Cotter Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Urklebot, I think you have confused their efforts with a Disney-style photo safari. Last I heard they were carrying large guns, not cameras. They have long since stated that only a body will do. Collecting photos and hair samples aren't going to give science the full documentation, so why waste time in the middle? And Drew, your inference that Bipto and crew are basically lying seems worthy of apology in my estimation. Good post. Everyone knows that photos, hair, sounds, etc will not do a thing to further advance the acknowledgement of these creatures. Bipto's crew is going for what everyone has been demanding as proof - a specimen. Why waste time (and money) attempting to get photos (that will be dismissed as fake)?
Guest Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 (edited) Perhaps it is time for me to reset the purpose of my involvement here and the purpose of our larger operation in the Ouachitas. I'm not here to convince anyone to believe in bigfoot. I honestly don't care if you do. Personally, I'm way past that. I similarly don't care if you think there are or are not wood apes in the area we call X. I know there are but I also acknowledge that the only thing you have to go on is the word of my group and, scientifically speaking, that's wholly insufficient. I'm here to answer questions regarding the work of the NAWAC. That's pretty much it. Not to debate or even defend. For those interested, we have valuable insight. For those not interested...I have to wonder why you even bother reading my words. The purpose of the multi-year operation we in the NAWAC have started calling the Ouachita Project is two-fold. We wish to collect, to the best of our ability, observational data of wood ape behavior much as primate researchers do all over the world. We are extraordinarily lucky to be in a place where they congregate and such observations are possible. (You may find the certainty of that statement to be insufficiently "scientific" or "skeptical" but, referencing my original point, I don't care. We have seen them on multiple occasions. We have interacted with them countless times. Remember, I'm not asking you to take my word for it. Believe me or don't.) We also hope to collect incontrovertible proof that wood apes are actual animals. Without such proof, all the evidence we collect will be of no better use than any other evidence that's been collected in that past 60 years. Right now, it's all proven to be essentially useless. After we have proof, it will become immensely valuable. We are absolutely committed to this work. We will not give up and no amount of internet doubting will change our course. If you have constructive criticism, I'm more than happy to hear it. If you have suggestions and ideas you think could help, bring it. If you want to accuse us of having "only stories" when I've already said as much myself...well, it's a free country. If the admins of this site think it's OK for some to keep doing that again and again, I'll have to eventually weigh the hassle of dealing with it against whatever value everyone else gets out of this exchange (including me and the NAWAC). Edited November 25, 2013 by bipto
Guest DWA Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 (edited) ^^^Right. For all the debate value the discussion of real? or not? might have elsewhere on the forums, it really detracts from this thread and shouldn't be encouraged here. Just my opinion; but sounds like I am far from alone. Edited November 25, 2013 by DWA
Airdale Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Amen, Bipto and DWA. Plus Bipto. It's been said before, but the "ignore" feature is a blessing. The only time I see posts by any of several un-named members is when they are quoted by another, and then I can ignore that post also. Life is too short to drink bad beer or read the same dreck over and over IMNTBHO!
Cotter Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 I for one appreciate the time you take to answer questions and provide insight into your operations. Thank you.
Drew Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 If the admins of this site think it's OK for some to keep doing that again and again, I'll have to eventually weigh the hassle of dealing with it against whatever value everyone else gets out of this exchange (including me and the NAWAC). OK, so we can't talk about whether it's an Ape or a Human. We can't discuss the lack of evidence that you have provided. If we do any of the above you leave. Is that a fair assessment of the above threat? I think if you bring up a topic, on a Bigfoot forum, that discusses the existence of a creature, that you have no evidence exists, and you say that you are trying to kill one, that people should be able to discuss the moral implications of such a policy. I also believe that if you are going to allow only positive Rah Rah comments from the crowd, then it should be stated in the forum rules.
Guest Stan Norton Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Brian, It seems that on occasion some of these creatures have been bold enough to leave the dense cover to make contact with the tin of the hut e.g. slapping, banging or shunting it. Is there any scope in using adhesive pads or anti-vandal paint on the hut exterior as a means of obtaining hair or contact prints. Might be a relatively inexpensive way of getting some evidence. This is an easy passive technique that I use on smaller mammals in woodland habitats...could work on sasquatch!
Guest Urkelbot Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 I would second the Steering Committee Chair's suggestion you read the information you have at your fingertips and, I would add, do this BEFORE making statements like the one you just posted. (BTW, the atomic detonations over Hiroshima and Nagasaki are "just stories" unless you happened to have been at one or the other, and survived it) I have looked through this thread and the nawac website. I must have missed the portions containing the physical evidence and clear photographs which would convince scientists that they should spend time/money researching Bigfoot in area x. Please show me where these are located if I am in error. Nagasaki and Hiroshima left behind much more than stories. Photographs of the mushroom clouds, destruction, injuries consistent with nuclear bomb. Instrumentation readings of radiation over time, cancer frequencies etc etc etc.
