Invisible Bigfoot & Alternative Thinking

[kitakaze]

Admin, I somehow believe the thread is a total loss. Steam rolls off this stuff on a cold morning. -Knuck

I strongly disagree. There is clearly a strong interest in numerous members of the BFF for alternative theories regarding the nature of Bigfoot. Does not the membership dictate what is worthy of discussion? I have an alternative theory regarding the nature of Bigfoot in contrast to the majority of members- it doesn't exist physically or metaphysically, but it's a lot of fun anyway.

I see strong hypocrisy in the level of scorn dumped on people considering this. Drugs, lunacy, feces... does it somehow feel satisfying to do such textbook scoffing? I don't think paranormal Bigfoots are anymore out there than Bigfoots living across NA in breeding numbers and remaining uncatalogued. Both defy conventional biological realities.

For the people that are into interdimensional Bigfoot or other beings, you might highly enjoy this episode of BBC's documentary series Horizons featuring physicist Michio Kaku. I have no belief obviously regarding paranormal Bigfoot, but neither will I imply you're insane or on drugs for considering it...

[BobbyO]

I have no belief obviously regarding paranormal Bigfoot, but neither will I imply you're insane or on drugs for considering it...

I don't think you have any belief in Bigfoot in any sense Kit, i don't even think you have any interest, it's the people that believe in BF that you're interested in & if you said differently, i personally wouldn't believe you after reading your Posts for the best part of a Year now..

& you're far too smart for saying someone is on Drugs or call them insane because that could be construed as against Forum Rules & you won't/don't do it that way, you do it in an incredibly condescending way ( imvho ) that keeps you within Forum Rules at all times, allowing you to continue Posting Video's that you suspect people on this Forum ( BF Believers ) possibly highly enjoying something that is even stranger than Elvis being alive

Edit : That doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong on the very last part though, unfortunately..

Edited April 7, 2011 by BobbyO

[kitakaze]

I don't think you have any belief in Bigfoot in any sense Kit, i don't even think you have any interest, it's the people that believe in BF that you're interested in & if you said differently, i personally wouldn't believe you after reading your Posts for the best part of a Year now..

I can live with that. Talk to me, get to know me better, and you'd know I enjoy Bigfoot and am interested in it as much as anyone here. Let me give you an example. Here is one of my all time favourite Bigfoot documentaries...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp-bD_Kjor8

I absolutely love it. I watch it usually once a month. It never gets tired to me. The music, the creature FX, the vibe - it's awesome. When I watch that I am the same eight year old in a corner of my school library lost in John Green's books. These are the ones that did me in for life with Bigfoot...

& you're far too smart for saying someone is on Drugs or call them insane because that could be construed as against Forum Rules & you won't/don't do it that way, you do it in an incredibly condescending way ( imvho ) that keeps you within Forum Rules at all times, allowing you to continue Posting Video's that you suspect people on this Forum ( BF Believers ) possibly highly enjoying something that is even stranger than Elvis being alive

Edit : That doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong on the very last part though, unfortunately..

That really shows how little you know me and that's too bad. The implication by you is that I would like to suggest some people here are insane or on drugs, but don't because I'm just too wiley for that. You miss the fact that I have friends who are adamant that they have encountered Bigfoot and I have never once said they were crazy or on drugs. I never have nor ever will say anything like that to Scott Herriott. I have never thought that of John Cartwright. I do not think that of Splash.

Bobby, I am as much interested in the culture of Bigfootery as I am in Bigfoot, but that doesn't mean I think myself smarter or better than people who believe in Bigfoot. Believing in Bigfoot does not make one stupid or crazy and I have never stopped arguing that from day one since I started writing on the Internet five years ago.

[BobbyO]

I have never thought that of John Cartwright. I do not think that of Splash.

What do you think of them two then Kit ??

If i then asked you if you believe in BF, you'd either say " Yes " or the above 2 people were lying to us all or grossly Mis Identified something surely if they were not on Drugs nor insane ??

