dmaker Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I think it would be great to have a habituators section. Not sure if that would happen, but I would definitely love to see all habituator threads put in one spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheri Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Nod4Eight, Sasfooty is witty in her answer's., and funny. It's just not what you want to hear. I find it a great way of responding instead of being rude or letting anger get the best of her. In my opinion you were being rude and mean. Maybe you weren't meaning to be. There are way's of talking to people to get a better response from them. I am only reponding to you because you used my word's in your post. Otherwise I wouldn't be saying anything. I know Sasfooty doesn't need me defending her, LOL. Sasfooty thank you. I am building my courage to post my sighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Owl Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I don't know if anyone picked it up on the video, but my fat bohunkus was huffing and puffing from the hike in there! The rig I had-mini cam and scope-both fit into my front shirt pocket. Light and very easy to carry. I was expecting to see something much closer, but that was no guarantee either. We could hear them stirring around from several locations because of the dried leaves on the gournd, but could never see anything. The sighting I had was very brief and over 100 yards away! It is a prime example of just how cautious these subjects can be. The brief glimpse, distance and brush would tax even an expert video technician working under those conditions. They are fairly used to seeing people with cell phones. Anything much larger than that, that you bring up to your face, they will be gone in a heartbeat...now if I could just get them to sit still for a family portrait!!!.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheri Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Grifter thank you. There are things that have been said that don't make sense to me either, but I have only had 1 sighting. I can tell you it was sneaky. What I can't say is they are not having the experience's they say they are having. I am not in their shoe's. If I was, I think It would be even harder to open up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Because the experiences are bigger than telling people who will think your nuts. Its like a deep dark secret you have to keep. Not everyone wants to announce BF to the world. If they want to keep their furry friends a secret, they probably shouldn't be blogging about their experiences. If they're going to post about it online where the public can read about, the public has a right to say proof or get the heck out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 No more so than the 'public' has to tell people who profess skepticism but continually express uninformed opinions to get informed or get out. Correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 ^^ You in charge now DWA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Better than leisureclass, right? You say so yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 (edited) No more so than the 'public' has to tell people who profess skepticism but continually express uninformed opinions to get informed or get out. Correct? Get informed or get out? Lol You do that all the time. It's how you shut down conversation when presented with the idea you may be wrong. My opinion is just as informed as yours and I present it as just that. An opinion. Not fact. Your opinion and the scientists you believe in have failed to produce sufficient evidence, let alone proof. Not so far, not as of yet. As of now. Edited May 31, 2013 by Squatchy McSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Well if leisureclass can do it...sauce for the goose! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 This is a good point, and it is something I too have noticed. I have always felt that those who are in a position to get good evidence should be willing to actually get it, and then share it with the community. But then again I have a much more scientific mindset and approach to the topic of bigfoot as a whole. I view the sasquatch community as a gathering of like-minded, scientifically inclined individuals and groups. But I suppose that this is assuming too much, since obviously not everyone has the same methods and goals. The main arguments that I can understand regarding an unwillingness to gather evidence in a situation like this are first that the people become attached to the animals, even though these animals are not viewing the person as their "friend." And second, people fear ridicule. But I have arguments for both of these instances. First, the sasquatch are coming to a specific location for a very specific reason. The most likely reason is that they are being given food. Like many other wild animals, the life of a sasquatch will revolve around its stomach, since they cannot run down to the grocery store and purchase some ham. They probably wouldn't even understand the concept, because if they could, I would have expected them to develop a society that is less primitive than that of independent family units, such as tribes, villages, etc...But had they done that already, they likely would not still be thriving, so maybe I am the one who is stupid here... Anyway, viewing sasquatch as friends is a mistake. If they viewed a human as an equal, they would allow much closer encounters, and maybe even slight physical contact, or other forms of face to face interaction. To my knowledge this does not happen, and may have never happened, at least not recently. But some people may not view them as friends, but as wild animals whom they wish to protect. Here is the truth about how discovery will affect the sasquatch population. If things continue the way they are now, the population of sasquatch in North America will have no choice but to decline. We encroach further and further into their territory every year, and up until now they have adapted because there is still plenty of habitat for them. But I am quite certain their population is growing, sightings are increasing and will continue to increase at a phenomenal rate, and quite soon, maybe within the next few decades, there is not going to be enough room for all of them. Once scientific discovery occurs, and we begin to learn more about their population in general, it is a given that many locations will be established as refuges for these animals. And more importantly, many of these areas will not be public places, but will be reserved