Skeptics: Define Your Success For Us, Please.

[Guest]

For me (a skeptic...although wanting to believe), proof would be a couple things. Notice these do not necessarily apply to personal belief. I could very well be out scouting or hunting and stand toe to toe with a BF. I would then believe, but it does not necessarily provide scientific proof...I could have been dehydrated, sleep deprived, eaten a bad mushroom, had some bad leftover Chinese food the day before or any number of physiological or psychological reasons that could cause me to have hallucinated or misperceived what I was seeing.

So to me, proof must be indisputable and available to anyone to see with their own eyes.

1. If a photo or video is captured, then the experience must be repeated. What I mean is that a reputable third party observer is brought along and sees/records the same thing. That would likely mean something along the lines of; Bobby Joe takes a pic of BF while hunting/camping/hiking and tells the local news. News sends out a crew and Bobby Joe takes them to the area where high quality additional video is captured for an extended period of time. This would then be confirmed by a reputable wildlife biologist that can find and study the creature long term.

2. The body or a significant piece of anatomy that is distinctive. Like say an arm or foot, with tissue still attached.

3. To me, DNA is tricky (I have a BS in Microbiology and Chemistry and worked for two years in a recombinant DNA lab). The reason I say that is that unless you know what you are looking at, the lay person will rely on expert analysis. Unless samples are sent to many different labs, and the source of the DNA is known (see #2 above), then the frame of reference will be in dispute...as in we have no Bigfoot so Bigfoot DNA would have to assumed because it is different than known species. Therefore the experts will have opinions on what they think it is. Good? Sure. Definitive? Depends.

So...to summarize my above post, there is a difference between personal belief/proof and universal acceptance/proof. I would have to have universal proof rather than personal...due to my current career, unless I had universal proof then no one would ever know about it since I would have severe professional career repercussions by relying on "my word".

I'm not saying those who have seen it are lying, simply only that the undocumented visual proof falls under my definition of personal proof.

[Branco]

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.

"This can be whatever you want it to be." ?????

Really! There is an a rational and specific explanation for what you saw and filmed. Three of the particular "unusual" things you saw and described could have been explained with closer observations, objective thinking and a little leg work. In doing so, you might have seen some things even more unusual. Filming and walking away from unusual findings in the woods is one thing; seeking to understand the history behind them is another. 

 

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

So what was the "perfectly reasonable explanation" for the unusual things you videoed?  Whatever you wanted it to be?  

 

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

Don't doubt that for a second. 

[WSA]

Cervelo.....gonna PM you about my NOVA (Fairfax/Loudon County area) umm...weirdness someday.

 

But you guys...not looking to get a debate over evidence going here, as much as I really value Branco's field experiences and Cervelo's vids..

 

The topic: If you are a skeptic (and why not: A proponent too) tell us where the mark is for you when you'd consider yourself to have succeeded in pursuit of any BF related activity you care to choose for yourself.  If you've achieved that, describe that for us. 

 

Again, the purpose is not to debate if you really did experience what you believe you experienced, only your subjective evaluation of your "win."

[Cotter]

^Sighting for this guy.

I'm not about proof.  If I do ever have a class A - no doubt sighting, I would type up my experience on here, and there is a good chance you would never hear from me again.

 

I like discussing the ins and outs of the phenom in general though, so that's what I'll do until further notice!

[dmaker]

Not all pursuits have a final objective. If this is a hobby or past time for most people, it does not make sense to try to force an end objective on it. For example, I have several hobbies. A couple of those would be playing poker or hiking in the woods. Neither one of those has a goal that I am trying to achieve other than to continue to get better at the one ( poker ) and to continue to enjoy the other.  Why must there be a "success point" in a pursuit?

 

It sounds like you are approaching your question more from a mission point of view, and less from a hobby point of view.

Edited January 15, 2014 by dmaker

[WSA]

Dmaker, not to say (and I was careful to say this up front": i.e.,  "If you have one") that you have to have an ultimate destination or goal,  or a definition of successfully completing that. For some, just participating is the extent of their ambitions, and they get to say if that satisfies them. It is still somethig I'm curious to know about, if so.

 

If that is your case, tell me what makes a good or bad day for you when you are engaged in that. To a large extent, I think I do get you from your previous posts. Thank you.

