N A W A C - Field Study Discussion (2)

[slabdog]

Oh the drama...(sigh)

My .02 cents.

The NAWAC's work is fascinating and I am thankful for their dedication.

Drew's supposed "stick figure" (post #1128) seemed to be a genuine effort and helped me visualize the event. I wish it could be confirmed or clarified. Oh well.

I enjoyed reading the NAWAC's updates here.

I also enjoyed the back and forth debate and tough questions and answers between the skeptics and Bipto.

It's Bipto's right to hit the eject button.

Hopefully he comes back but if not I will get my updates from the BFS.

(Back to lurk mode)

[Drew]

I have tried to stay out of this discussion, but I think this has kind of gotten out of hand.  First of all, I am a NAWAC member and I have seen two wood apes in Area X, possibly a third last year.  I really think everyone should back up and listen to the Bigfoot Show's last show and absorb the details of the tree break...I think there is some miscommunication going on here.  The tree certainly wasn't 96 feet tall but I think Drew (although the tree type isn't right) may have had the tree "failure" right - around 16-20 feet up (as stated in the Bigfoot Show podcast).  Also, bipto didn't leave the BFF in a "huff" like a few of you have suggested.  He left because his roll in the NAWAC is to educate the public about wood apes...once the education process ceases to exist, then there is no point in continuing on.

 

I actually went back and tried to find a given height.  Bipto said 50-60 feet.  But his load example in post #663 said that the weight was 45' up in the tree. I didn't think that the beast was only 10' from the top of a 55' foot tree.  So the height of the tree was arbitrarily placed at double the location of the weight load.

 

I also found that Bipto said the break was at 24" from the ground.

 

I have revised the drawing, and redone a scaled sketch based on the dimensions that Bipto gave in the thread.  See post #658 

Today's was interesting because, unlike those I was present to experience, the tree involved was heathy and green. It stood about 60 yards away from the cabin and was about 50-60' tall with a diameter of 20-24". It was broken off about two feet above the ground. The wood was fresh and yellow and wet and showed no signs of disease or damage. It's breaking sounded like a gunshot as it snapped and fell. After the tree started to fall, the member present heard another thudding secondary impact we suspect was an ape falling out of the tree. This is exactly what I experienced a few weeks ago. 

 

 

Certainly the revised drawing shows the difficulty of generating force from a lower location.

The higher up the weight, the more force that can be generated. If the beast was 20' up in the tree, and the tree is only 55' high, a 24" stout tree like that would not even move under the weight of 700 pounds.

 

[See-Te-Cah NC]

^^^^^^^

You won't find one. Bipto has had more patience in this long running thread than I ever could. I've read his responses, watched his videos and listened to his podcasts for years, the guy is a class act.

See, I understand that your hurt by his comments about the BFF and rightfully so. I sincerely hope that the NAWAC and the BFF can make up and move on. I love this forum and I think you do a stellar job running it. But trying to moderate is a thankless job, and it's easy for us to sometimes forget how hard it is to keep things running smoothly around here.

I certainly don't agree with his potshots towards the BFF, but I think they came from utter frustration and exhaustion.

 

Not once have I questioned his integrity, nor have I ever implied that he's not genuine in his efforts and his observations. I'm not there, so it's not for me to say. This is why I - like many others - look for evidence to support the claims. I want him and the NAWAC to succeed, and I'd like to see evidence that shows that they're making progress.

 

I'm not so much hurt by the comments about the BFF as I'm disappointed that a long time member of the BFF - and the founder - would malign the forum like he did. I don't run this forum alone. There are many others that make this place click. This is why I'm disappointed. Those pot shots weren't just directed at the BFF, they were an implied reflection on the staff, too. Whenever I see this, I'll stand up for them, regardless of my personal feelings.

 

Even with everything that's been said, Bipto is welcome here anytime. There's no need to make up as far as I'm concerned because we're all adults here. We can all get along, but he can't keep firing off insulting banter at the forum. As the chief Admin, I expect no more or no less from Bipto than I did before his exit.

 

If you skeptics want to run people off of the BFF? Why not start with the proponents of UFO Bigfoot? Mind speak Bigfoot? How come your not in there harassing them with silly questions constantly? It's only logical......as their claims are. 2000% more outlandish than a tree falling in the woods.

Comfy? Not really.......

I think what you fail to address Drew is that there were a lot of people that enjoyed the dialogue here in this thread. Go ahead and gloat all you like, getting this shut down by running off the OP, is not a win for anybody it's just unfortunate all the way around.

