Urban Bigfoot, Seriously?

[dmaker]

So it's a possibility because you say so? And when faced with no real evidence to support that subjective proposition, you resort to why am I here? That is typical and, quite frankly, expected. When you have nothing to back up your "this is a possibility", you lash out with irrelevant things like why am I here? It's ok, I've seen it a dozen different times. The answer to that question has been given by me at least a half dozen different times in various threads. It's a tiresome question and I will simply say thread mine if you want the answer. i can't be expected to type it out every single time someone gets frustrated with their own lack of evidence.

[Will]

Calm down Francis

 

Is there no evidence or just no real evidence?

 

Citing the database is all one needs for it to be a possibility. DNA is all one needs to say this creature exist, which I readily admit they do not have, which makes me a skeptic. You could say the same about the fairy database, except I'm an unbeliever when it comes to that, so I don't spend years arguing it with people. You understand why me being there would seem a little strange.

 

I'm not lashing out at you, I'm a skeptic, it is only a possibility to me and I'm not frustrated with the lack of evidence, I have no time invested in it.

[dmaker]

Now we are getting somewhere. There is no real evidence. Sorry. There is a ton of anecdotal evidence, sure. But we both know that is not scientific evidence. So it remains where it should in a scientific discussion: stories.

Now let's move on to physical evidence: tracks. Lots of tracks. How many have been hoaxed? Quite a few. How many have actually made it past Meldrum and Krantz only to be proven fake later? So lets agree that tracks are suspect simply based on their own hoaxed history.

Next up, DNA. Ah yes, DNA. How many times now have samples come back as dog, bear, carpet, human or synthetic? Vs how many times have they come back as....well...dog, human, rug or bear? Not very squatchy...

What else is left?

Edited September 7, 2013 by dmaker

[BobbyO]

****, I checked in thinking we might be talking about Sasquatches in urban areas but instead we are talking about absent of evidence again.

[Guest DWA]

It always happens.  This is what goes on when frustrated people, hampered by a lack of information, run into people who are paying attention.  Man, the frustration is PALPABLE.  A chill pill, and going somewhere else if this frustrates one so much, are my prescriptions.

 

Back on topic.  The big news would be if we find out sasquatch AREN'T doing this.  Every other large animal hangs out as close to us as it can get, at least some individuals on some occasions.  (Stay in those Yellowstone hotels - about as civilized as anywhere in a city - for many illustrations, per week.)

 

When you don't know or believe or care that something exists, and everybody that says they saw one gets laughed at, how praytell are we gonna know this stuff?  Someday, I know, the skeptics are gonna answer that.

 

Naaaah.

 

^Lots of owls and they are rarely seen, but only because they come out at night. The trophy caliber whitetail is a better example, its a very smart animal that lives to not be seen.

The two biggest whitetails I ever saw in my life were in College Park, MD, right next to a frequently-used commuting path right near a large office building. 

 

I wouldn't bet there is space in that town for those monsters to lie down next to each other without the whole town seeing, but there they were, racks in velvet that alone were big as me.

Edited September 7, 2013 by DWA

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Dmaker,  I get what your saying about them leaving evidence, Yet there are hundreds if not thousands of deer and coyotes, and probably two or three very smart Sasquatch who may hide their feces or gather into one remote area, that has been reported.  As has been true of some of their kills, gathering all the animals into one hidden area. It is not that they would even have hide anything, most of the time the areas they use see little or no human intrusion.  I feel that should be understood in what I am saying. They still need to have an area free of intrusion to feel safe, and that is the case with my marsh and surrounding forest.  I and my wife are the only people who venture into it, and that might be once a year.  I intend to find footprint evidence to back up my claims, because I feel that is our best bet on detecting them in an area.  That situation has occurred numerous times in the last few years, In area where sightings had occurred.  Ironically these prints were all found In the snow, so that might demonstrate their intelligence in avoiding leaving tracks at other times of the year.  They have been seen walking down a stream of river in order to not leave prints, as other animals and apes have shown the intelligence to know what prints mean, namely you can follow them to the source.  So to those questions I can only answer that the effort needed to find such evidence is great, and those who are already convinced by other means, do not have that kind of motivation.  I do routinely check the morning dew as that might reveal them coming through the yard.

[Guest DWA]

...and I'd rather have people looking than people just saying they know, and expecting the rest of us to somehow buy that.  Good luck.