Please Mods see the context in what i write, i am certainly not implying that either of the 2 people Kit mentioned were on Drugs or were insane..

I'm just curious Kit in what you actually think & am willing for you to show me how what i think you're actually in it for, is wrong ..

[Guest ShadowPrime]

On a purely PRACTICAL level, where does talking about "supernatural" BFs get us? Doesn't it render almost all discussion, or analysis, kind of useless?

Here is what I mean. Suppose, for example, that you come to see me, to investigate a BF sighting I have reported. I take you to the place where I say I saw the BF... a large open area near some deep woods. You note that this large open area is extremely flat and muddy, and was muddy for at least the last day or two because of the weather - yet, no tracks. I tell you that is because BF leaves tracks only when it wants to - when it doesn't want to leave tracks, it just doesn't... maybe it can hover slightly over the ground or something. Hmmm. Okay, you point out that at the time of my alleged sighting, there was a large group of people having a picnic on the other side of that open area, where there are tables and grills, etc. Even though many of them were looking in this direction, none of THEM saw this eight foot tall, massive creature. Well, I tell you, BF can choose whether or not it is seen, can make itself invisible, or invisible to some and visible to others, depending on its whims. Hmmmm. You note that there is a bank nearby, and its parking lot security camera routinely films a section of this area, which is just beyond the lot. Nothing on the camera. Ah, I explain - BF radiates a field that can prevent its being filmed, or blur its image, if it chooses. And so forth.

I am honest NOT saying this to mock. Just noting that I think this path is basically a dead end. If you speculate that BF is a supernatural entity who can defy the conventional rules that apply to animals and humans, well... that kind of ends any PRACTICAL discussion, doesn't it? I mean, what more can you really say. ANYthing, any inconsistency, or unlikely event, or the like, can be explained away by reliance on these alleged supernatural abilities. So ... where does that get you? Not much to say, in any case, it seems to me.

Shadow

[kitakaze]

I mentioned three people, Bobby. Scott, John, and Splash. Scott thinks he may have encountered two creatures, John, one, and Splash two creatures on separate occasions, one moving away quadrupedally, the other bidpedally. I do not think they were lying, nor on narcotics, nor insane. Misidentification is something to discuss, but since I think none of it involved invisible Bigfoots in any fashion, it's rather OT, no? Scott's would probably be the closest with the glowing red eyes he reported, but I have really no idea what Scott saw.

I'm still unsure what that last sentence means exactly, which may be the gnarly headcold I have now, but the point is that I don't withhold against my desire saying people are on drugs or crazy regarding Bigfoot sightings, especially since I have friends who report Bigfoot sightings and know such explanations don't fit IMO.

Main point, this is not the old BFF. There's all sorts of discussion on this forum from pterodactyls to flying amoeba that is fantastically fringe. You can clearly see that there are many people here glad to be discussing alternative theories regarding Bigfoot, so what's the problem? That there will be a loss of credibility? Credibility with who? It's the biggest and best Bigfoot forum on the Internet so nothing to worry about there. Mainstream credibility? We all know full well that as long as the subject matter being discussed here is Bigfoot, it is going to be made fun of elsewhere. I think the best you can do is pay it no mind and make an example that the people discussing things are neither crazy nor on drugs. There's some pretty deep conversation here regarding how something like interdimensional Bigfoot or other beings might be possible. I see no harm whatsoever in allowing the discussion.

The most important point of all: You explore the topic and you can discuss and weigh its merits. You can hash it out, compare ideas, see what people think, and get a better idea about it - possibly you can arrive at a conclusion that nope, doesn't make much sense. OTOH, people who complain about "scoftics" and the need for comradery and tolerance turning right around and scoffing at other Bigfoot believers with comments on lunar lunacy and drugs is just about the most ironic thing ever.

Bigfoot being due to some paranormal phenomenon we don't understand is not any stranger to me than a massive mammal with the following distribution remmaining uncatalogued in 2011...

I'd almost say they have a better way of dealing with the lack of evidence that is necessary for such a species.

