Skeptics: Define Your Success For Us, Please.

[WSA]

I recently posed a question on an adjacent thread, and thought it bears greater examination in an independent one.  It concerns the definition of goals in this community.  Namely: What does your ultimate personal success in this field look like?

 

The underlying utility of this answer always seems obvious to me. If you don't keep your end goal in mind, you're unlikely to either get there in the most direct and pleasing way, or even to recognize it when you get there.

 

Fair is fair though, so I'll go first.

 

As someone who is reasonably convinced of the existence of this animal, my success is defined by me to include at least one of these:

 

1. Have an encounter of my own someday.  

2. Have a close, trusted personal acquaintance have the same.

3. Have objective evidence accepted by the professional scientific community (a "squishy" definition, I'll acknowledge).

 

In a larger sense though, I'm succeeding in my goals each time I view what I consider to be a compelling piece of evidence. Some have already achieved #'s 1 and/or 2 on my list. Some may think #3 has been achieved as well...although I differ on that. Some we know have a success that is defined as "body on slab", and you can't get more concrete than that, I don't think.

 

But, the skeptical community here. How do you define your personal  success goals, if you do?

 

Truly, many of you don't entertain the real possibility of existence at all, or so you tell me. I'm doubting very much you could share any of my definitions, but you might. Your personal safety is assured here if you do want to "come out".  Your definition is your own, and I don't have standing at all to question your choice, only to try and understand them. I lay no traps or snares here and I'd encourage others to declare the same intent.

 

(BTW,  I'm not at all interested in how you define "failure", for either you or me, or for anyone else. The world is full of people who are quick to offer that up, and it frankly doesn't intrigue me at all)

[Guest Cervelo]

I'm going to be outdoors regardless...when I'm in The Great Dismal Swamp I'm looking for bears, Ivorybilled woodpeckers, panthers, coy/wolf hybrids, Indian settlements, downed aircraft, ect ect somewhere down the list is Bigfoot.

I'm firmly convinced I've seen an Ivorybilled woodpecker...they are considered extinct in Va.

But it was most likley a really big regular woodpecker, with some diffrent markings ect ect ....I'm just not prone to making those kinda jumps that some do....I don't know what I saw other than it was a woodpecker.

Here's something I have seen in GDS that's odd I find it hard to believe this is from a bear...

But I deal in the likeliest possibilities...so I'll go with odd but bear.

I've had numerous experiences that for many here would be concrete, no doubt about Bigfoot experiences.

But I've spent enough time outdoors alone to realize that ones perception can be vastly influenced by the experience or inexperience in what for most would be considered a hostile environment.

My issue is with the "evidence" 99.9% of it is malarkey IMO....I think the possibility of Bigfoot existing in the continental US is as likley as a dragon both of which are still reported in modern times

For me it's about getting outdoors and the more remote the better.....no goal, no objective typically (catch lots of fish) just go out and have a great time.

If I see a cougar and a Bigfoot this weekend I'll be more afraid of the cougar but still amazed by both....as long as I get home, relatively in one piece....objective achieved

Edited January 14, 2014 by Cervelo

[bigbear]

^ that's a big pile.  

 

I came across an amazing pile of poo a few months ago while walking some dirt roads around town.  It had to have been 2.5-3inch thick single piece that was 10" long easy maybe even 12".  One might think this is crazy, BF turd right?  But I know there is a couple in town with a huge 200+ pound mastiff and at closer look there is undigested doggy food in the giant poo, and there is your answer.

No BF turd

 

Oh and to answer goals question, it is to have fun, isn't that what it is all about?  That is my goal as the other goal of proving the existence of BF isn't likely to happen for numerous reasons but I have fun every time I get out

Edited January 14, 2014 by bigbear

[Guest Cervelo]

Your the first person to suggest that

And yes it is about just getting out there and having a good time!!!

[WSA]

Well, this thread went direct to poo, didn't it? And hey, let me just say, I'm completely down with that.

 

(Gotta think too, that pile defined "success" for whatever made it!)

 

So, two heard from (and I paraphrase): Being "out there and coming back alive" and "having fun." What's not to like?

 

But let me f/u on that a little with you both: Is the contemplation of BF just a distant idea, not really much to think about? I see a bunch of traffic from both of you, you especially Cervelo.  Seems like a big investment of time for you here, for something that is so inconsequential to you.  Just noting that I might be hard to convince it stays that far in your periphery.  I'm not probably accepting that your dissapointment in not finding anything is as small as you might claim. What say you to that? 

[Guest Cervelo]

My interest stems from a stalking experience when I was 16-17 yrs old.....I'll go to my grave believing it was on two feet and no man.

But mine is nothing but another anecdotal story that most likely was a very dumb person that could have just as easily been shot if I had been properly trained....thanks Dad!

I've yet to see a single piece of evidence that doesn't have a perfectly reasonable explanation.