When I first began researching the Bigfoot phenomenon I had to grapple with the thought of how such a creature could have alluded detection from science, and remained in isolated populations presumably in the mountain ranges and rain forest of the Pacific West.  It sounded plausible that, given the vast wilderness and resources available in this region, that such a large animal could hide and sustain itself.  Then you begin to read the books and sighting reports and discover that, far from what you thought was a localized population of rare animals, you discover them to be seen in every part of the country, excepting parts of the great plains, which for obvious reasons makes good sense.  You continue to discover that in areas, such as suburban New Jersey, and even Chicago you have very credible sightings, not more that 30 miles from a sprawling urban center.  There are even a few reports of the large hairy biped much closer to these areas.

 

   The question I have for you is one that was answered in my mind this summer in July, when at 3:50am, tossing in my bed, I was given a rare experience.  I overheard what I will call a conversation of two bigfoots, one that was crossing between mine and my neighbors house, and one further into a tree line.  They were alarmed when a night police patrol came down my semi-busy road shining a spot light into the yards.  It started with a Whooooeeeeep Whooooeeep, followed by an answer from inside the tree line, Whoooo,  Whooo, which was lower and more emphatic.  The sounds were only possible to a human or primate, and given the volume and the clarity, as well as the pitch, not possible to humans either.  The sounds repeated again but moving deeper into the marsh that borders my backyard, and the police car paused, as if he saw something in my yard, and even returned to look again. On the fourth of July a week or so prior my wife and I heard strange whoooops coming from the trees and marsh in response to some noisy fire works, at the time we knew they were odd, but dismissed them as human until that late night conversation. Oh did I mention I have an apple tree in my backyard that was producing nice little apples at the time

 

I live in a semi rural/suburban environment, 40 miles or so from downtown Chicago, and bigfoots frequent my backyard.  Reality check!  How can such a creature live in a fairly populated area, which almost always has traffic, except between 2:30am and 4:00 am, when it is more sporadic.  Yet it avoids detection, excepting a few foot prints in the snow and a rare sighting, usually crossing a road in the wee hours of the morning, probably returning to it's safe spot.  If it did not happen to me I would probably never excepted the possibility, though when the foliage comes in mid summer the possibility seems much better.  Do a little research on the BFRO sightings around the bigger cities, you will discover the geographic correlation, the connecting of greenways, bike paths, rivers and streams, all serve as pathways for these semi urban bigfoot to travel, and that is where the sightings are occurring.  Not hysteria, or misidentification, just honest people encountering a real creature that leaves real footprints, makes audible sounds different from any other animal, and lives just beyond our gaze.  Winter is a question I will address later as I have not come to terms with that yet, though we have had footprint findings in our area for several years.  I should mention that my County has been buying vast amounts of land for several decades in order to preserve our special environment, which is noted as one of the best wetland areas in the country, and recently is being incorporated into a federal wildlife refuge called the Hackmatack Wildlife Refuge.

I should circle back on this to note to people who don't, you know, tend to read much:

 

The area in which this happened sounds like areas mentioned in scores of reports.  How are humans seeing them when they avoid us entirely?

 

Answer and yes there is one:  NO ANIMAL avoids us entirely!  We make their job of finding food way too easy for that.  Ask a gorilla or a chimp.  Or a mountain lion; a wolverine; a bighorn sheep; a wolf; an elk; a leopard or a hyena or a lion ...all of which take copious advantage of humans.

...and that list could go on so long that it would look more like an inventory.

[Guest]

If bigfoot are coming close to residential areas then you don't need top tier funding for an expedition.  

[Guest DWA]

No.  You might just need the chief of freakin' police to stop laughing when they get reports.

 

Once again, one person seeing one = science confirming it.  Howfigger?

[Guest]

Key work here: caught. The police wouldn't laugh at you when you got the monkey.

[Guest DWA]

Calm down Francis

 

Is there no evidence or just no real evidence?

 

Citing the database is all one needs for it to be a possibility. DNA is all one needs to say this creature exist, which I readily admit they do not have, which makes me a skeptic. You could say the same about the fairy database, except I'm an unbeliever when it comes to that, so I don't spend years arguing it with people. You understand why me being there would seem a little strange.

 

I'm not lashing out at you, I'm a skeptic, it is only a possibility to me and I'm not frustrated with the lack of evidence, I have no time invested in it.

