slabdog Posted June 30, 2013 Author Posted June 30, 2013 WARNING POST! Severe and swift disciplinary action has already resulted from antisocial behavior and trolling in this very thread. Trolling and anti-social behavior will NOT be allowed. That includes excessive badgering which serves no other purpose but to derail the thread and debate. It will not be tolerated. Period. Keep the debate spirited, keep the debate lively, but above all, KEEP THE DEBATE CIVIL.
Guest Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 I just got back from spending three weeks in Area X. My husband did three weeks himself prior to my time. I can tell you that every single thing bipto has ever said is completely true. I stand behind the NAWAC with every bit of my reputation as a scientist and a researcher. Sometimes I think that the idea of wood apes really scare a few people. Maybe you aren't as safe in the woods as you think you are? Maybe there are things you don't know about? Maybe you are just scared of the dark? Hairy Man, I do not believe Bipto is lying about anything. Much of what is occurring in Area X is ambiguous and Bipto has admirably and honestly retained that ambiguity. However, it is Bipto's and your interpretation about what is happening within that ambiguity that ought to be challenged and not simply accepted as fact. You're a scientist and you agree. If you take away the eye-witness accounts by individuals not confirmed by others, one could make a credible case for the events described as a combination of outside hoaxing and the expectant anticipation and imagination of committed believers. Another concern: NAWAC cannot claim to be scientific and then be dismissive of criticisms by using the ad hominen, as Bipto employed against the sensible comments of alaskaloner. As to the nature of the beasts you believe you are encountering, could you list behavior traits that do not fit the ape hypothesis? Would that not be a good exercise?
Guest zenmonkey Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 (edited) I just got back from spending three weeks in Area X. My husband did three weeks himself prior to my time. I can tell you that every single thing bipto has ever said is completely true. I stand behind the NAWAC with every bit of my reputation as a scientist and a researcher. Sometimes I think that the idea of wood apes really scare a few people. Maybe you aren't as safe in the woods as you think you are? Maybe there are things you don't know about? Maybe you are just scared of the dark? Hairy Man, I do not believe Bipto is lying about anything. Much of what is occurring in Area X is ambiguous and Bipto has admirably and honestly retained that ambiguity. However, it is Bipto's and your interpretation about what is happening within that ambiguity that ought to be challenged and not simply accepted as fact. You're a scientist and you agree. If you take away the eye-witness accounts by individuals not confirmed by others, one could make a credible case for the events described as a combination of outside hoaxing and the expectant anticipation and imagination of committed believers. Another concern: NAWAC cannot claim to be scientific and then be dismissive of criticisms by using the ad hominen, as Bipto employed against the sensible comments of alaskaloner. As to the nature of the beasts you believe you are encountering, could you list behavior traits that do not fit the ape hypothesis? Would that not be a good exercise? I dont personally know bipto or anyone in the NAWAC. but after studying hours of podcasts from BB and people like Katy Strain I would put 100% on the fact that they are the real deal and are out doing things for this subject I can only dream about doing. I am sure they are totally 100% honest. I am almost shocked at the disrespect that I read on this subject. Just wanted to tip my hat to everyone in the group and say thank you. You guys are on the leading edge and keep it up! Edited June 30, 2013 by zenmonkey
Guest DWA Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 Hairy Man, I do not believe Bipto is lying about anything. Much of what is occurring in Area X is ambiguous and Bipto has admirably and honestly retained that ambiguity. However, it is Bipto's and your interpretation about what is happening within that ambiguity that ought to be challenged and not simply accepted as fact. You're a scientist and you agree. There's a difference between challenging the evidence and just saying "you're wrong," and not providing any evidence that the other person is wrong. If you take away the eye-witness accounts by individuals not confirmed by others, one could make a credible case for the events described as a combination of outside hoaxing and the expectant anticipation and imagination of committed believers. One "could make a credible case." Why then is there to date no credible case? This is the fundamental skeptical pitfall: thinking that the case makes itself, when in all scientific debates the case requires evidence, and there is yet absolutely no evidence to support that "credible case." Another concern: NAWAC cannot claim to be scientific and then be dismissive of criticisms by using the ad hominen, as Bipto employed against the sensible comments of alaskaloner. Show no respect and take the risk that no respect will be shown. I go with zenmonkey: "I am almost shocked at the disrespect that I read on this subject." Disrespect backed by nothing is disrespect cubed and 500 added to the result, and the result squared. As to the nature of the beasts you believe you are encountering, could you list behavior traits that do not fit the ape hypothesis? Would that not be a good exercise? From one who has made a good read of the evidence, "none" would be a good response to the question.
Guest Suesquach Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 Zenmonkey, I concur and couldn't have said it better myself!!
Guest zenmonkey Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 ya sorry I just had to get that off of my chest. Bipto, do you think the chances of an encounter are higher sleeping in a tent alone at X or in one of the cabins?
