found it".

[Guest]

It's amazing how Bigfoot guru’s and proponents have custom tailored BF’s behavior and intelligence over the years. Customized so these characteristics can be utilized as an excuse to explain why they can never come out with concrete evidence.

You fail to mention all of the know Hoaxters out their now have radio shows.

[Guest]

Systema Naturae - first edition, 1735. There were many attempts to collect and describe biological specimens between Aristotle and Linneaus, of course. The basic system in use today (e.g., establishing a binomial for every species based on a description in the scientific literature), however, dates back at least 277 years.

Then why did the initial western reports of the gorilla get so universally ridiculed, Sas? Known since Hanno the Navigator, but poo-poohed by the Skeptics of the day in Europe.

You still can't get away from the "experientialism" of Western Science. Until Western Science sees a phenominon in person, it rejects it. Which is belief over true science.

[southernyahoo]

It would seem that Bigfootry has painted itself into a corner with the idea that Bigfoot is a human, by attributing all of these amazing abilities, that can only belong to a human(or a being of higher intelligence).

From the evidence, it appears to me that Bigfoot paints itself into that corner. A relict hominid (member of genus homo) answers for the evidence and lack of proof better than a bipedal gorilla hypothesis. There may not be that much difference between the two biologicly, but if thats the case, then there is no corner.

I really wish that people could see that most proponents are simply making observations about the evidence and forming hypothesis that fit that evidence (as if it were real or could be.), instead of proclaiming their hypotheses to be an actual claim. Much of the evidence may be hoaxed, but the things that repeat will still stand out, and will inform.

[Guest BFSleuth]

Why should anyone need huge amounts of money, to go out and find verifiable evidence that a HUGE animal has been wandering around North America for the last several thousand (or million) years? That didn't stop people from discovering every other large land mammal in North America.

Compare the equipment, time, and funding for the typical group of BF researchers to a single expedition funded by National Geographic as an example. A BF research group is normally paying for their research efforts out of small pockets, getting the best possible equipment they can afford and that equipment is far from optimal. A NG expedition to go capture a few minutes of prime video of a snow leopard for example will pay salaries and expenses and for highest quality video cameras and other equipment for a months long effort. That kind of expertise, expense, and effort is extremely rare in the world of BF research. Most BF researchers are getting out for weekend camping trips with rare excursions into the wild for any extended period of time. The Olympic Project comes to mind as one of the better organized and funded organizations with extended effort over a period of time in their research area, but I think a single NG expedition costs more than their annual budget.

It's amazing how Bigfoot guru’s and proponents have custom tailored BF’s behavior and intelligence over the years. Customized so these characteristics can be utilized as an excuse to explain why they can never come out with concrete evidence.

I think SY nailed it (^). BF researchers aren't "custom tailor"ing BF behavior and intelligence, they are reporting what they experience and we are trying to determine ideas why the experiences are what they are.

[Guest FuriousGeorge]

I can buy the argument that a supposed intelligent and extremely reclusive creature can avoid the least graceful species in the animal kingdom. Not to mention the scent of synthetics and/or McDonald's.

Just get a few spy satellites coupled with the appropriate software to look specifically for a few hours, and I'll be happy with the results. Or at least anything that is a step up or two from fat guys with camouflage and FlIRS.

Saskeptic and Drew, do you believe that the appropriate methods of research have been established, and the results of "nothing" should be the conclusion? I should add, (without the preconceived notion that the animal does not exist) of course. I added that phrase because those reasons above are pretty thin to draw a conclusion (if you have already). I was wondering if you knew something concrete.

[Drew]

Why does it cost as much as a National Geographic expedition, to go to Salt Fork Lake State Park?

Two basic travel scenarios for each type of expedition

Remote Siberian Animal

Fly into an airport in Siberia somewhere with group of scientists, photographer, hire guides, hire equipment carriers, do weeks of track searching looking for an active animal, set up camera, maybe get shots.

Bigfoot

Call up all bigfooters in the Midwest, tell them to meet you at Salt Fort Lake State Park, tell them to bring their own cameras, encircle the perimeter of the park, everyone hikes towards the middle. Tell everyone to pay for their own campsite that night, get Animal Planet to cater breakfast the next morning for everyone, do the circling the park thing again.

[Guest BFSleuth]

So, all you bigfoot researchers that have one $30,000+ professional video camera with at least $20,000 in lenses and can stay in place in a blind for at least seven days, raise your hand!

Anyone with at least $100,000 of equipment including multiple professional quality HD video cameras, FLIR's, etc. can be considered a bonus...

Anyone?

[Drew]

Why do you need all that stuff?

[salubrious]

You fail to mention all of the know Hoaxters out their now have radio shows.

They sure do! My own experience makes it a lot easier to know when I'm hearing a hoaxter on the radio.

