It Will Not Make Any Difference

[Guest Stan Norton]

Why would there be a conspiracy to cover up a purported old world origin for the yuchi language? Who would gain and what would be the point? Might you be reading a little to much into the sad situation of yet another language and culture going the way of so many before it?

Egyptian culture in the grand canyon?? Are you serious?? Any archaeological evidence for that, not counting iffy websites with a clear bent to topics not allowed to be discussed here?

Edited August 13, 2014 by Stan Norton

[Yuchi1]

Archaeological evidence, what archaeological evidence, so sayeth the Smithsonian.  My point exactly.  BTW, wonder if anyone out in cyberland would consider this website as "iffy"?

[Guest]

I stated in a past forum subject about 2 years ago, that I personally didn't feel the much anticipated release of the DNA study report would make much of an impact and it seems to be true.  Not much has changed in the Bigfoot world since then except for one group changing their name!

 

With that said, I have seen a number of folks shift towards the shooting of one of these giants of the forest to prove-for what ever reason-they do exist.  Be it purely a scientific endeavor ( I don't really believe that in most cases) or just a big ego to be the one who finds the Holy Grail of proof and obtains fame and possible fortune that may follow.

 

In my opinion, if and when that does happen, I feel this will have little total impact for a number of reasons.  Probably the greatest one is that it will probably happen to someone or a group quite unprepared to deal with it with no plan of action in place.  Seeking help, someone will tip off the media or other parties early and at some point the state or feds will show up and confiscate the body.  The skeptics will then be out in full force and once again nothing changes.

 

I don't have a dog in this fight one way or the other.  I have seen these elusive subjects on multiple occasions and know they exist.  Other than pure self defense, I also wouldn't dare trying to kill one.  Yes, they can be brought down, documented stories support this and I have also spoken with people that shot them while being charged.  One was brought down, the other fled and eventually bled out died.  Both times involved people who had no idea they existed and were not connected with the Bigfoot interests at the time.  They were so shaken and freaked out after seeing these subjects up close they kept it to themselves for years.

 

Again, it may sound like a convenient story to the skeptic, but its the truth anyway.

 

If and when it happens again, I say nothing will change and the controversy will continue to roll on...just my opinion .

 

M.O.    

I've been resisting this thread for a while now. There are many on this forum who believe that DNA would not be sufficient evidence for science to accept bigfoot. Science WILL accept DNA as evidence. It is unfortunate that recent DNA studies have yielded nonsense answers that science does not accept. "Angel DNA" of all things. Manbearpig!!! really!!! This is not the fault of science but of the less than scientific work of people who disgrace science. Any DNA evidence (even just a toe nail or hair) will be accepted by science as evidence if it is processed correctly. Here's hoping we will get some soon.

[Incorrigible1]

Not sure why Wingman's postings come thru with such odd spacing. Difficult to read.

[Midnight Owl]

I would hope someday antfoot, that the heavy hitters in science would give the Bigfoot-Sasquatch study a serious swing!  Disregarding the clear recorded history of Native Americans, the literally thousands of personal reports and new articles, the expert opinions of recorded sound, cast footprints with authentic dermal impressions, I do not know of one tax supported agency jumping in and giving this field of study full consideration.  As to the contrary, they are very quick to Pooh-pooh any privately funded concern.  It seems to me Doctor Jeff Meldrum's position is closest we have, but most of his Bigfoot work seems to be of a personal nature only tolerated by his employer.  With that said, he at times also seems to have had his share of grief defending his position.

 

As I have stated before-in my opinion-I think most of the government work has been performed on this without the public's knowledge and never will be acknowledged!      

[Guest]

When scientists are presented with suitable evidence, they will study it. Suitable evidence has not yet been presented. A million reports is not evidence no matter how reputable the witnesses. They are anecdotes. Physical evidence has been material that can be hoaxed pretty easily and is known to have been fake previously. Any such evidence is tainted by that. Do not blame science for that. That is the fault of the hoaxers only. The hoaxers are responsible for the large amount of disdain the public has for the subject of bigfoot. Native American history is anything BUT clear. Like most ancient stories that were not written down for thousands of years, the histories of Native Americans likely bear little resemblance to what really happened.

[Guest]

Lots of jockeying for position and posturing on either side of the kill/no-kill position. I disagree, fundamentally, with the opening post, in that a bigfoot carcass will make profound waves in the scientific community. Within a few years, the discovery could change fundamental land-use and permissions upon vast tracts of federal land.

 

The claimed physical evidence has been found wanting, and clowns on the left, jokers on the right have been affronts to serious study. It's no wonder accredited scientific efforts have not been forthcoming. Those in the public eye, at outlandish press conferences or reality television shows, discourage study from creditable scientific fronts.

 

Yet when some amateur researcher proffers the carcass of an unclassified primate or hominid, or a severed limb or head of such, the scientific world will come to an abrupt standstill. And those would be interesting times, my friends.