Guest Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 (edited) JW, head over to the JREF. Find the thread from two years ago when we first started talking about Operation Endurance. I'd find the thread for you, but I wouldn't go back to that cesspool if you paid me. Find where our Alaskan friend began his quest to find X. Not so he could confirm our observations or validate our claims, but so he could talk others into going there and interfering. He carelessly and callously encouraged others to put our members and themselves in danger by walking in and disrupting our work. He incited them to break laws by trespassing. Would anyone reading this even continue to engage *at all* in the face of this kind of abuse? Bipto, do you think the chances of an encounter are higher sleeping in a tent alone at X or in one of the cabins? It's a good question. We've had both approached. They seem to be boldest when they think they're unseen, so IMO it's about a horse apiece. Edited July 1, 2013 by slabdog Remove content
Airdale Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 I also appreciate what you are doing in Area-X, Bipto, and the information being passed along to those of us thirsty for data from credible sources. In my case, and likely others as well, I'm currently physically unable to do really serious field work and am especially grateful for your group's generosity. Thank you!
indiefoot Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 I would like to see a zero tolerance policy on outing of any kind, both here at BFF and community wide.
Airdale Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 I must respectfully disagree, Indiefoot. The only way anyone can make informed decisions is with information. As a relative newbie to the forums and current bf research, I want to know how much credibility to assign to a given source. In the case of the individual referenced by Bipto, I could deduce a certain amount by the tone of his post and the fact that I don’t recall ever seeing his username in any of the thousands of posts read over the last six months or so. Bipto is a source whom I’ve come to trust, and his information in this case is valuable. If there is information at odds with Bipto’s, I would welcome that also. No personal information was disclosed, i.e. name, address, etc., only a different username from another site. Thanks again, Bipto.
Guest COGrizzly Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 dmaker - I could be wrong, but I think the way "science works" is if they actually had a body or a part of a body, they wouldn't be able to tell you if they had because of NDA's or whatever they are called. Bipto and Hairyman - I am so incredibly hopeful that you two and your group get one (or several, even better) on the "slab", as they say. My "belief" of their existence is in serious jeopardy. Fingers crossed. Good luck ladies and gentlemen.
NCBFr Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 Bitpo - Thank you for all of the hard work you and your team have put in to this effort, especially the communication. I love threads like these (except the tedious trolling of course) that touch upon single aspects of their world. I have always wondered how their diet enables them to put forth tremendous burst of energy which is far outside the human range. NCBRR
Guest Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 (edited) I don't have a horse in this race, but I do follow this thread. Personally I'm not going to kill anything unless Me or Mine is in danger, but I am neutral on the bigger question I guess. And I realize that I and everyone else who has expressed an opinion on this issue will be the first to want to see or gain knowledge of the creature if NAWAC is successful. That is a cop out of character of course, but truthfully the way I feel. So, basically someone else does the dirty work and I get to look at the fruits of their work while thinking I am an anti kill person. But in the direction the discussion is heading in, I can't see the pay off, as Dr. Phil, a renowned Texan, says. Other than to enjoy the outdoors, enjoy camaraderie of ones' fellow man, or as an excuse to get away from the daily grind, experience Male Bonding, and enjoy guns and the people who enjoy them, I being one of those, I can't see any other bottom line pay off. Maybe fifteen minutes of fame, but even fame becomes boring after sixteen minutes sometimes. Name recognition, maybe, but screen names are relativiely anonymous to begin with, and the BF Community is relatively small. Case in point, I am the only member of this forum of anyone I know or know of locally. Zero of my family and friends know that this forum even exists. None are Bigfoot proponents to my knowledge. So in reality this is a very small pond to be a big fish in. Although I know nothing of NAWAC, I dont think there are huge financial gains for being involved in their quests, maybe a tee shirt sale every now and then perhaps. So, I am led to logically believe that they are sincere in their goals and believe in themselves, having kept at it for years, albeit without physical success. This forum is a unique place, for reasons of necessity of course, where different sides may believe the other is lying through their teeth, but may not express that opinion without violating the forum rules, needing to, instead, cite references or opinions to lead readers to come to that conclusion on their own. But at the end of the day, after many words, that is the gist, you either believe what someone has stated, or you think they are mistaken, stupid, or just plain lying. And you of course may be right. Or not. I personally don't think Bipto, whom I do not know at all, is lying. I think what I think, why I think, and how I think, and I'm okay with that. If crow needs consuming I can do that too. PB edited for spelling PB Edited June 30, 2013 by people booger
hiflier Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 Hello people booger, I'll second that 'til the cows come home.
Guest Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 Even those who are "scientific" can recognize when their debate partner is nuts. JW, head over to the JREF. Find the thread from two years ago when we first started talking about Operation Endurance. I'd find the thread for you, but I wouldn't go back to that cesspool if you paid me. Find where our Alaskan friend began his quest to find X. Not so he could confirm our observations or validate our claims, but so he could talk others into going there and interfering. He carelessly and callously encouraged others to put our members and themselves in danger by walking in and disrupting our work. He incited them to break laws by trespassing. This is not an intellectually honest person. He has proven himself not to be someone worthy of debate. Even his interaction here demonstrates that. He swoops in, lays his egg and fertilizes it with bile and venom, then flies off again. Would you, in my position, give him anything more than I have? Would anyone reading this even continue to engage *at all* in the face of this kind of abuse? Bipto, do you think the chances of an encounter are higher sleeping in a tent alone at X or in one of the cabins? It's a good question. We've had both approached. They seem to be boldest when they think they're unseen, so IMO it's about a horse apiece. Bipto, I understand. I think we all have certain "nemeses" that we would rather not deal with. I think it was Sartre that said "Hell is other people." Some skeptics reduce Bigfoot phenomena in total to lies and lies for profit. I do not understand the reasoning behind this and have said so. As to the location of Area X, it seems to me that NAWAC has already posted it on their website: http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/457
Recommended Posts