Anyone with at least $100,000 of equipment including multiple professional quality HD video cameras, FLIR's, etc. can be considered a bonus...

Anyone?

I got a $1200 Canon HD. Does that count? I can't figure out how to defeat the autofocus...

Funny thing, one of the best (IMO) researchers, Timbergiantbigfoot, has no budget to speak of and more often then not is using a junky camera. But he gets results as good as anyone, not out of anything more than sheer persistence. If he got paid to do that? And had decent cameras??

However at this point its safe to say that the if there was a perfect BF video or film, it will be disdained by the skeptics as fake anyway. And likely a matter of debate for years if not decades. I think we are already seeing that. From what I understand, there has been plenty of solid tangible evidence submitted as well, but what scientist is willing to risk their career by saying that they have proof BG exists??

This is why we all have monikers on this site. Even those of us who have had bona-fide encounters, if outed, we are by definition nutbags. Before 'evidence' can be accepted (which is a lot different from merely existing), we have to overcome the social stigma first, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

IOW, BF is 'not found' due to social issues, not for lack of evidence! http://www.atma-sphere.com/alfg

[Rockape]

Systema Naturae - first edition, 1735. There were many attempts to collect and describe biological specimens between Aristotle and Linneaus, of course. The basic system in use today (e.g., establishing a binomial for every species based on a description in the scientific literature), however, dates back at least 277 years.

I see your point Saskeptic and it is a strong one, but it is not a closed book. We have examples that went unknown such as the Mountain Gorillas and most recently the Bili ape.

I spend time here to try to interject a skeptical interpretation of alleged evidence because I am an educator dedicated to increasing the use of critical thinking,

That is admirable and it is good to have natural scepticism, I think most of us here don't automatically believe everthing we see or hear about BF.

But a closed mind is not a good thing either is it?.

I hope you at least leave open the possibility BF exists. With your statement here - "If there are such things as bigfoots, they'll still be there after we're done saving those other species that really need our help" it seems you don't, and we don't know if BF really needs our help or not, do we?.

[Guest BFSleuth]

Why do you need all that stuff?

I got a $1200 Canon HD. Does that count? I can't figure out how to defeat the autofocus...

Funny thing, one of the best (IMO) researchers, Timbergiantbigfoot, has no budget to speak of and more often then not is using a junky camera. But he gets results as good as anyone, not out of anything more than sheer persistence. If he got paid to do that? And had decent cameras??

The issue regarding the cost of acquiring a professional grade video camera is highlighted in the videos taken by TGB as an example. For video quality that is capable of being broadcast for large format HD television you need a camera that has the capability for recording and storing massive amounts of data and you need some decent lenses. Most BF researchers are buying HD cameras in the $200-$1000 range, a few have gone out to buy cameras up in the $1000-$5000 range. Now look at the very small area that purported BF that are possibly caught on video actually take up on the screen. They aren't standing still in plain sight within 20', they are mostly hiding behind trees at a distance or otherwise in a position that we have to blow up the image and zoom in in order to try and determine what we are seeing. The result has been and continues to be nothing but blobsquatches.

So, if you really want to go out and get professional quality video, then you need professional quality video equipment and especially professional quality lenses. Think telephoto lenses that can gather a lot of light in low light conditions with focal lengths greater than 600mm. That's the kind of equipment that is used by professional wildlife videographers.

Having the equipment is one thing. The next thing is to have the time and inclination to set up in a tree blind or other type of blind in a promising area for days or weeks at a time. That's what wildlife photographers do. I haven't read any accounts of this level of commitment in the world of bigfoot research. I'm not aware that anyone has received funding for that type of research, with paid salary during the expedition.

So yes, it is feasible for a bigfoot research group to go to their local research location (like Salt Fork) and try to get some video, but with crappy cameras, limited weekend jaunts or day hikes, and lack of knowledge or effort regarding how to get "the shot" we are left with fleeting glimpses of blobsquatches.

HRP has alluded to an amazing HD video of grooming BF that can't be released to the general public. That video was apparently shot by someone with an HD video camera from a tree blind on private property with known activity. This instance seems to follow what I've been pushing for numerous times on this forum: get into some kind of blind with decent video equipment and wait for the shot. Don't go crashing about the woods alerting all known wildlife in a quarter mile radius that you are there, and for goodness sakes lay off the tree knocking and call blasting for a change. Get hidden, stay hidden, and wait patiently.... with a great camera and even better lens.

[Cotter]

So basically, the answer to the question "Why hasn't someone gotten clear footage of one of these creatures?" Is simply, "Someone has."

[Guest BFSleuth]

That pretty well sums it up.

[Cotter]

So, perhaps a better question for folks to ask is "Why haven't 'they' shown ME the photos?"

Well, I think if one spends 10 minutes on this very site, the answer is quite clear.

There's a huge difference in those 2 questions.