Old Dog Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 If you ever want to know why more people don't report their suspected BF experiences. If you wonder why many people keep it all to themselves, just take a look at the responses to this article on the Erickson Project that have been posted on Huffington Post. Kind of says it all as to why people keep quiet. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/02/bigfoot-exists-say-researchers_n_4032364.html?utm_hp_ref=weird-news
Guest Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 There was a survey done on UFO sightings, and apparently only 10% of those who thought they had seen one had reported it to anyone. Now the biggest reason for reporting it was a sense of "duty" in that it might have had national defense implications... so let's imagine that a high proportion of those reports went to Police*, USAF* etc, and are not recorded in a public database such as MUFON etc.... might leave us with about 3% report rate to non-governmental organizations. Anyway, we might suspect similar low report rate with BF, and question whether there is the same sense of "duty" in feeling "someone ought to know"? Which if not, might make it even lower. (*Who at various times might have been secretly recording reports, or have been disinterested or dismissive)
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Some of us have held this position for quite some time, myself included, and it seems that we can sympathize with the mindset of these witnesses. Flashman raises a point I've never considered all that much. Think of all the land in the US that is controlled by the DoD or other government entities, which therefore is populated almost entirely by employees of the government. Since there is so much land of this nature, just consider the percentage of sightings that occur within the ranks of the government. Maybe the number is not that great, but I would suspect that a considerable percentage of all sightings, maybe ten percent or so, just off the top of my head, are from government employees. Now having been in the USAF myself, I know that there are probably more government employees who are not under security clearance contracts than there are who are under such contracts. I have been through the vetting processes the government employs, and I understand that even those who are not under specific security contracts CAN be asked to keep their mouths shut on certain things. This is because everyone who joins the military DOES sign a contract, and I am pretty sure there would be something in there to that regard. I have also been through debriefings, the biggest being upon leaving the military. I was actually sent to see a guy off on another side of the base, and even though I was not involved in stuff that was all that secret, it is still sort of frightening in a way. He reminded me of the oath I took, among other things, and used phrases that are probably used all the time. So knowing that this occurs, I can only imagine what the process would be like for someone who actually knew things that were highly secretive. I have heard some of the older military guys, especially in my own family, as many of my older relatives were in various armed forces branches, and I have heard some of the stories they've told. For instance, my great uncle, who my grandma makes me go see quite frequently, since he only has one leg now and needs people to do stuff for him, was involved with nuclear weapons at what used to be Gray AFB in Texas. This was quite a secretive place, especially certain aspects and parts of the base, and do you know he wouldn't talk about what he did there up until a few years or so ago? And he is already in his 80's. He still hasn't said WHY he was compelled to keep what he knew secret, considering that I would guess most of that stuff is probably known by this time. We used to ask him about it, and he would simply change the subject or say he didn't want to talk about it. And he would ALWAYS say that. And even though he opened up more about what he did, after I finally told him that I knew what went on there, more or less, during the 50's, he started talking a little more. But even to this day he hasn't come out and admitted everything that went on there. And that just blows my mind. Maybe it has to do with the older generation or something, although nowadays it is not uncommon for people in the armed forces at that time to come out and talk about things they've experienced. Anyway, so I can understand why people would keep their mouths shut, from more than one perspective. And I would bet that out of all the people employed by the government who have seen a sasquatch, only a very small percentage have ever admitted to anyone else. And a higher percentage would have admitted it only to their closest family members. So think about the number of those such reports we have in a large database like the BFRO's. Probably a negligible amount. Something else that blows my mind is this: there are thousands of sightings reports, literally thousands, and I have enough faith in the observational powers of humans to know that many of those people actually saw a sasquatch. They know that what they saw was not a bear or other known animal. Maybe they get the smaller details wrong, but about what they saw, the majority of the time, they are certain. Two people who see the same sasquatch may disagree about some of the details, but both will know that what they saw was not a known animal. And there are those who will latch on to the fact that these two disagree on the smaller details, and use that as a basis to dismiss what they saw altogether. THAT is preposterous in my opinion. And it blows my mind that anyone can know how many sighting reports there are, and still say that sasquatch is not a possibility. I can understand being skeptical and not admitting that these animals certainly exist. But to say the CANNOT exist? Especially after so many sighting reports. Think of how many different aspects of our lives, our government and industry, armed forces, legal system, etc, DEPEND on the observational powers of humans. We put faith in these abilities in all areas apparently, EXCEPT when it comes to seeing something like sasquatch.