[Guest]

I mentioned three people, Bobby. Scott, John, and Splash. Scott thinks he may have encountered two creatures, John, one, and Splash two creatures on separate occasions, one moving away quadrupedally, the other bidpedally. I do not think they were lying, nor on narcotics, nor insane.

I enjoyed some insanity from 1995 through 1997, however, I didn't see any bigfoot during those times.

[Drew]

What's the name of that Boat Drew ??

& are those " believers " who haven't seen a BF in the same Boat as people who have, or is there yet another different Boat for that & if so, what's that called too ??

I gave you the name of the boat in the post you quoted. It was a metaphor, though, and I feared some would not get it.

Of course I am of the opinion that those who believe in Physical Bigfoots, and those that believe in Invisible Bigfoots, are in the same boat.

Neither one has any verifiable evidence.

The advantage of the Invisible Bigfoot people, is that they can say "Of course there is no evidence, it is an invisible being."

The Physical Bigfoot people have to say, "Of course there is no evidence, Bigfoot is too smart, cunning etc... to get caught."

Very similar.

If you want a literal translation, I will do it, but I think it is much more effective in metaphoric form:

I forgot to capitalize it properly, and probably should have put: HMS or USS in front of it like this.

...are in the same boat, The U.S.S. Any Verifiable Evidence?, or H.M.S. Any Verifiable Evidence?

Unless one of the categories can bring some verifiable evidence to the table, they are all on the same boat.

It is not a bad boat, it's name is just very straightforward.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Drew

[Guest Knuck]

I strongly disagree. There is clearly a strong interest in numerous members of the BFF for alternative theories regarding the nature of Bigfoot. Does not the membership dictate what is worthy of discussion? I have an alternative theory regarding the nature of Bigfoot in contrast to the majority of members- it doesn't exist physically or metaphysically, but it's a lot of fun anyway.

I see strong hypocrisy in the level of scorn dumped on people considering this. Drugs, lunacy, feces... does it somehow feel satisfying to do such textbook scoffing? I don't think paranormal Bigfoots are anymore out there than Bigfoots living across NA in breeding numbers and remaining uncatalogued. Both defy conventional biological realities.

For the people that are into interdimensional Bigfoot or other beings, you might highly enjoy this episode of BBC's documentary series Horizons featuring physicist Michio Kaku. I have no belief obviously regarding paranormal Bigfoot, but neither will I imply you're insane or on drugs for considering it...

Kit, I didn't say there was no interest in the given subject matter. There is obviously a lot of interest in it, and plenty of witnesses who feel there is more to these beings than simple bone and tissue. I was referring to the totally OFF THE SUBJECT ranting, and how far off center from the OP that the thread had been dragged. You must see that regardless of some believer's rather strong opposing views on the subject, some who would point out other's faults have plenty of thier own. Especially when they don't know of what they speak anymore than the ones that are the object of thier ridicule. There are no cold hard black and white facts in front of anyone here that dictate what is and what isn't. Some are chuckling to themself that the structure of serious bigfoot research is showing cracks.

The man meant nothing by the "bong" remark, other than some humor and a soft way to show he doesn't agree with the idea that Sasses are interdimensional beings. Some are getting too sensitive. Some are not sensitive enough.

One can't de-bunk what hasn't been established yet. Geeez, some must have gotten bored 'somewhere else".-Knuck

[Guest]

On a purely PRACTICAL level, where does talking about "supernatural" BFs get us? Doesn't it render almost all discussion, or analysis, kind of useless?

Here is what I mean. Suppose, for example, that you come to see me, to investigate a BF sighting I have reported. I take you to the place where I say I saw the BF... a large open area near some deep woods. You note that this large open area is extremely flat and muddy, and was muddy for at least the last day or two because of the weather - yet, no tracks. I tell you that is because BF leaves tracks only when it wants to - when it doesn't want to leave tracks, it just doesn't... maybe it can hover slightly over the ground or something. Hmmm. Okay, you point out that at the time of my alleged sighting, there was a large group of people having a picnic on the other side of that open area, where there are tables and grills, etc. Even though many of them were looking in this direction, none of THEM saw this eight foot tall, massive creature. Well, I tell you, BF can choose whether or not it is seen, can make itself invisible, or invisible to some and visible to others, depending on its whims. Hmmmm. You note that there is a bank nearby, and its parking lot security camera routinely films a section of this area, which is just beyond the lot. Nothing on the camera. Ah, I explain - BF radiates a field that can prevent its being filmed, or blur its image, if it chooses. And so forth.