Everytime I go in the woods of Va. I could find you an example of a "tree structure" here's a vid of an area I frequent often and was within a mile of my stalking incident...

^^

This can be whatever you want it to be

No disappointment on my part I'm not out there looking for Bigfoot per say and haven't bestowed myself with the "reseracher" moniker...when I do I'll seek professional help LOL!

FYI at work I'm the guy who believes in Bigfoot here I'm a skeptic....go figure.

It's a fascinating subject and of interest to me, my only reason for participating here is to share what I have experienced in the outdoors in my lifetime of hunting, fishing, hiking and camping.

So far I've seen nothing to indicate a 8'tall 300-500lbs undocumented hominid is present.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Cervelo

[dmaker]

I have no goals regarding a bigoot encounter. Imaginary animals are impossible to meet in the flesh. I enjoy the outdoors, but I don't expect to find a bigfoot out there. If I see something that bigfooters might like or find amusing, I will note it. Like when I shared that sign with the bigoot on it from my hiking trip in the Sierras.  But I am not out there "squatchin" by any means. There is absolutely zero disappointment in me in that regard. Accept that or not, it's your choice and makes little difference to me. I tire of the constant claims that skeptics are either afraid of bigfoot or frustrated that we haven't had an encounter or found any evidence. I could stroll over to a park not far from my work that has an urban greenspace with a small lake and a small forest. I have seen at least four obvious stick structures. I could take pics of those and bring them back and people would ooh and ahhh over them and insist that bigfeets made them. Throw in a pic of some poo and I could start climbing the bigfoot ladder and be on my way to a bona fide " voice in the bigfoot community".  Thanks, but no thanks. 

 

Why you see so much traffic from me is that while I don't contemplate bigfoot as an animal, I do find the social phenomenon rather fascinating. It's like being in a cult, but not having to become a member. I voice my opinion often because I think things like bigfootery, in general, are harmful and promote anti-science agendas and discourage critical thought. Also, to be honest there are personal rivalries that develop and can entice one to weigh in on a topic or respond where I might otherwise not be so inclined. We're human after all

 

Personally, I think it would be great if everyone realized that bifoot is just a social construct and stopped trying to make all the circumstantial evidence create this illusion of an actual beast. But, alas, this will never happen. So I contend myself with countering proponents arguments with my own. 

Edited January 14, 2014 by dmaker

[NathanFooter]

I have no goals regarding a bigoot encounter. Imaginary animals are impossible to meet in the flesh. I enjoy the outdoors, but I don't expect to find a bigfoot out there. If I see something that bigfooters might like or find amusing, I will note it. Like when I shared that sign with the bigoot on it from my hiking trip in the Sierras.  But I am not out there "squatchin" by any means. There is absolutely zero disappointment in me in that regard. Accept that or not, it's your choice and makes little difference to me. I tire of the constant claims that skeptics are either afraid of bigfoot or frustrated that we haven't had an encounter or found any evidence. I could stroll over to a park not far from my work that has an urban greenspace with a small lake and a small forest. I have seen at least four obvious stick structures. I could take pics of those and bring them back and people would ooh and ahhh over them and insist that bigfeets made them. Throw in a pic of some poo and I could start climbing the bigfoot ladder and be on my way to a bona fide " voice in the bigfoot community".  Thanks, but no thanks. 

 

For, and why you see so much traffic from me is that while I don't contemplate bigfoot as an animal, I do find the social phenomenon rather fascinating. It's like being in a cult, but not having to become a member. I voice my opinion often because I think things like bigfootery, in general, are harmful and promote anti-science agendas and discourage critical thought. 

 

Personally, I think it would be great if everyone realized that bifoot is just a social construct and stopped trying to make all the circumstantial evidence create this illusion of an actual beast. But, alas, this will never happen. So I contend myself with countering proponents arguments with my own. 

 

 Dmaker , are you lumping all researchers together here ?   It sure sounds like it.

[dmaker]

Not sure what you are getting at Nathan. I don't consider any bigfoot "research" to be a genuine endeavor. So while some may be more reasonable in what they accept as evidence, in the end they are all just tilting at windmills anyway. It's just a matter of degree.

[WSA]

Thanks for contributing Dmaker... though I'm going to decline to go to a discussion of the evidence/lack of here. We've got plenty of spaces to do that in, of course, and it was not my purpose in posing the question. 

 

Let's go back to the question a sec, please.

 

What is it you are going for here? I assure you again too, I'm not looking to make some larger point. I just want to know how you define the point (if you do) where you are able to say with some satisfaction that you've achieved what you set out to accomplish here. Really, I'm just curious to know. If you are telling me, and I'm just missing it, I apologize. Tell me again though.

 

And I'm not saying you have to have one, and you might not. If so, fine by me.