Guest Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 If anyone here thinks the skeptics or scoftics on BFF are difficult to put up with, just go to another forum that has nothing to do with cryptic creatures. I frequent a college football forum and any mention of BF there immediately brings 99% of the members there calling you crazy. It it something that is simply not taken seriously - by mainstream science, by media (they use BF stories as fluff/humorous general interest) and most people in general.
See-Te-Cah NC Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 This link shows that you're right. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/42208-melba-ketchum-erickson-project-press-conference/?p=776133
Oonjerah Posted October 8, 2013 Posted October 8, 2013 I agree with the Huffington Post article that Old Dog linked to above. I believe Bigfoot is real. But I don't think Ketchum & Erickson are.
BobbyO Posted October 8, 2013 SSR Team Posted October 8, 2013 This link shows that you're right. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/42208-melba-ketchum-erickson-project-press-conference/?p=776133 And you hit the nail on the head with it See in what you wrote. Can you blame them ?
Guest LarryP Posted October 8, 2013 Posted October 8, 2013 If you ever want to know why more people don't report their suspected BF experiences. If you wonder why many people keep it all to themselves, just take a look at the responses to this article on the Erickson Project that have been posted on Huffington Post. Kind of says it all as to why people keep quiet. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/02/bigfoot-exists-say-researchers_n_4032364.html?utm_hp_ref=weird-news Anything and everything in the Huff Post that's posted under "Weird News" immediately attracts the sociopathic naysayers.
Guest Rex Posted October 8, 2013 Posted October 8, 2013 Anything and everything in the Huff Post that's posted under "Weird News" immediately attracts the sociopathic naysayers. I am under the distinct impression that is a valid observation.
Guest Posted October 8, 2013 Posted October 8, 2013 Part of the problem...it's posted under "Weird News". A BIG part of the problem, I think. I wonder if/when other reports come out, (depending on who they're from), if they'll continue to be posted under such umbrellas.
Guest Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 ^^ That's going to depend entirely on the evidence brought forth in those other reports. If it's more like what came out last week with a Wookie mask, then it will continue to not be taken seriously. If someone were to bring forth some good physical evidence it may make a difference. I'm crossing my fingers (but not holding my breath) that Sykes' report is that evidence.
Guest Posted October 10, 2013 Posted October 10, 2013 Yah, the "research community" doesn't get to choose what it is represented by, last week it was a wookie and a rootball.
Guest Darrell Posted October 10, 2013 Posted October 10, 2013 (edited) Why should anyone have any expectiation of credulity in main stream society when discussing this topic? It is weird news (always has been) and having the stereo type of the Finding Bigfoot crew doesnt help either. If you come across as crazy you will be regarded as crazy. thats just the way it is. Edited October 10, 2013 by Darrell
Old Dog Posted October 11, 2013 Author Posted October 11, 2013 Why should anyone have any expectiation of credulity in main stream society when discussing this topic? It is weird news (always has been) and having the stereo type of the Finding Bigfoot crew doesnt help either. If you come across as crazy you will be regarded as crazy. thats just the way it is. Why would anyone have expectations of credulity in main stream society? Sure there are some who are gullible and willing to believe anything, but not in general. Unless you meant credibility. I'm not sure of your definition of credulity.
Guest Darrell Posted October 11, 2013 Posted October 11, 2013 ^ a tendency to be too ready to believe that something is real or true. I think thats a big hinderance in this pehnomina.
Recommended Posts