Urban Bigfoot, Seriously?

[norseman]

 

I have never suggested that we have tangible evidence, only that the account may be valid in spite of it being reported 14 years after it happened.

 

 

And I have no problem with a urban Bigfoot report in this thread.

 

For the record, I'm not taking it personally. I enjoy a good discussion and/or debate. I just never intended for it to be a scientific validity debate, but nonetheless found myself in one.

 

I'm glad your not taking it personally, but See? You didn't find your self in one, you started it with this statement:

 

 

I find it strange you can't consider an account reported 14 years after it supposedly occurred, yet you're probably all up in evolutionary theory presented millions of years after the supposed fact.

 

Fascinating.

 

 

The difference of course between your report and evolutionary theory IS tangible evidence.

 

I'm bowing out, letting this thread get back on course. Enjoy.

[hiflier]

Hello dmaker,

 

Take your pic from a long list of reasons why people claim to see things that are not really there....

That is something that even you'll have to admit is only half the coin. This is not to say that the report is anywhere near provable. It is to say the witnesses "claim" what they saw WAS there. To say it was imaginary has no basis whatsoever. Just because you weren't there doesn't mean it was an illusion. I'm not going to get bogged down in some unwinable argument such as this. Suffice it to say that your "claim" of objectivity somehow is in itself subjective. You bring up some truly valid points on the scientific side but to toss all witnesses onto the ****pile of fabricating encounters is a bit harsh.

Edited October 20, 2013 by hiflier

[Guest Cervelo]

Hello All,

If a large hairy-from-head-to-toe creature walked in front of you or your car on TWO LEGS and it's eyes reflected red? On the subject of recall one may not remember the hair color accurately, or whether the creature was 6 1/2 feet tall or 8, or whether the teeth had canines or were even. But I truly doubt that they would say that the eyes reflected green instead red! Somethings WILL stand out and never be forgotten. In the general sense the creature was large, hair covered, WALKED ON TWO LEGS and it's RED eyes were well above the surface of the road or wherever else.

I don't think one needs totally perfect recall in order to paint the picture of something as unusual as a Sasquatch.

I've seen ghosts, heard a piano play itself, had a premonition of a friends death, had an NDE or was dead, packed up camp and hauled butt just based on my dogs reaction to something... and had something stalk me while hunting that I'll go to my grave believing it was on two feet and no man....even had what would for most here be considered a "gifting".... my conviction or perception of those experiences doesn't make them real to anyone but me.

My experience outdoors over my lifetime... I haven't seen anything that can't be explained as natural or hand of man and I've seen some strange stuff!

People with little or no outdoor experience looking into the woods from their backyards or stepping 100yrds in and "Finding Bigfoot" highly unlikley.

In regards to the scenario you've presented there are only a few options, misinterpretation, lying/hoax or real.

I'm a man of "most likelys" and based on my own personal experience I've seen nothing to indicate an 8' tall monkey man, with US/Canadian continental wide distribution has managed to go undetected/unproven/unharvested since the arrival of Europeans much less one hanging out in urban/suburban environs.

Still looking when I see one you guys will be the first to know!

[Sasfooty]

No, I believe you're missing my main point. Can't we discuss a report of a Bigfoot visiting an urban area in a topic called Urban Bigfoot, Seriously? without having to defend whether it's real or not to your satisfaction? Who knows? If discussion of the report were allowed the membership just might decide that the account is indeed unlikely.

 

I never claimed it to be scientific evidence - You only claim that I did so after I asked the question about the time passed for both the report and a well-accepted scientific doctrine.

 

 

I'm having a hard enough time defending a normal, run of the mill sighting with this individual. Why don't we get a "normal" sighting out of the way before we inject the extremely extraordinary into the mix?

So......Are you beginning to see things from our point of view a little better now?

 

On a thread that is titled "Habituating Bigfoot", why can we not be allowed to discuss out "stories" or whatever they want to call them, without being constantly told that they don't believe us & we must give them proof?

 

The title isn't "Proving Bigfoot".

Edited October 20, 2013 by Sasfooty

[hiflier]

 Hello Cervelo,

In regards to the scenario you've presented there are only a few options, misinterpretation, lying/hoax or real....

That made me smile. It does cover the bases pretty much, eh? It's basically the "real" part that causes the problems. I mean when a report says that a large hairy creature punched through a door glass and knocked the owner unconcious that's one thing. When the owner comes to and finds his dog "torn apart"? One has to wonder. If there is a police report then a public record should exist. Maybe a forensic vetrinarian was involved? Unless anyone seriously gets off the Forum and personally checks any of this stuff out then it's all just fairytales. For myself? If 2% is true then....wow.

[Guest Cervelo]

It only takes one no doubt....but what's actually working against biggie is two things IMO

1) The location of the reports (worldwide distribution) in some very densely populated areas

2) number of reports

These two "facts" and the march of time would seem to make their existence less proably as time goes by.

But hey the great outdoors has so much other cool stuff to offer just get out there folks and enjoy!

[JDL]

"No, I don't just assume that they saw something and that that something cannot be easily explained. If it could be easily explained we wouldn't be discussing the topic on a Bigfoot forum, now would we?" -See

Yes, we do it all the time.

"... based on the obviously subjective position that witness reports are universally fallible."- JDL

Actually, it's an objective position, not a subjective one. Eye witness reports are universally fallible and that is an objective fact, not a subjective observation.

"If it's not really there, how did they actually view it?

You may have your opinions on the matter, but I believe better of the majority of witnesses that observe the creature." -See

Take your pic from a long list of reasons why people claim to see things that are not really there. It's great that you believe better of people that you have never met and who are making claims that they have not a single shred of evidence to support. Without that sort of blind faith devotion, myths like Bigfoot would have far less traction than they do.