 

Cotter, I think you've pretty much summed up my ultimate ambition too. If I had a sighting, I think the last thing on my agenda would be to try and prove it to others. In that regard, I understand the lack of drive from others to do that. If science steps in and claims biggie for its own before I get there...well, I would no doubt feel my efforts were still worthwhile. But yeah, I'd probably still want to experience it for myself. Maybe even more so. 

[Guest Urkelbot]

3. To me, DNA is tricky (I have a BS in Microbiology and Chemistry and worked for two years in a recombinant DNA lab). The reason I say that is that unless you know what you are looking at, the lay person will rely on expert analysis. Unless samples are sent to many different labs, and the source of the DNA is known (see #2 above), then the frame of reference will be in dispute...as in we have no Bigfoot so Bigfoot DNA would have to assumed because it is different than known species. Therefore the experts will have opinions on what they think it is. Good? Sure. Definitive? Depends.So...to summarize my above post, there is a difference between personal belief/proof and universal acceptance/proof. I would have to have universal proof rather than personal...due to my current career, unless I had universal proof then no one would ever know about it since I would have severe professional career repercussions by relying on "my word".

I'm not saying those who have seen it are lying, simply only that the undocumented visual proof falls under my definition of personal proof.

Using protein alignments it shouldn't be hard to shake out the phylogeny amongst extant primates. Most of the work I've done has been in virology but I feel confident given some cells I could determine its closest relative, if it's a primate.

As far as what the lay person is to understand they'll be told what to believe from the citadel.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I think the goal for the majority of us is to live to see the discovery of the species; where science accepts bigfoot as a previously unclassified, or thought to be extinct, animal. But there is one other thing I would love to see, and that comes after scientific acceptance. What I am referring to is the apologies, the "I was wrongs," from those who previously made it a point to always deny the existence, or the possibility of existence, regarding sasquatch. I would be willing to bet that some of these people will disappear from the scene after discovery, simply because they will not be able to admit that they were wrong. Those who were civil about it, or those who didn't outright deny the possibility of existence, will likely stick around.

 

And I am 100% the species will be accepted one day, because I know that the animals exist. Knowing this, I know it logically can only be a matter of time before the right combination of people come together on a case where evidence is present, and they handle it in a superb manner, and things take off from there. Those who are attempting to do scientific things with bigfoot at the moment are pioneers, and pioneers are always scoffed at. So that doesn't surprise me any, and again, I am confident that the wrongs science has allowed towards bigfoot in general will be atoned for sometime in the future. I expect it will happen relatively soon, although it will likely be a matter of years.

 

A body would do it, but whoever finds the body or shoots the bigfoot could shoot themselves in the foot, depending on who they contact, and what they do with that specimen. I do believe that there are certain people who would not want such information to come out. And if those people are within branches of the government, and they have any power, they can force all those under them to keep their mouths shut, although nobody would need to know about what was going on except for those who needed to be involved. I am convinced that at least one time in the past, a certain government organization obtained a sasquatch body. If this group falls under the umbrella of the DoD, then of course it will not reach the public eye. They still have stuff classified from the pre-WWII era. THAT says a lot.

 

Anyway, I am getting away from the original point of your thread. So to reiterate, I look forward to discovery in general, as well as to slightly gloating when finally the shoe is on the other foot. I promise I will be gentle though, lol.

[WSA]

Thanks Jiggy, that is  a goal definition we've not seen here so far. I understand completely and bragging rights can count for a lot in this world. I have a gentlemens' bet with a couple of friends, along the lines of... Which will be confirmed first: BF or extraterrestrial life?  I don't follow the latest theories or evidence of ET, so I probably couldn't even make book on that bet if I had to. If the day does come to settle up though, there is going to be some pretty vigorous face-rubbing, you can bet that much.

[Guest DWA]

I am actually prepared for those who are most anti- now to be most annoying after confirmation as well.

 

It will, of course, be even easier to laugh at them then.

 

But yep, those told-you so's will be fun.

Edited January 16, 2014 by DWA

[dmaker]

I think the goal for the majority of us is to live to see the discovery of the species; where science accepts bigfoot as a previously unclassified, or thought to be extinct, animal. But there is one other thing I would love to see, and that comes after scientific acceptance. What I am referring to is the apologies, the "I was wrongs," from those who previously made it a point to always deny the existence, or the possibility of existence, regarding sasquatch. I would be willing to bet that some of these people will disappear from the scene after discovery, simply because they will not be able to admit that they were wrong. Those who were civil about it, or those who didn't outright deny the possibility of existence, will likely stick around.