 

Nobody has the ability to run anyone off of the BFF except a select number of staff - The Admin and myself. The individual member makes the call on what and when they'll post. Bipto made his decision to leave for whatever reason. He was not run off.

 

While it is indeed unfortunate that Bipto has exited, thus shutting down dialogue for skeptic and proponent alike, it was his choice to leave, presumably in the face of direct questioning regarding the tree break incident. Nobody is responsible for the stoppage of dialogue except Bipto. He wasn't run off... he left.

 

*slaps forehead*

The NAWAC is a pro kill organization!!!! So you cannot see the difference??? Anecdotal accounts are not the end all goal for Bipto's group unlike most others.

Also, I see your agenda clearly now, the UFO Bigfoot proponents have no credibility? So go after the ones that do? Is that about right?

That just makes skeptics look all the more petty in my eyes Drew......

Sure.

But would you prefer the BFRO? That's all they promise is anecdotes.......forever.

 

Some member claims are more believable than others, wouldn't you agree? Just as in any field, some people have a reputation, be it credible or otherwise. Because of this, the higher the reputation, the more responsible they should be. Bipto has a good reputation regarding Bigfoot research, so I'd expect him to be held to a higher standard than someone touting a Bigfoot/UFO correlation.

 

Wouldn't you?

[norseman]

As I've already stated Drew, white oak has big horizontal limbs. Move your stick "biggie" out to the edge of your green sharpie marks and recompute.....what does that shear force look like now.

And I promise you that at 250 lbs I could climb a 24" diameter ponderosa pine tree and make it sway with no problem.

Trees fall in the forest all the time Drew, but you don't REALLY care do you? Maybe a UFO photon beam brought it down????

Are you gonna go away now?

[See-Te-Cah NC]

Mod Statement:

 

Guys, I know that we're discussing sensitive stuff here, but please remember not to make things personal with the other members. Whether we agree or not, we can be civil with each other as we debate and discuss.

[MIB]

Nobody has the ability to run anyone off of the BFF except a select number of staff - The Admin and myself.

 

Semantics, I guess.   I would say only you and the admin can THROW someone off.   "Running someone off" includes making them so uncomfortable they choose to leave.  Very clearly members CAN do that ... and do.   Bipto wan't the first to leave.

 

MIB

Edited July 9, 2014 by MIB

[Drew]

Norseman said:

As I've already stated Drew, white oak has big horizontal limbs. Move your stick "biggie" out to the edge of your green sharpie marks and recompute.....what does that shear force look like now.

 

 

Sheer force?

 

It makes no difference in physics if you are at the edge or in the middle.  A horizontal force is a horizontal force whether you are in the middle or at the edge.

 

It all is going to depend on whether the limbs out at the end of the canopy would be able to transmit enough of the force to the trunk, to snap it off at the 24" mark.

Which they wouldn't.

 

I put the beast against the trunk, because it is the only place where the creature would be able to generate forces that would break off limbs like toothpicks long before the trunk would break.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Drew

[See-Te-Cah NC]

Semantics, I guess.   I would say only you and the admin can THROW someone off.   "Running someone off" includes making them so uncomfortable they choose to leave.  Very clearly members CAN do that ... and do.   Bipto wan't the first to leave.

 

MIB

 

Having someone leave because they're uncomfortable with the questioning that is bound to accompany unsubstantiated claims and observations has nothing to do with those doing the questioning.

 

If someone's uncomfortable enough with their inability or unwillingness to present evidence to substantiate their claims that they choose to leave, maybe they should have kept the claims made to themselves until adequate proof was available.

[dmaker]

Dmaker: Like I said, me and Alice have had our cards punched already. Pasadena.

 

I do encourage you though to venture in your life to more of the remote areas of the U.S., especially those in the S. tier, and spend some nights on the ground there... preferably alone. You may find all is not what you assume it to be ensconced in your N. redoubt.  You've got a sharp mind dmaker, and I enjoy your contributions, but you lack the kind of hard practical experience that is required to make sense of what is being reported. Relying on others to tell you what that that is like, and what is possible, or not, is exactly the same shortcoming you accuse some of us of, only many of us have that experience to back it up. You are debating facts concerning environments, terrain and people you only read about, which is a handicap you might want to address to truly be serious about this debate, and not be just be another guy with a keyboard and an agenda.

