dudeman Posted January 16, 2014 Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) Here is a google maps image of the Wekiwa River. You can see the dense vegetation between civilization. Most of Florida is like this. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=wekiwa+river&hl=en&ll=28.83723,-81.397276&spn=0.042631,0.055189&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.371738,56.513672&t=h&hnear=Wekiva+River&z=14 Edited January 16, 2014 by dudeman
Guest DWA Posted January 16, 2014 Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) If I'm seeing a significant quantity of reports of the same general tenor that I'm seeing in the supposed hotspots, I don't discount the possibility. The KS/OK/MS/NB/IA area: 312 reports on the BFRO database. That compares favorably with any "hotspot" state, and it squares well with the situation on the ground. Those states aren't the most heavily forested but there is considerably more wooded area than people think. There is loads of agriculture. By moving around - mainly at night - a large, smart omnivore is gonna eat well, particularly when no one acknowledges its existence. Reports from there read just like reports from elsewhere. Copycatting? Not likely. Do I do it? Do you? Does anybody we know? Does anyone they know? Right. Generally, folks don't. And if 80% of reports to these sites don't even get published...well that tells me the ones who are pranking are getting caught. They're the ones that send in this kind of stuff: 1. I SAW BIGFOOT!!!!!!!!!! IT WAS BIGGER THAN MY DAD AND SMELLED LIKE MY MOM!!!!!!!!!!!! 2. I saw this on the way to work yesterday and thought you guys would be interested. [photo of obvious guy in suit] 3. A copycat report...that either gets sniffed out on investigation, or the guy chickens out when he's contacted. (I'd say 80% of the 80% - minimum - are 1. and 2. Just that's what pranksters generally do. I very seriously doubt that anyone in the town hall meetings on Finding Bigfoot are pranksters. The consequences for getting caught out after appearing on national TV are too great.) Anyone who thinks this animal simply doesn't occur in those states has to prove it to me. So far, no one's offered an argument that washes. And yep, it's on anyone who disagrees with me to prove they're right. Otherwise ...well, if you have no skin in the game I just don't take you seriously. That's my big problem with bigfoot skeptics: no skin in the game. Edited January 16, 2014 by DWA
Guest Darrell Posted January 16, 2014 Posted January 16, 2014 And yep, it's on anyone who disagrees with me to prove they're right. Otherwise ...well, if you have no skin in the game I just don't take you seriously. That's my big problem with bigfoot skeptics: no skin in the game. Why is it on me? You can make claims but its my problem to prove you wrong? I trudged thru a lot of terrain back in the 80's and 90's in W & NE Washington and N. Idaho. Some of that time was actually looking for this creature. Know what I found? Nothing. Know what I saw when I was stationed at FT Lewis? Nothing. Spent many a night looking thru thermals and NVG running while around the training areas and state land. So I have a little skin in this game. And I have found the same as you, nothing! The real problem you have with skeptics is that we have made an informed decision that isnt the same as yours.
salubrious Posted January 16, 2014 Moderator Posted January 16, 2014 Here is a google maps image of the Wekiwa River. You can see the dense vegetation between civilization. Most of Florida is like this. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=wekiwa+river&hl=en&ll=28.83723,-81.397276&spn=0.042631,0.055189&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.371738,56.513672&t=h&hnear=Wekiva+River&z=14 People don't realize that New Jersey is 80% forest as well. There are reports in that region too. Why is it on me? You can make claims but its my problem to prove you wrong? I trudged thru a lot of terrain back in the 80's and 90's in W & NE Washington and N. Idaho. Some of that time was actually looking for this creature. Know what I found? Nothing. Know what I saw when I was stationed at FT Lewis? Nothing. Spent many a night looking thru thermals and NVG running while around the training areas and state land. So I have a little skin in this game. And I have found the same as you, nothing! The real problem you have with skeptics is that we have made an informed decision that isnt the same as yours. Its not unless you decide to take it on (although I have no beef with your closing statement above). As I mentioned before, you will not find them by looking. That is why you found nothing. They aren't dumb- they find you. In order to 'find' them, you have to intrigue them, in such a way that they are curious and probably also do not perceive you as a threat. Camp out by yourself (well away from other humans), don't light a fire and start playing music at 2:AM in the dark (or something equally strange). It helps to do it in an area that already has a sighting record and also has good water and food sources (deer) nearby. Keep a set of rocks in your tent that you can clack together if you hear strange sounds. No matter how quiet you are entering the forest, they will know you are there. I'm guessing you don't know what concentric rings are when it pertains to the forest; concentric rings are the warning signs made by other creatures in the area. You can know if something is around by those sounds and that is one way they know you are coming well in advance. In addition, we humans tend to walk by leading with our heels because we wear shoes. This is noisy, as are modern textiles. Add to that the fact that you are looking down at the ground most of the time to see where you are stepping. So you won't find them by looking, as you give them plenty of time to hide. That is why you have to draw them in by doing weird things that humans don't normally do. Deer are a lot easier to find. They know they can run away quickly, so they are less likely to hide at the first hint of danger. BF is different- they are voyeurs, and they assess things.
