MIB Posted July 6, 2014 Moderator Posted July 6, 2014 (edited) Hmmm ... the shoe fits on the other foot as well. Maybe YOU need to remember that Bipto is a person with feelings, not just an avatar, who has invested his own time and money and was voluntarily sharing because he thought someone would be interested and benefit. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, right? Suggesting that Bipto might be playing anyone for a fool IS an extraordinary claim. Show your proof. MIB Edited July 6, 2014 by MIB 2
Guest Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 ^ Settle down MIB. Nowhere did I say Bipto was actually playing us for fools. I was suggesting that without proof people tend to get worried and that their reason for asking questions was just the need for a little reassurance.
ShadowBorn Posted July 6, 2014 Moderator Posted July 6, 2014 This is not his forum, its everyone's forum. All of the members make it a great place to talk BF, weather your a scientist who believes anything or an armchair skeptic, everyone has a place here. Starting the BFF doesn't make you into some kind of Bigfoot Godfather, "I'll tell you a story you can't refuse". Bipto needs to remember that we are not just avitars, we are people. People with feelings, who want to make sure the time, trust, and even money they invest in him and his NAWAC is not being misplaced. Outlandish claims sometimes need a little proof just as a reassurance nobody is being played for a fool. Every time we go into the woods looking for these creatures we are being played a fool by them. They have the advantage and we usually end up looking dumb founded... So having a big tree knocked down is no big deal for them, right! Knocking down that tree is their way of showing dominance among males. Rather then argue about it being done argue about why?. My on professional opinion is that the tree being knocked down is them showing their way of dominance . If they are these so called wood apes or apes like what the Powers To Be would like for them to be. Then would this not what the behavior of a wood ape be? On so many levels.
dmaker Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 (edited) Hmmm ... the shoe fits on the other foot as well. Maybe YOU need to remember that Bipto is a person with feelings, not just an avatar, who has invested his own time and money and was voluntarily sharing because he thought someone would be interested and benefit. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, right? Suggesting that Bipto might be playing anyone for a fool IS an extraordinary claim. Show your proof. MIB He invested his own time and money but also solicited and accepted donations and enjoyed tax breaks for his organization. This is not meant to be slanderous and has been mentioned and confirmed many times. I am simply pointing out he has not been paupered due to his NAWAC association. Back to your other point. Can you show proof of how any known North American mega fauna can bring down a healthy, two foot diameter tree at the base? No, you cannot since it is not realistically possible. Edited July 6, 2014 by dmaker
Guest Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 This entire NAWAC situation has ballooned to the levels it has because Bipto is the one posting. If Joe from down the street were to come on here posting the same stories, event, and encounters no one on this forum would have looked twice at it. Many on this forum are simply "star struck" by certain names, and what they say and post automatically garners attention. We all are aware of Bipto's status on this forum, so it boosts the egos of many on here to participate in this thread. There are several individuals on this forum whose simple agenda is to post as many times as possible, and in doing so have quickly established themselves as a person who has nothing of substance to offer here. It is disappointing that Bipto no longer wants to share NAWAC info with the forum, but certainly understandable. Read some of these posts...the entire conversation has turned to whether he ran away scared or not... At the very least i commend the NAWAC because they are actually in the field doing work and trying to bring Bigfoot to life. At least they are not sitting around behind their computers commenting on every single post that someone makes...doing nothing to add value to the world of sasquatch.
dmaker Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 "At least they are not sitting around behind their computers commenting on every single post that someone makes.." Did you post this from the field? 4
Guest zenmonkey Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 Then maybe if a bunch of other members hadn't been running around like the world was coming to an end he might not have thought it so bad. No, it's not his forum. The people who run it now saved it, so we kinda owe them. What I was getting at was he started all of this.