I am honest NOT saying this to mock. Just noting that I think this path is basically a dead end. If you speculate that BF is a supernatural entity who can defy the conventional rules that apply to animals and humans, well... that kind of ends any PRACTICAL discussion, doesn't it? I mean, what more can you really say. ANYthing, any inconsistency, or unlikely event, or the like, can be explained away by reliance on these alleged supernatural abilities. So ... where does that get you? Not much to say, in any case, it seems to me.

Shadow

SP – with respect, I’ve always had a problem with this “take on things†– quite often put forward -- about the perceived uselessness of the supernatural / paranormal approach. It seems to me to make the status of the whole issue, that of a game which if it ceases to be fun to play, is no longer worth bothering with – whereby the players may seek to tweak things, so that they can continue to enjoy a “fun†game.

Can it not be considered that the whole “Bigfoot thing†is, perhaps, indeed beyond what our current knowledge of what goes on in the world, is informed of – to say nothing of possible future knowledge of same? For sure, bad luck for would-be practical-type (or any) investigators; but is it inconceivable that, just, “them’s the breaksâ€? If we are – to borrow your words – at a dead end: could it not be that, frustrating as it may be, we are, unfortunately, indeed at a dead end? Coming to that conclusion would – if one were to be Vulcan-like logical – suggest “write the topic off as, probably, unresolvable and forever a mystery, and get interested in other, less sterile, things insteadâ€; but humans are weird and not totally logic-and-sense-driven, and might well choose to go on worrying at the matter, however much of a dead end they rationally perceived it to be.

Paraphrasing Kitakaze’s words of 7th April on this thread: “Bigfoot being due to some paranormal phenomenon we don’t understand is not any stranger [possibly less strange] to me than a massive mammal with a distribution [over vast tracts of North America] remaining uncatalogued in 2011...â€: perhaps “the hard pill to swallow†is that if anything on this scene is going on at all – it not being 100% a mixture of lies / hoaxes / misidentifications / wishful thinking / hallucinations (which aforesaid “combo†strikes me as the unlikeliest scenario of all) – it is most likely indeed stuff “beyond the known physical worldâ€, which we may well never get any kind of handle on.

[Guest UnknownHairyOne]

I remember a time when "infrasound being used by the bigfeet" was thought to be in the same vain...looney. All the sudden, everyone accepts it because many have experienced some manipulation of their physical being and BFRO promotes the theory (peer pressure and acceptance all of the sudden).

The indians lived alongside these large people for hundreds and maybe thousands of years. Most tribes say the same things that experienced researchers or people who share a property with the bigfeet (same as indians) say about them. All along the lines of interdimensionalism, telepathy and other items.

Now a few white guys who think themselves wiser (trying to make a name for themselves) than these indians come along and dismiss them as over-imaginative. So who's correct? I go with experience every time, the indians. Conceptualist always seem to get it wrong. Look at certain scientists still claiming there are only 300 of the bigfeet and that they are just flesh and blood apes. I believe that they'll soon be proven to be anything but apes and eventually we'll catch up with the indians. It takes time and experience though OR just listening to wisdom for a shorter learning cycle. Take your pick. Anyway, very difficult to imagine or explain but so are many facts of life.

Edited April 7, 2011 by UnknownHairyOne

[Guest]

I just wanna know where the bigfoots are hiding their mini hadron colliders.

[Guest]

I just wanna know where the bigfoots are hiding their mini hadron colliders.

This is very off-topic and snarky Saskeptic. Was the comment really necessary?

(as always JMO)

[Guest]

I remember a time when "infrasound being used by the bigfeet" was thought to be in the same vain...looney. All the sudden, everyone accepts it because many have experienced some manipulation of their physical being and BFRO promotes the theory (peer pressure and acceptance all of the sudden).

The indians lived alongside these large people for hundreds and maybe thousands of years. Most tribes say the same things that experienced researchers or people who share a property with the bigfeet (same as indians) say about them. All along the lines of interdimensionalism, telepathy and other items.

Now a few white guys who think themselves wiser (trying to make a name for themselves) than these indians come along and dismiss them as over-imaginative. So who's correct? I go with experience every time, the indians. Conceptualist always seem to get it wrong. Look at certain scientists still claiming there are only 300 of the bigfeet and that they are just flesh and blood apes. I believe that they'll soon be proven to be anything but apes and eventually we'll catch up with the indians. It takes time and experience though OR just listening to wisdom for a shorter learning cycle. Take your pick. Anyway, very difficult to imagine or explain but so are many facts of life.

Extemely well said and a very VALID point. Tossing out all unexplainable behavior like a baby with the bathwater is short sighted. Just because this is the only historical record we have to date, it would seem the sooner all oddities are recorded the sooner we'd have a database and patterns would begin to emerge. Instead of doing that, people are demeaned and the very tired "same old" retoric is invoked.

This thread has brought up some interesting ideas, then due to some people with absolutely no self control it's devolved away from the OP's stated intent. Let me pose a question

Why would I take anyones opinion seriously and give it all due consideration when the same consideration to the topic was so blatently disregarded??

When someone new checks in to the forum looking for information what is apparent is as members we most certainly are not putting our best foot forward. When was One Upmanship relevant to any topic? For the folks who couldn't resist answering the question that WASN'T ASKED in reference to is Bigfoot flesh and blood...shame on you. When posters drag every thread into obscurity with repetitive, irrelevant to the topic posts, it isn't because the topic wasn't facinating, or relevant it's due to uncontrolled juvenile behavior.

(as always JMO)

[Guest]

On a purely PRACTICAL level, where does talking about "supernatural" BFs get us? Doesn't it render almost all discussion, or analysis, kind of useless?

Here is what I mean. Suppose, for example, that you come to see me, to investigate a BF sighting I have reported. I take you to the place where I say I saw the BF... a large open area near some deep woods. You note that this large open area is extremely flat and muddy, and was muddy for at least the last day or two because of the weather - yet, no tracks. I tell you that is because BF leaves tracks only when it wants to - when it doesn't want to leave tracks, it just doesn't... maybe it can hover slightly over the ground or something. Hmmm. Okay, you point out that at the time of my alleged sighting, there was a large group of people having a picnic on the other side of that open area, where there are tables and grills, etc. Even though many of them were looking in this direction, none of THEM saw this eight foot tall, massive creature. Well, I tell you, BF can choose whether or not it is seen, can make itself invisible, or invisible to some and visible to others, depending on its whims. Hmmmm. You note that there is a bank nearby, and its parking lot security camera routinely films a section of this area, which is just beyond the lot. Nothing on the camera. Ah, I explain - BF radiates a field that can prevent its being filmed, or blur its image, if it chooses. And so forth.

I am honest NOT saying this to mock. Just noting that I think this path is basically a dead end. If you speculate that BF is a supernatural entity who can defy the conventional rules that apply to animals and humans, well... that kind of ends any PRACTICAL discussion, doesn't it? I mean, what more can you really say. ANYthing, any inconsistency, or unlikely event, or the like, can be explained away by reliance on these alleged supernatural abilities. So ... where does that get you? Not much to say, in any case, it seems to me.

Shadow

That's quite a skimming of the surface. In factoring the "odditys" in you can build a database of localitys, conditions, prevelance of local belief systems regarding alleged BF behaviors, commonalities in reported occurances all of which can then be looked at and winnowed down. By chosing not to discuss it at all the reports are intentionally incomplete. Hardly good science.