for sasquatch only. So now we have state forests and the like, but there are still people there. This is going to have an affect on the sasquatch in one way or another. So the best thing for them would be discovery, because that is the only way to ensure them a future. And like I said, they can continue the way they have, and be fine, but only for a while. Eventually they will NEED protection from us, whenever that may be. So those who think they are doing these animals a favor are wrong in my opinion. The other argument I mentioned is that these people fear ridicule. It is true that no picture or video can conclusively prove the existence of sasquatch, plain and simple. It just cannot happen, because there will always be those who discount the evidence, because it is inconclusive. And those who fear ridicule are right, they will be ridiculed by some, even if their evidence is authentic. But someone who is habituating sasquatch is in a unique position. They are not subject to freak encounters on the sasquatch's terms...rather, they will have multiple opportunities to get evidence that is much better than a fleeting glimpse. They have much more flexibility in gathering visual evidence, and even physical evidence. And I believe that they should use their opportunities to gain such evidence. I believe that many in this situation have obtained evidence of this nature, yet they do not publicly release it. I personally know that there are quite a few people on this site who have viewed private footage, and agree that it is probably better than most other footage out there. Some have claimed footage that is better than the PGF, which is the best we have today, considering that it shows not only the physical specimen, but the animal's movements as well, over a fairly lengthy period of time. I think I may be overlooking some prominent reasons for withholding evidence. I would bet that there are some people who are holding out to make money from their evidence. Honestly though I have no clue why someone would not release evidence. I suppose that this is because I would not withhold evidence, since I would not view sasquatch as "mine," and I would not fear ridicule all that much. The opinions that I would actually care about, from the people who I know are objective, would be the only ones to matter to me. And I am quite certain that if the evidence was good, they would draw the correct conclusion...that it is authentic. So for whatever reasons individuals, and even research groups, withhold evidence, I believe they are wrong. Where is the SCIENTIFIC spirit and methodology? Does not science involve sharing one's results with the rest of the community? By withholding evidence aren't those people simply serving to validate the conclusions of many professional scientists, that the sasquatch community is NOT scientific? I think these people are hurting the community. ESPECIALLY those who claim to have evidence and then never release it. Many people never claim to have evidence, even if they actually do. We hear about that evidence through other people, people who were fortunate enough to have viewed it. Something that good evidence can do, if it cannot prove the existence of sasquatch, is generate the interest of people who may go on to fund research of their own. A really good piece of video can generate quite a bit of interest, and may convince someone that they should throw their hat into the ring, starting their own investigations or giving resources to those who will study sasquatch. So again, the community as a whole is suffering from the withholding of evidence. We must not overlook the fact that there are many people who denounce those with private evidence simply because they want to freakin' see the evidence. I can understand this, but that type of attitude is not going to get us anywhere. In fact, that type of attitude is just as selfish as the withholding of evidence to begin with. So we should want people to release private evidence not to satisfy our curiosity, but rather for the benefit of the community, and the sasquatch, as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I don't often agree with you Jiggy but I plussed that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xspider1 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 There are some really good posts above from both sides of the fence. plusses! I can understand not wanting the general public to invade a BF sanctuary. This should be a place for BF experiences to be shared without unreasonable demands for proof. Is it really surprising how difficult it is to take close-up pictures/video of them (even if one wanted to) and that they don't stick around for the 'slab body' scenario? Well said and very reasonable comment above, Saskeptic. thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Jiggy, I can't imagine any higher level of ridicule than one would receive from making claims of constant and personal contact with an individual or group of BF and not proffering any sort of proof other than their word. It used to be you could take person on their word, but these days, with all the hoaxes and charlatans out there, you just can't anymore. I know it, you know it, and those making claims with nothing to back it up know it. xspider1, what exactly is an "unreasonable demand for proof"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Because the experiences are bigger than telling people who will think your nuts. Its like a deep dark secret you have to keep. Not everyone wants to announce BF to the world. If they want to keep their furry friends a secret, they probably shouldn't be blogging about their experiences. If they're going to post about it online where the public can read about, the public has a right to say proof or get the heck out. This isn't a blog. It is a private forum that requires registration and approval from the Moderators to post comments. So technically there is no "public". As a result, you have no "right" to demand anything. But you do have the right to choose what you do or do not decide to read here. The fact that you think you have right to say "proof or get the heck out" only serves to highlight your inherent fear of the unknown. Fear of the unknown is the classic symptom of a pseudo-sceptic. Bigfoot to a pseudo-sceptic is like a Tiger in the jungle. You know the Tiger is there because you can hear him and smell him. But you can't see him and as a result you're terrified. So in a desperate attempt to allay your fear you tell yourself that the Tiger doesn't really exist. Hence your Santa Claus analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts