Operation Persistence

[Guest]

Disregarding all evidence of something because some is faked or wrong, predetermining your judgement, ignorantly speaking about things with which you're not entirely familiar because they fall outside your standard paradigm. Unscientific. You're not looking for information. You're not seeking an explanation. You're not doing the basic things scientists do.

Thing is, there are footprints. Look at them. Understand their context. When you do, you'll see the standard "fake or bears" won't explain them. There have been hairs collected. They do not match known hairs. They're not cows or dogs or raccoons. They exist and are unique. Understand their context. There have been sightings. Not all are authentic or what the witness thinks they saw, but some are quite compelling. Again, context. There are photos and audio recordings and, true, some are wrong or fake, but not all are easily dismissed if you understand their context. You're ignoring the context of this evidence because it doesn't fit for you. It's outside your comfort zone. Which is all fine and dandy, but...

You spend a lot of time on a forum dedicated to discussing something you say can't be true and anyone who does is deluding themselves. There's context to that, too. I don't believe in flying saucers or crop circles or the Loch Ness Monster and I don't spend one second even looking for conversations on those topics. What would it say about me if I did? Am I trying to bring light to the uninformed and uneducated? Am I trying to better the human condition and persuasively convincing people to spend their efforts more productively? Or am I being an argumentative prat?

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you think. I have my own compelling experiences that tell me you're not seeing the forest for the trees. There is a larger world out there. If my group is successful in its goals (or if someone else meets them in any other way), then you and this entire exchange really won't matter. In the mean time, why not let those who are curious about the world and don't think they know all its secrets have a say for a while?

Edited April 5, 2013 by bipto

[Cotter]

I think the hang up is that it appears that some folks cite the most outlandish 'evidence' and then assign all other pieces of 'evidence' the same level of outlandishness....

Edit - Bipto put it much better than I.....

Edited April 5, 2013 by Cotter

[Guest]

And they're often the "skeptics" who don't differentiate their sources.

I honestly think the whole "it can't possibly be true and you're crazy for thinking it is though I'll hang around here and poke at you with sticks educate you until something really compelling comes along" is driven by having a deep and abiding interest in the subject but being deathly afraid to admit it either to yourself or others. Also, fear of being ridiculed or wrong.

That's it. Really.

[Drew]

Goofy giant footprints, hairs that are 'unidentified', made up stories, and a group of elite Bigfoot hunters that 'know' that Bigfoot breaks deer legs, is not human, and raises coyote pups, and imitates Barred Owls, does not equal scientific evidence.

Asking someone to divert their scientific resources on an endeavor with meager support as that, is like asking someone to study Brontosaurus sightings in Africa. I don't care what you do with your time, but to insinuate that some here are going to educate future scientists to waste time on unsupported tangents is ridiculous.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Drew

[Guest]

Goofy giant footprints, hairs that are 'unidentified', made up stories, and a group of elite Bigfoot hunters that 'know' that Bigfoot breaks deer legs, and raises coyote pups, and imitates Barred Owls, does not equal scientific evidence.

Actually, hair and tracks are scientific evidence. By definition. Also, I like how you mix the mundane with the absurd in order to nullify the whole package. Nicely played.

Asking someone to divert their scientific resources on an endeavor with meager support as that, is like asking someone to study Brontosaurus sightings in Africa..

But posting over 1,600 times on a forum dedicated to African Brontosauruses would be...OK?

Edited April 5, 2013 by bipto

[dmaker]

Hey, I understand your approach. I just can't help but think if the "filet mignon" ( as DWA likes to put it) of the evidence was as good as you think it is, then someone would have put an end to this mystery a long time ago. But hey, it's your time, spend it tilting at whatever windmills you want. We don't have to agree. I find your style easy to read and you make rational, calm points. They don't inflame my sensibilities as much as one of your more ardent supporters. When he gets on his high horse and starts proclaiming how he came here to educate us poor folks like he is some sort of Bigfoot prophet. Well yeah, that gets under my skin. I don't think the young biologists of the future ( LOL, sorry but high opinion of yourself much? ) are best served by someone as close minded as that leading the charge chasing shadows and folk tales. But if they are bright enough, they will just ignore him hopefully. I find myself responding more to him than the subject matter most of the time. Others get caught in the crossfire. Which is why I should stay out of this thread. Our usual battleground is over in the no evidence, but lots of excuses thread. Not here. I should not have wandered.

Edited April 5, 2013 by dmaker

[dmaker]

And honestly if you, or any other team, actually managed to prove the existence of Bigfoot, that would be awesome! I really mean that. I came to this forum because Bigfoot is interesting. Myth and folklore are interesting. But who wouldn't want to see a real, live Boogeyman? I know I would.

[Guest]

I look forward to the day when we can show them to be more than just folklore.

[Guest DWA]

To those who have made this point, and to those who are still working on this:

All proponents are not created equal.

I choose the ones who, when I examine what they are doing, seem to be applying science to this. They never seem far apart from one another; and they bear no relationship at all to the woo-woo stuff bigfoot skeptics seem to use almost exclusively as the windmills against which to tilt.

NAWAC: check. Meldrum: check. Bindernagel: check. Krantz: check.

All those people out there who are independently, and with no signs of copycatting or comparing notes, providing descriptions every bit as guidebook-consistent as all those people describing a gorilla they just saw:

Check. (Those reports, not the recesses of Meldrum's imagination, are where Meldrum's field guide comes from. Legit. How science is done.)

Not so much Ketchum. Not so much Georgia Boys. Not so much anyone who just flatly says "they're human." Really? Why?

As to this:

---------------------------

"I just can't help but think if the "filet mignon" ( as DWA likes to put it) of the evidence was as good as you think it is, then someone would have put an end to this mystery a long time ago."

---------------------------

That doesn't happen because almost nobody has done what NAWAC is doing; and NAWAC hasn't been at it for a stretch anyone in mainstream field biology would consider long enough. It's that old real-people-with-surreal-jobs thing.

And then everybody else likes to mix the filet mignon with the woo-woo stew, which clouds the issue so badly they lose interest.

Stop doing that, and maybe now one can focus some money and time on the high-quality evidence.

[norseman]

Bipto,

I just wanted to say that I listened to your audio file of the conference and I shook my head yes through most of it. Talking about a type specimen, science and conservation was SPOT ON. Your also a very very good speaker. I'm not at your area X so I cannot say anything other than what you have told me..........but if I was the head of your organization, I think I would concentrate on night operations that were capable of taking a type specimen. If something is throwing rocks at your cabin REPEATEDLY through the night, then you have your catalyst. I'd be looking at a self climbing tree stand that could over look the area with a suitable rifle with either a flir or night vision sight. With strict rules that members do NOT get out of the cabin or their tents for ANY reason during the night. At that point it's simply a matter of time.........

Cutting some firing lines into the bush surrounding the perimeter would be prudent as well.

Good luck!

[Guest]

I do probably come across a little jaded as I'm tired of all the excuses and failed promises in Bigfootery. Nothing has been proven, ever, in the history of Bigfoot. Everything is either faked, something else, man made or just pure fantasy. It gets very tiring after awhile. The wizard behind the curtain has been exposed time after time, yet people keep plugging away and trying to will Bigfoot into existence. Anyway, I'm repeating things I've said many times in a different thread. This may seem disingenuous to you, but I don't think you're full of it, or deliberately deceiving.

Are you directing years of pent up frustration towards Bipto though? For what? For trying? For sharing? I don't get bent out of shape and frustrated with the lack of evidence because I never believed any of the claims of imminent discovery regularly made by the shysters of the Bigfoot world. 99.9% of the time the general context and circumstance surrounding the claims are enough for me to dismiss them immediately. Does R.D. seem like the type of person who is going to put in the hard work it takes to advance scientific knowledge? From what I understand a tremendous amount of work and personal expense goes into the NAWAC operations. I don't see them on reality TV claiming to know everything about these animals. I don't see Bipto cranking out 20 Youtube videos a week on Bigfoot Evidence and similar pulp blogs trying to generate personal revenue (like so many other groups). I don't see them perpetrating hoaxes like so many others. People who don't believe the Wood Ape can exist come here and attack Bipto and NAWAC. People who are "believers" come here and attack them. Even people who aren't sure get on here and attack them.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If folks don't believe him I completely understand. I wish people would just state their opinion, "I don't believe you" and move on instead of harassing a guy incessantly for sharing what they are up to.

Hey, I understand your approach. I just can't help but think if the "filet mignon" ( as DWA likes to put it) of the evidence was as good as you think it is, then someone would have put an end to this mystery a long time ago. But hey, it's your time, spend it tilting at whatever windmills you want. We don't have to agree. I find your style easy to read and you make rational, calm points. They don't inflame my sensibilities as much as one of your more ardent supporters. When he gets on his high horse and starts proclaiming how he came here to educate us poor folks like he is some sort of Bigfoot prophet. Well yeah, that gets under my skin. I don't think the young biologists of the future ( LOL, sorry but high opinion of yourself much? ) are best served by someone as close minded as that leading the charge chasing shadows and folk tales. But if they are bright enough, they will just ignore him hopefully. I find myself responding more to him than the subject matter most of the time. Others get caught in the crossfire. Which is why I should stay out of this thread. Our usual battleground is over in the no evidence, but lots of excuses thread. Not here. I should not have wandered.