 
 

Edited January 14, 2014 by WSA

[dmaker]

I don't know that I have ever stopped to consider a goal for being here.  This thread feels like a different version of the old: "This is a Bigfoot board, why are you even here if you don't believe in Bigfoot?" Pardon me if that is not your intention here. I have certainly seen you express that sentiment in other threads. Perhaps this is just your attempt at gathering that information in one spot. 

 

My original "goal" for coming here was to learn more about this phenomenon. This was before I had made up my mind about the subject. I had admittedly not really spent much time or thought on it and when one watches Finding Bigfoot one might get the impression that Bigfoot was a commonly known and accepted animal to science. So I went searching. Searches will lead you here. This place is a great jumping off spot for learning about Bigfoot. You can get recommendations on reading, sites to view, videos to watch, etc. And so I did. You will also get introduced to Bigfooting in general. And then that is where things started to slide down hill. It turns out that bigfoot was not, in fact, a recognized animal and that Bobo and Matt and Cliff just make stuff up on national tv and no one calls them on their crap. That was one of the first things I realized. So after much reading and watching and seeing the circus that is Bigfootin' , I came to my own conclusions about the alleged animal. 

 

I still remain interested in the social construct however. It still intrigues me that so many grown adults take this as seriously as they do when it seems patently obvious that no such creature exists. This is my first exposure to this kind of thing. I have never been one to read up on UFOs, or Lake Monsters, or Conspiracy Theories, or any fringe topic. I had always found the tin foil hat crew to be rather odd, but never gave them a second thought.  I always thought bigfoot was a cool idea, but never tried to really find out more. So while no question lingers in my mind about the existence of bigfoot, I do still find that I stick around.  My goal, I guess would have changed from seeking an answer to a question to now engaging in the debate from a skeptical point because, as I mentioned, I think Bigfooting is not a productive influence at all. 

Edited January 14, 2014 by dmaker

[Guest Darrell]

To have sucess, there has to be an agenda and an endstate one is working toward. Being a skeptic is really just a point of view. Granted a POV that is many times 180 deg opposite from most proponents here. But I dont need sucess to be skeptical or cynical. If i point out something absurd that another member here is advancing as fact and someone thinks I make sense, then ok, but it doesnt lead to anything. Im not trying to prove bigfoot doesnt exist. Existence isnt on me its on you. There is no agenda to change everybody's minds or convert you to my POV. There is no conspiricy. But I have to tell you some of the claims being made on this forum are outlandish and crazy and most people with common sense wouldnt waste two seconds on them. So have to admit I enjoy being the desenter that questions what some of you here accept as fact based on nothing.

[Drew]

My goal is to be the greatest Bigfoot historian ever.

 

And to open the eyes of people in denial about sleep-disorders, sleep deprivation, hallucinations, and prescription drugs being the cause of some sightings.

[dmaker]

" I just want to know how you define the point (if you do) where you are able to say with some satisfaction that you've achieved what you set out to accomplish here"  WSA

 

OK, I see what it is you want. What would I call a success? I don't really set out to accomplish anything, but I do get PMs on occasion from people thanking me for expressing my skeptical viewpoint. If any one of those people was influenced enough to not buy the bigfoot myth hook, line and sinker, but to instead give it some genuine critical thought. Well I would put that one in the win column. 

[WSA]

Dmaker...got it. No, I'm not trying to stir up that old debate, which tends to go nowhere very quickly, and about which I've become exceedingly bored.  If there is any ulterior motive aside from just plan curiosity, it would be to promote the idea of the self-examination and where your motives intersect with this discipline. Before I answered this question for myself, I had to look at what I'm really hoping to accomplish, and I had to try to do that as honestly as possible.  You've done the same, and I appreciate your willingness to do that.  It is obviously scratching some itch you have, or you wouldn't do it, just like I wouldn't.

 

Drew, dig that!  What is the end result or product of all that study? A book, treatise, or blog? Or is it merely to have knowledge for the sake of it? (A worthy goal in my book.)

" I just want to know how you define the point (if you do) where you are able to say with some satisfaction that you've achieved what you set out to accomplish here"  WSA

 

OK, I see what it is you want. What would I call a success? I don't really set out to accomplish anything, but I do get PMs on occasion from people thanking me for expressing my skeptical viewpoint. If any one of those people was influenced enough to not buy the bigfoot myth hook, line and sinker, but to instead give it some genuine critical thought. Well I would put that one in the win column. 

That's a pretty well-defined goal, yes.  As well, I don't think that is contrary to anything else we do here at all.  The fip-side being, we never know who our arguments will convince, or in which direction we will push those who hear them. The marketplace of ideas is well beyond our control, am I right?

 

I don't so much fight for the hearts and minds of others here. I long ago stopped caring what others care to do with their spare time, and I'm a live-let-live guy, but I certainly see the attraction of that approach.  If I did have, say, a "mission statement", it would be to plant my flag for curiosity in all forms.  And weirdness of all kinds that confound my ideas of rationality. Do you ever hunger for experience of that kind?