Guest DWA Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 I have looked through this thread and the nawac website. I must have missed the portions containing the physical evidence and clear photographs which would convince scientists that they should spend time/money researching Bigfoot in area x. Please show me where these are located if I am in error. Nagasaki and Hiroshima left behind much more than stories. Photographs of the mushroom clouds, destruction, injuries consistent with nuclear bomb. Instrumentation readings of radiation over time, cancer frequencies etc etc etc. So, let me get this straight. Science needs proof of something before they will acknowledge the possibility? I can think of a lot of things (I'm contributing to one of them on one of them right now) that never ever would have happened if that's how science worked.
Lake County Bigfooot Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 (edited) I appreciate your effort to operate the thread Bipto, which is more challenging given the huge commitments you have made with your radio blog, and NAWAC involvement, so I applaud you for remaining available even if criticism was brought by me or anyone else on our side of the fence. For those of you who want to argue existence, head back over to my thread...I fully enjoy the ceaseless banter... Edited November 25, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot
Guest zenmonkey Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 OK, so we can't talk about whether it's an Ape or a Human. We can't discuss the lack of evidence that you have provided. If we do any of the above you leave. Is that a fair assessment of the above threat? I think if you bring up a topic, on a Bigfoot forum, that discusses the existence of a creature, that you have no evidence exists, and you say that you are trying to kill one, that people should be able to discuss the moral implications of such a policy. I also believe that if you are going to allow only positive Rah Rah comments from the crowd, then it should be stated in the forum rules. All that is being said is this isn't the place to debate this where we can ask bipto questions about the topic at hand area X their are other places for that type of stuff. Bipto- something I've often wondered do you think the fact that the mountain range goes from east to west and I believe is the only in the country (correct me if I'm wrong) has anything to do with the animals or at least maybe birthing cycles and rutting seasons????
WSA Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Urkelbot... if you read the thread, you must have seen the links to the Bigfoot Show episodes? I'd give those a listen. But as Bipto has said, you can choose to believe it, or not. To say that you don't believe the evidence is one thing, to say it is not evidence is entirely another. (I don't know about you, but all the photos of the aftermath of Fat Man and Little Boy are fuzzy to me, and could have obviously been hoaxed. I wasn't there. The stories of the events are also just anecdotal and can't be relied on by science. I've never met anyone with radiation sickness symptoms, so obviously I can't consider those claims as true. Most of all, I just can't imagine a detonation on the scale of an atomic bomb, so I'm holding out for extraordinary proof...something like somebody exploding one in my town might convince me, maybe. Until then, I'm thinking of sarcastically taunting Hiroshima survivors on their forum website) Cheers! 1
Guest Urkelbot Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 So, let me get this straight. Science needs proof of something before they will acknowledge the possibility? I can think of a lot of things (I'm contributing to one of them on one of them right now) that never ever would have happened if that's how science worked. Not proof but good evidence. The nawac has been in the area for years now and has no physical evidence or decent photographs. Yet they claim interactions such as Bigfoot getting close enough to throw rocks at their campsite. Whether or not a population of Bigfoot reside or travel through area x to most scientists and observers it appears more likely some sort of shennagins are in play.
Guest zenmonkey Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Not proof but good evidence. The nawac has been in the area for years now and has no physical evidence or decent photographs. Yet they claim interactions such as Bigfoot getting close enough to throw rocks at their campsite. Whether or not a population of Bigfoot reside or travel through area x to most scientists and observers it appears more likely some sort of shennagins are in play. Ya the shennagins are something far from our understanding. It is important to understand the area. Its so thick very very thick at that. If X is where I believe it is its in a valley and these apes totally have the advantage of climbing on their side. Im heading down to an area really close to where I believe X is. I haven't been this late in the year. Im curious of the visibility!
Guest Posted November 25, 2013 Posted November 25, 2013 Is that a fair assessment of the above threat? There's no threat there. I laid out why I participate here and, if that's not what others want this thread to be, I have sufficient other demands on my time to fill out my day. Is there any scope in using adhesive pads or anti-vandal paint on the hut exterior as a means of obtaining hair or contact prints. Might be a relatively inexpensive way of getting some evidence. This is an easy passive technique that I use on smaller mammals in woodland habitats...could work on sasquatch! We've discussed other ways of recording their interaction with the surroundings, but not that one. I'll pass it along. Good idea! something I've often wondered do you think the fact that the mountain range goes from east to west and I believe is the only in the country (correct me if I'm wrong) has anything to do with the animals or at least maybe birthing cycles and rutting seasons???? The Ouachitas are unique in that they're the only predominantly east-west aligned range in North America (as far as I know) but I think there are apes in many other places that don't have that kind of range or even mountains to speak of. There may be something specific about that topology they're exploiting, but I can't think what it is. The nawac has been in the area for years now and has no physical evidence... Not at all true. We have cast footprints and photographed more. We've recorded audio and have collected blood samples. We've collected hair evidence coincident with an ape encounter (the determination of the source of which we still wait to hear from Sykes). We have no physical evidence that you will accept. That's not the same as no physical evidence. And people wonder why we don't focus on that kind of thing anymore.
Recommended Posts