Suggest you go back and look at your own references. Each points out that anecdotal reports have the potential to be fallible for a variety of reasons, not that they are all actually fallible. You've taken it a step further.

[JDL]

I should restate that. They are all potentially fallible, but your references stop short of stating that they are all false.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

I guess the evolution of my acceptance of their existence took about 3 years, I am sure I thought it was all hoax up till then. I think what allows an individual to begin to accept their existence is sort of along this line, that after considering how they survived as an extant specie in the first place. 1. the idea of their ability to completely hide themselves. So that if you walked down your average forested path, one could be standing sideways 30 feet behind some tree, and you would never see it. 2. Then comes the leaving trace evidence hurdle. When you come to terms with why they do not leave prints, scat, or hair, all the time, in fact they actually only do so by mistake, or when they have little worry about staying in an area, or have had little contact with humans, say in more remote parts of the country. 3. Then you have the body hurdle, well that one is not all that tough, given the lack of bear or cougar bones ever found, or for that matter any other secluded mammal types. They go off somewhere to die, usually somewhere very remote and safe. Then given the small numbers of the animal and long life spans, not too many bones. 4. once one accepts the existence of the creature one begins to desire and understanding of behavior and territory. It is really at this point that I enter the discussion, but indeed I had to overcome the other hurdles, could they even exist, and if so how, when, and where. I am answering the questions as I go, propelled the more by my own backyard experience. I can see how easily one can simply not ever jump those first hurdles, so being a skeptic on this subject is not blindness, or ignorance, but likewise accepting that they can manage those things is no more blindness or ignorance. I know that it seems we "believe" in Sasquatch, and that it seems no one could arrive at their existence without some belief, but I have never seen many animals, and I know they exist. I think that the eyewitness evidence is icing on the cake, it is the footprint evidence, and the biological morphology they demonstrate, that seals the deal. That is the evidence that pushed me over the fence. I think to dismiss that as all hoax or misidentification, when track ways have been studied and cast, and evidence published, that might equate to some inability to accept the obvious truth, that these prints(track ways that defy the ability to have been hoaxed), not all prints because there have been hoaxers, are part of the reality of our natural world, they are not going away. The creature does exist, that is reality, for better or for worse. If I was an evolutionist I would probably had an easier time coming to terms with this, but not being so I have had to jump even more hurdles than some to come to terms with this. Suffice it to say it was no casual conclusion for me.

Edited October 21, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot

[Lake County Bigfooot]

"For hunter or conservationist, tracks left by animals leave clues about their numbers and behaviors. Renowned wildlife tracker Dr. Jim Halfpenny observed that mammals are among the most elusive animals in the world. Much of what is learned about mammals in the wild comes from the stories that can be read from their tracks and other sign. I spent an afternoon with Halfpenny in his Gardiner, Montana, home just north of Yellowstone National Park, discussing the interpretation and nature of sasquatch tracks. We jointly examined a small selection of sasquatch casts that I had brought along to illustrate the traces of dynamic features I observed— toe movement, midfoot flexibility, pressure ridges, etc. These duplicates were subsequently left with Halfpenny to be added to his remarkably extensive and informative collection of wildlife track casts. He was clearly impressed by the animation evident in the sasquatch track casts, and interested in my inferences about their dynamics, but in the end he seemed to feel that the story told by the tracks did not yet have a definitive conclusion. He was quite willing to give serious consideration to any new track evidence we might recover, and challenged me to put him onto a fresh track. Then he was confident he would get to the bottom of it one way or the other. A clear example of the sasquatch footprints located by Deputy Sher iff Dennis Heryford in Grays Harbor County, Washington, in 1982 (Courtesy of Dennis Heryford) Dr. John Bindernagel echoed many of Halfpenny’s sentiments and further addressed the significance of sasquatch tracks: “There is so much more evidence for the existence of sasquatch than most people realize. In addition to eyewitness descriptions and drawings, we have hundreds of descriptions, photographs, and plaster casts of the tracks. For me as a wildlife biologist, it’s the tracks that we depend upon for the existence of an animal in a study area. We don’t usually see the mammals, but we do see their tracks. In the case of the sasquatch, this is the most compelling evidence we have.†Clearly those who have most closely examined the footprints attributed to sasquatch are the least inclined to simply dismiss them offhandedly as hoaxes."

Meldrum, Jeff (2007-04-01). Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science (Kindle Locations 3769-3786). Tom Doherty Associates. Kindle Edition.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

The most extensive collection of Sasquatch casts and other evidence will be taking the road as part of the "Falcon Project", as a means to raise the necessary funds to put the craft in the air and feet on the ground, I suggest anyone with questions regarding the authenticity of the track evidence attend one of these showings.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

William Barnes and some of the Olympic Project folks are working with Meldrum to get the thing going, and the road show was in the making, hitting areas across the country for the year. Not quite the Minnesota Iceman, but it should draw attention to the track evidence and bring in some funding for the project. I am quite curious what happened when Sykes filmed his BBC series 3 episode in America, that should also be an interesting tidbit. I know that the skeptics will be unimpressed as usual, but for the rest of us, maybe some new information. I heard all about "The Falcon Project" road show on "Bigfoot Tonight" Blog talk radio show with William Barnes, seemed this was in formative stage, but pending.

Backyard Update, have had some loud stick snapping and some tree knocks from various locations, so I can still continue to delude myself...LOL :}

Edited October 22, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Hey where did everybody go, it just me and the walls around here,  I guess everyone had gone on to refuting the Abominable Snow Bear...

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Just in here checking out the walls, nobody's home, head on over to the Urban Polar Bear thread...

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Ah Ah Ah Ah Staying Alive, Staying Alive.....

No Mas, No Mas, ....