Guest Darrell Posted January 16, 2014 Posted January 16, 2014 ^I just do not buy into that. There is no indicator that if bigfoot exists that the creature has super intelligence. Buying into the mind talk/paranormal/super being camp then, IMO, you are just trying to explain your inadequacies in actually finding a bigfoot.
BobbyO Posted January 17, 2014 SSR Team Posted January 17, 2014 ^I just do not buy into that. There is no indicator that if bigfoot exists that the creature has super intelligence. You don't think that, if Bigfoot exists of course ( just to keep you comfortable ), that given it's size it doesn't show super intelligence by just avoiding being found under the noses of nearly 400m people ? I think that shows some serious intelligence personally, otherwise they would be in Zoo's all across the continent and even beyond. 1
NCBFr Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 Why is it on me? You can make claims but its my problem to prove you wrong? I trudged thru a lot of terrain back in the 80's and 90's in W & NE Washington and N. Idaho. Some of that time was actually looking for this creature. Know what I found? Nothing. Know what I saw when I was stationed at FT Lewis? Nothing. Spent many a night looking thru thermals and NVG running while around the training areas and state land. So I have a little skin in this game. And I have found the same as you, nothing! The real problem you have with skeptics is that we have made an informed decision that isnt the same as yours. Yes, there are. Check out Round Valley Reservoir.
Guest DWA Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 I don't trust any "informed" decisions based only on an individual's personal experience. In fact that is almost by definition NOT "informed." I have never in my life seen a mink or a Baltimore oriole, and have lived pretty much all of my life and spent most of my time outdoors in their territory. Does that mean they're not real? Nope. Am I going to discount the consistent, authentic-ringing accounts of thousands based on one person's personal experience? Nope. Am I going to consider an opinion worthy of consideration that doesn't seem to reflect the substantial thought I and others I am aware of have given this topic? Nope. That simple.
salubrious Posted January 17, 2014 Moderator Posted January 17, 2014 ^I just do not buy into that. There is no indicator that if bigfoot exists that the creature has super intelligence. Buying into the mind talk/paranormal/super being camp then, IMO, you are just trying to explain your inadequacies in actually finding a bigfoot. I have a different experience. And I don't buy into the mind talk/paranormal thing either, and absolutely no idea how you got that from my post! I've had 4 encounters so far, in all cases I didn't find them. They found me. 1
BobbyO Posted January 17, 2014 SSR Team Posted January 17, 2014 (edited) Why is it on me? You can make claims but its my problem to prove you wrong? I trudged thru a lot of terrain back in the 80's and 90's in W & NE Washington and N. Idaho. Some of that time was actually looking for this creature. Know what I found? Nothing. Know what I saw when I was stationed at FT Lewis? Nothing. Spent many a night looking thru thermals and NVG running while around the training areas and state land. So I have a little skin in this game. And I have found the same as you, nothing! The real problem you have with skeptics is that we have made an informed decision that isnt the same as yours.That's classic human ( and skeptical in the world of Sasquatch ) arrogance right there." I didn't see anything, so I know that nothing is there, as if there was I would have saw it when I was looking for it. And YOU are wrong." Me, Me, I = Correct You = Wrong Edited January 17, 2014 by BobbyO
dmaker Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 Me, Me, I = CorrectYou = Wrong hmmmm, that reminds me of a certain very vocal proponent around here.....
Guest DWA Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 Well, no, because he has made a major review of the evidence, and thought about it at length and ^^^that description is only for people who, well, haven't, but accuse themselves of "critical thinking."
dmaker Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 "Well, no, because he has made a major review of the evidence, and thought about it at length and ...." and he cannot be wrong?
Guest DWA Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 But see, if that were an informed opinion, you know...but I haven't seen evidence that it is, and I run on evidence.
Recommended Posts