I don't see a huge difference between what DWA is doing, and what Drew is doing. Are there really a bunch of serious young impressionable scientists here hanging on the every word of a particular poster? Drew regularly justifies his participation here by letting us know that we are just wrong. My general take on his posts is that he is here to save us all from having the wool pulled over our eyes. Many people are here because they have had experiences which cannot be dismissed by someone else's insistence that they are simply wrong, or that they must simply be mistaken about what they saw. I have never shared my personal experiences here. While not a sighting, it is very difficult for me to reconcile those experiences by casual explanation. If these animals don't exist there are some enourmously tall pranksters with superhuman strength, who risked being shot to death repeatedly day and night to scare us from our hunting camp (which it did for me). They risked their lives numerous times to poach ducks (and even an entire deer according to a neighbor). I would like to point out that science once ridiculed claims of Gorillas existing in Africa. Just because people say that the Wood Ape can not exist, does not make it so. For people who have had clear daylight visual encounters, nothing in the world anyone can say will change their minds.

Personally, I am grateful that someone is out there pursuing the evidence, and not doing it to grift people out of money by taking them on "expeditions" for a fee, or trying to get their spot on a "reality" tv show. IMHO their operations have been groundbreaking efforts, and I appreciate them freely sharing information, and I appreciate Biptos continued willingness to volunteer his time here despite the continual negative feedback. If people are frustrated by a lack of evidence, attacking the few groups that take a serious practical approach to gathering physical evidence is probably not the most constructive use of ones energy and resources.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Irish73

[Guest]

I'm not at your area X so I cannot say anything other than what you have told me..........but if I was the head of your organization...

Thanks for the feedback. We have some new tricks up our sleeve this year that we haven't tried before. Some not too far removed from what you're suggesting.

[Guest DWA]

It's very unscientific in the Bigfoot world to not be impressed or massively swayed by anecdotal and circumstantial evidence. In other words, non scientific evidence. You are not very scientific if you insist upon scientific evidence in the bizarro world of Bigfoot.

No, you just aren't very knowledgeable if you post things that show you aren't paying too much attention to the topic. And keep on coming back and back and back doing it. And slagging people who are first, putting in the work, and second, know a lot more about it than you are demonstrating you know.

(Bindernagel. Past page 3 yet?)

[Guest DWA]

I think you mentioned your group has some samples currently being analyzed? That's great. I'm eager to see what the results are when the study is finished. I'm sorry if my comments seem to undermine or disrespect your efforts. I am sure you have a thick skin ( or you wouldn't be doing this) so my opinion, in the end, is of little importance to you. And that is how I would feel, were I you. I do probably come across a little jaded as I'm tired of all the excuses and failed promises in Bigfootery. Nothing has been proven, ever, in the history of Bigfoot. Everything is either faked, something else, man made or just pure fantasy. It gets very tiring after awhile. The wizard behind the curtain has been exposed time after time, yet people keep plugging away and trying to will Bigfoot into existence. Anyway, I'm repeating things I've said many times in a different thread. This may seem disingenuous to you, but I don't think you're full of it, or deliberately deceiving. I'm going to bow out of this thread. I don't enjoy feeling like the big jerk raining on your parade.

This just shows a patent inability to do what needs to be done here: suss out the [dung] from the shinola. Why is this so hard for people to do?

[Guest]

Everything is either faked, something else, man made or just pure fantasy. It gets very tiring after awhile. The wizard behind the curtain has been exposed time after time, yet people keep plugging away and trying to will Bigfoot into existence.

I'd argue that most of what is publically hailed, promoted, puffed, teased, and sold is crap, but there's a metric ton of good stuff that never gets out there that's honest and valuable. We in the NAWAC have made a concerted effort to put forward what we have learned specifically in order to try and counter all that other BS. However, if you're only skating along the surface, it's entirely too easy to dismiss what we have presented as more of the same. I get that. I'm jaded, too. But I also have seen them, smelled them, and felt their presence. That's an advantage I have that only comes from being where they are.

In any event, don't prejudge our efforts. I honestly believe we can end this debate. Not sure if we will because it will take the perfect combination of preparedness and chance to pull off, but we've got a pretty good shot at it. Maybe as good as anyone's ever had.

Edited April 6, 2013 by bipto