chelefoot Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 This entire NAWAC situation has ballooned to the levels it has because Bipto is the one posting. If Joe from down the street were to come on here posting the same stories, event, and encounters no one on this forum would have looked twice at it. Many on this forum are simply "star struck" by certain names, and what they say and post automatically garners attention. We all are aware of Bipto's status on this forum, so it boosts the egos of many on here to participate in this thread. There are several individuals on this forum whose simple agenda is to post as many times as possible, and in doing so have quickly established themselves as a person who has nothing of substance to offer here. It is disappointing that Bipto no longer wants to share NAWAC info with the forum, but certainly understandable. Read some of these posts...the entire conversation has turned to whether he ran away scared or not... At the very least i commend the NAWAC because they are actually in the field doing work and trying to bring Bigfoot to life. At least they are not sitting around behind their computers commenting on every single post that someone makes...doing nothing to add value to the world of sasquatch. I have been following this thread since it started and I have to disagree with many points that you make in this post. In my opinion, most members who post in this thread are genuinely interested in what is going on at X, whether they are proponents or skeptics. I really don't believe that there are "many" who only post in this thread to boost their egos. And although there are some folks who do post a lot, and while they may very well have an agenda, I doubt it is because they have an agenda to "post as many times as possible". Of course, I could be wrong. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I do agree that NAWAC should be commended on their work in the field. But when they decided to report their findings here, they had to know that the tough questions would be asked. I do understand the frustration with answering the same questions over and over, but it really puzzles me that it upsets them that members question a claim as extraordinary as the tree break incident. Regardless, I wish them luck in their efforts to solve this mystery.
Drew Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 This is a perfect example of Bipto coming back, admittedly not reading the comments that took place while he was gone, and then putting the blame for his leaving, squarely on the back of people who were simply questioning his recollection of an incident, that doesn't happen in the woods. Creatures don't break healthy 24" trees at the base. It doesn't happen. Chimps, Gorillas and Orangutans don't do it either. It is a simple matter of physics. We all love the Sasquatch, but the Sasquatch isn't capable of doing what was described. Can you imagine the danger involved in riding a giant tree down to the ground and leaping off at the last second? With 8" branches falling all around, and an unknown medium lying on the ground below? Surely even if there was a 10% chance of a severe injury Sasquatch would have been long extinct. Anyway, I at least would have thought that Bipto could have read the comments before bailing. It seems weak to lay the responsibility for that at the feet of people who are simply questioning claims. I even think that there is a Forum rule that says 'expect to have your claims questioned' or something like that. Maybe one of the Mods can clarify that. 1
Guest Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 He should probably of made these observations in blog posts and then just provided a link.
Cotter Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 Insinuations. No-one was silly/honest enough to say it straight. Not in the GF at least.
Guest Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 (edited) For the record, I have no idea what a fully grown wood ape weighs."African or European variety?" {And with or without a coconut husk?} ;~)° Edited July 7, 2014 by Kite-Squatch
Cotter Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 Back to your other point. Can you show proof of how any known North American mega fauna can bring down a healthy, two foot diameter tree at the base? No, you cannot since it is not realistically possible. Agreed, but how I think about it is not 'Bipto and gang are making stuff up', but rather 'Bipto and gang must be mistaken'. There HAD to have been other factors involved, absolutely. To immediately default to 'hoaxing' is the result of a proverbial set of blinders being worn. (Assuming BF did it is another set of blinders altogether). Seems day in and day out skeptics and proponents alike leave VERY little room for middle ground.
Drew Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 Is there an NDA requirement if you visit Area X? Even if someone went there and saw nothing, would they be violating the NDA if they came on here and said "I didn't see anything", or take it a step further, what if they saw something fishy going on? Would they be under the NDA Umbrella?
Cotter Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 ^I don't think NDA's hold up when exposing fraud, or am I not correct in that assessment? So, since someone has not come forward either 1) there is something fishy going on there and all members as 100% on the take, or 2) there has not been anything fishy identified or 3) there is simply nothing fishy going on. I want to go fishing now.
Recommended Posts