 

Even if it is not to do BF research, I hope you can do that. The U.S., like Canada, has some astounding stuff out there that is only accessible to those willing to risk it. I wish that for you most sincerely. If you are healthy, fit and not too risk averse, any number of people here could point you in the right direction. PM me anytime and I'd be glad to give you some destinations and gear tips.    

 

I don't need you to lecture me on the outdoors, thank-you. I spend plenty of time in the outdoors, some of it alleged bigfoot habitat. Last year I spent several days hiking the Desolation Wilderness area of the Sierras--there are some photos on this site somewhere. And in 4 weeks I leave for north Vancouver island for a week camping and kayaking near a marine preserve. I'll see plenty of orcas, but nary a bigfoot I predict. In my home province I hike The Bruce Trail year round. I'm an avid kayak enthusiast and spend lots of time kayaking local rivers and the Long Point area of Lake Erie. 

 

I make sense of what is reported just perfectly fine. What I lack, and you have in spades, is bigfoot confirmation bias. 

 

I don't know what gave you the idea that I am chained to my keyboard and never leave the house. 

Edited July 9, 2014 by dmaker

[Rockape]

<I don't know what gave you the idea that I am chained to my keyboard and never leave the house.>

 

Just guessing but probably from the gazillion posts you make here.

 

Seriously though, I'd like to see someone such as yourself do some "bigfooting" and report back, and by "bigfooting" I mean spending time in the woods for the specific reason of trying to find evidence of the creature. Just spend some times checking for wood structures and what you make of them, seeing if you hear any wood knocks or howls, and what you think they are. Maybe even see something, say a known creature and show how they can be mistaken for a BF. But, get photos, or you know we'll hammer you.

[norseman]

Norseman said:

Sheer force?

It makes no difference in physics if you are at the edge or in the middle. A horizontal force is a horizontal force whether you are in the middle or at the edge.

It all is going to depend on whether the limbs out at the end of the canopy would be able to transmit enough of the force to the trunk, to snap it off at the 24" mark.

Which they wouldn't.

I put the beast against the trunk, because it is the only place where the creature would be able to generate forces that would break off limbs like toothpicks long before the trunk would break.

I disagree with a species such as Oak.

Prove it.

[WSA]

Having someone leave because they're uncomfortable with the questioning that is bound to accompany unsubstantiated claims and observations has nothing to do with those doing the questioning.

 

If someone's uncomfortable enough with their inability or unwillingness to present evidence to substantiate their claims that they choose to leave, maybe they should have kept the claims made to themselves until adequate proof was available.

 

As I said, I don't think Bipto objected to fielding legitimate requests for supplemental information. It was the sub-text of a lot of the inquiries that wore him down.  Let's just be straightforward about this, could we? When parties who are on record as saying not only is there no evidence of this animal, but that its very existence is impossible, how much productive give and take is going to result?  The answer, of course, is: None.  Now, what profit is there in that for somebody trying to arrive at answers, when the on-going insinuation from some others was, "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" No profit at all is the answer, and we all know that for the truth. So, let's just not pretend that a learned discourse with these posters was interrupted by Bipto's exit. Nothing of the kind, and we should just admit that, even if our pretense of "free exchange of ideas, etc." is the casualty.

[See-Te-Cah NC]

No pretenses are required. If you have the goods, you put them on the table. If not, you don't advertise them and expect to be believed because you say so.

[David NC]

I have to agree with WSA. I have seen a lot of posts that were transparently veiled potshots/snipes at the OP or at a poster directly above them. See you stated that there are no rules on how many questions a person can ask or how many times they post in an individual thread that they do not believe what you are saying. So I can post I do not believe you every 6th, 7th, 8th poster thru a 1000 post thread that I do not believe what is being said and I would not be a TROLL? I have also seen posts that have nothing to do with the subject in the thread and were nothing more than snide/snipy comedy and this from an "official" on this site.

[WSA]

Dmaker... 

 

Good, keep on that path, would be my advice, but until you've spent consecutive days alone in deep woods (leave the phone at home) you'll not really be aware of what I'm talking about. Then, come back here in 40+ years and tell us what you think you know now didn't change. It will. Trust me on that one.  In the meanwhile though.... your holiday outings? There are those here who are spending every spare moment out there, weeks on end. They know things you do not, and even all my years doing that have to give way to the things they are bringing back to me.  A smugness in the face of that knowledge is somewhat unbecoming, and I try to avoid that if I can. I hear you to say for you it doesn't matter, and I accept you for who you are. (Not sure I'd want to share a tent with you though...but hey, I have close friends that applies to as well...)