Actually, I don't think dmaker would understand why you don't have 2,000 posts on the fairy database.  You don't know anything about it...you have no evidence for your proposition...so why wouldn't you have 2,000 posts up there yelling nonono?

 

At last a skeptic I can talk to!  So far I mean.

 

Look, I get it about the skepticism.  That's the way I reacted to "every continental state and province has reports."  Ohcrap.  UFOs, is what this is.

 

Then, for some reason, I read the reports.  (I know, I know:  endangering one's mind with the pollution of information.  I'm an addict, what can I say.)

 

At least I had a reason:  I have an interest in animals that's up there with anybody's.  And Patty looks like an animal to me and always has.

 

Other folks'  reasons?  Well, we are one odd critter.

 

Oh, I get the skepticism.  I just don't get 2,000 posts of nonono.

Key work here: caught. The police wouldn't laugh at you when you got the monkey.

 

Great.  Thanks, police, for doing YOUR JOB, which is helping me with the monkey problem.

 

You're not getting this.  We delegate the monkey problem to people called, among other things, peace officers; the National Guard; rangers; Neighborhood Watch; and, you know, scientists.  When folks laugh at the monkey problem with no evidence that this is the right approach, and copious evidence that a scientist on his meds would accept that it's the wrong one, they don't solve the monkey problem.  They perpetuate the monkey problem. 

[Guest DWA]

For the third time, the point is its a possibility. For you no, but for the skeptic, the possibility is there. Why is this so hard for you to except?

 

A better question would be, why are you here?

 

You have stated for months now your unbelief. How much longer is it going to take to convince you BF does not exist?

 

I could go on the fairy forums for about 2 minutes to figure out its not for me. How many months have you been here?

And SKEPTICS are asking dmaker this.

 

I'd love to find out if fairies are real.  But I'm not holding my breath and not investing any time.  Motivation is just not there.

 

But then ...for some people...well, there's just 8 million stories in The Naked City...

[Will]

 I just don't get 2,000 posts of nonono.

Neither do I, my guess would be that dmaker is no skeptic, he is simply a nonbeliever who enjoys telling people who have had sightings they are full of it, that's fine with me, It just seems that would get boring. He's come at from every angle possible, I suppose he'll continue.

 

I'm very close to the Washington beltway, so you understand how easy and how interesting it is that these deer can remain hidden.

[Guest]

Great.  Thanks, police, for doing YOUR JOB, which is helping me with the monkey problem.

 

You're not getting this.  We delegate the monkey problem to people called, among other things, peace officers; the National Guard; rangers; Neighborhood Watch; and, you know, scientists.  When folks laugh at the monkey problem with no evidence that this is the right approach, and copious evidence that a scientist on his meds would accept that it's the wrong one, they don't solve the monkey problem.  They perpetuate the monkey problem. 

 

There is no monkey problem, otherwise footer organizations would have done their job. Again, you keep dodging the point.

 

Also if there's something breaking into someone's house or barn, or killing livestock, the police/rangers are gonna look into it, even if they don't believe the person's claim that its a bigfoot. Something needs to be taken care of.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Jerrymanderer

[Guest DWA]

Neither do I, my guess would be that dmaker is no skeptic, he is simply a nonbeliever who enjoys telling people who have had sightings they are full of it, that's fine with me, It just seems that would get boring. He's come at from every angle possible, I suppose he'll continue.

 

I'm very close to the Washington beltway, so you understand how easy and how interesting it is that these deer can remain hidden.

 

Yep, it's the "in plain sight" deal, that we see all the time.

 

You see it.  I see it.  We don't go blattin' to the world.  Somebody else sees it; she doesn't either...

 

And yep, whitetails are known to be real.  So now we toss into the mix:  nobody thinks it real.

 

He sees it; she sees it; he and she see it...and one goes:  I'm not talking.  The others go:  well, now I know, who cares who else does..?  One gets a quick glimpse and goes:  funny looking huge guy in hoody....was it...?  Hmmmm....

 

The way I hear it from skeptics, there's a scientist sitting right on every witness's shoulder, ready to confirm for our benefit...so why hasn't it happened?  obviously because it's not real...then a wildlife biologist or geologist or mycologist or botanist or park/forest ranger or policeman or Special Forces officer (I've read reports from each) sees one:  well, my career's down the tubes if I talk, so I'm not talking....

 

...how hard is this to get?  The evidence says:  maybe not so hard.

Edited September 7, 2013 by DWA