 

And I am 100% the species will be accepted one day, because I know that the animals exist. Knowing this, I know it logically can only be a matter of time before the right combination of people come together on a case where evidence is present, and they handle it in a superb manner, and things take off from there. Those who are attempting to do scientific things with bigfoot at the moment are pioneers, and pioneers are always scoffed at. So that doesn't surprise me any, and again, I am confident that the wrongs science has allowed towards bigfoot in general will be atoned for sometime in the future. I expect it will happen relatively soon, although it will likely be a matter of years.

 

A body would do it, but whoever finds the body or shoots the bigfoot could shoot themselves in the foot, depending on who they contact, and what they do with that specimen. I do believe that there are certain people who would not want such information to come out. And if those people are within branches of the government, and they have any power, they can force all those under them to keep their mouths shut, although nobody would need to know about what was going on except for those who needed to be involved. I am convinced that at least one time in the past, a certain government organization obtained a sasquatch body. If this group falls under the umbrella of the DoD, then of course it will not reach the public eye. They still have stuff classified from the pre-WWII era. THAT says a lot.

 

Anyway, I am getting away from the original point of your thread. So to reiterate, I look forward to discovery in general, as well as to slightly gloating when finally the shoe is on the other foot. I promise I will be gentle though, lol.

And when you are in your twilight years, however long that is from now, and bigfoot has not been confirmed, how will you feel then?  Maybe you should hang your " I told you so hopes" on something that is more likely to pay off.  Like a female president or something.

[Guest Cervelo]

Branco,

I'd love to here your opinion on what's in the vid.

Based on my experience I could show anyone this stuff all day, everyday, anywhere in Va as long as there are....trees.....all are natural occurrence or manmade.

Here's another vid of a "trail being blocked" enjoy

Edited January 16, 2014 by Cervelo

[Guest DWA]

dmaker:  will I win the lottery next year?  How about WSA?  I wanna take advantage of that talent for predictions.

 

I think we'll probably have sasquatch confirmation before a female president.  I'd definitely be willing to make a side bet on that.

 

In person.  Those who track evidence never send cash through the mails.

Edited January 16, 2014 by DWA

[Guest Cervelo]

Cervelo.....gonna PM you about my NOVA (Fairfax/Loudon County area) umm...weirdness someday.

But you guys...not looking to get a debate over evidence going here, as much as I really value Branco's field experiences and Cervelo's vids..

The topic: If you are a skeptic (and why not: A proponent too) tell us where the mark is for you when you'd consider yourself to have succeeded in pursuit of any BF related activity you care to choose for yourself. If you've achieved that, describe that for us.

Again, the purpose is not to debate if you really did experience what you believe you experienced, only your subjective evaluation of your "win."

I'd love to hear about it...and trust me I've had one little standoff with something that was not intimidated by my bluff charge and obviously had a keen interest in my little dog.....some strange stuff happens in the woods for sure

[Guest Captain Caveman]

This is the desired end state. A perpetual search for a legendary creature.

 

After Ketchum, Smeja, and Sykes, Bigfoot is dead to me as a real creature. But long live Bigfoot. Many cultures throughout time have had a Wild Man archetype, so why not ours? That it's a literal attempt to find an actual hominid is just an artifact of our literal(izing) culture.

 

What if Bigfoot did appear on a slab? It would be a great day for science, but Bigfoot would become a definite animal with definite characteristics, losing most of its power as a psychological projection object. On the other hand, what if Bigfoot ceased to exist as a possibility, however remote? Where would our Wild Man go then?

 

"He's a monster, he'll eat anything, alive, dead, fresh, rotten.... He's a survivor... mobile, quick, fast, and strong.... Anybody who sees a slow Sasquatch is not in the ball park.... He's got no limits, climbs any mountain, swims any river. He's got no barriers.... Not an endangered species, thats us.... He can pull down big game on the run or by stealth, like a cougar.... He can lay down a light track or spring like a deer.... Has a lot of humor, yet restraint.... Rocks cars and cabins, but lets folks go.... We agonize, he couldn't care less.... An opportunist at the top of the food chain, in great shape--he's got it made! Adapted to cutover lands, lives a good rugged existence.... He's got no need for wages, lives off the fat of the land, and pays no taxes!"

 

-- Jim Hewkin, retired fish and game professional from Oregon, quoted in Pyle, Robert Michael. "Where Bigfoot Walks: Crossing the Dark Divide." Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1995, page 204.