 

 

Interesting times indeed.  IMHO, it will a boil down to who..or which group either harvests, or finds definitive remains.  Some groups and even individuals have protocol in place to handle and present that evidence it it ever happens.  We do, and I know of several other researchers that do as well.  I could easily see the government stepping in if they can, and confiscating evidence to squash public hysteria,  if your normal hiker stumbles across, or shots a Sasquatch, but if a prepared group finds itself in that situation, I think the outcome would be much different.  The odds are rising.

 

If that ball ever drops, the outcome will depend on who it drops on.

 

DR

[Guest Stan Norton]

Archaeological evidence, what archaeological evidence, so sayeth the Smithsonian.  My point exactly.  BTW, wonder if anyone out in cyberland would consider this website as "iffy"?

I'm certain they would. Fact remains though that at least here there is, if you look with care, a core of generally sensible and informative discussion (dare I say leaning to the sceptical?) rather than the touting of strange views with no critique.

[Guest DWA]

When scientists are presented with suitable evidence, they will study it. Suitable evidence has not yet been presented. A million reports is not evidence no matter how reputable the witnesses. They are anecdotes.

 

This isn't true.  The anecdotes meet the requirements of compelling evidence, as the scientists who understand this have clearly shown.    Moreover they dovetail with the physical evidence.  Evidence like this has been run to ground since before "evidence" and "science" were words.  The scientists who aren't studying it, when they are asked why, convey their inability to understand what's going on more than anything else.  This is actually less surprising than most non-scientists might think.  Most scientists really don't understand how science works, outside of the narrow corners of the field in which they operate; and their statements on this topic baldly show this.

 

Physical evidence has been material that can be hoaxed pretty easily and is known to have been fake previously. Any such evidence is tainted by that. Do not blame science for that.

 

This isn't true, and I don't blame science.  I blame scientists.  Big difference.  Scientists who have analyzed the footprints have shown pretty compellingly (1) how they cross-reference impeccably with the anecdotal evidence (and the film we have of a sasquatch) and (2) how hard they would be to fake.

 

Native American history is anything BUT clear. Like most ancient stories that were not written down for thousands of years, the histories of Native Americans likely bear little resemblance to what really happened.

 

One thing is really clear:  those things on which large numbers of Native Americans agree with large numbers of non-Natives are, pretty much without exceptions, real things.  There are no historical cases of "legends" jumping cultures like this.  One can't dismiss as "Native legends" things that compelling evidence indicates are being seen by non-Natives as well.

[Guest DWA]

Sorry wingman but you came off as a class A jerk to your friend. was he really one of your friends? I would have either left or punched you in the nose for such disrespect (maybe both). Light waves have measurable values and are more accurate than a tape measure. He was probably aghast at your total lack of comprehension of that fact. I always find it astounding when an ignorant person considers his opinion to matter more than the opinion of the man or woman who actually studies the matter at hand.

Well, actually, the scientist showed he doesn't understand science very well.  And can't discuss it very easily with laymen.

 

(A scientist who would punch someone in the nose can be dismissed as emotional to the extent that it clouds his vision.)

 

It's very obvious that almost no astronomical "proofs" would be so accepted by zoology.  Astronomy, like paleontology, uses proxy measures to "take us" places none of us will ever be able to go.  Woulda been easy enough to say this without getting mad, but he decided to be either ignorant or a class A jerk about it.

 

This happens constantly in this field - the skeptic gets mad and offers a punch in the face.  Having no evidence, no argument, no way to explain oneself, does do this to people.

 

" I always find it astounding when an ignorant person considers his opinion to matter more than the opinion of the man or woman who actually studies the matter at hand."

 

Just how we proponents feel about the scientists who disagree with us.  Exactly.

Edited August 14, 2014 by DWA

[Midnight Owl]

Having retired from an investigative law enforcement background Antfoot, I'd call footprints with dermal impressions verified by an expert witness, hundreds of credible eye witnesses, wall pictures, totem figures and hair samples not given to any known North American primate "Suitable evidence".  This level of evidence has and will stand in the criminal and civil courts of America, yet your statements are a prime manifestation of the slanted, uneven playing field established science continues to hold to.  Not my opinion, but nearly 40 years of "Been there done that"!  You or no one else will change my educated and experienced opinion on this.  There is a deliberate effort by science to avoid this subject! 

[Incorrigible1]

Is there also a deliberate effort to prevent anyone from presenting "science" with credible evidence?

 

 

 

And OMG, have just presented our resident self-proclaimed "scientist" with yet another opportunity to make his umpteenth carbon-copy posting of how it's the fault of "science" to not recognize his efforts at reading a thousand anecdotes and how that proves the existence of the creature, all to the dismay of "science." 

 

 

Aggh!

Edited August 15, 2014 by Incorrigible1

[Guest DWA]

One of the things that characterizes a certain mindset is the posting of pretty much the same words, over and over and over and over, in the course of asserting, all evidence right in front of collective faces to the contrary notwithstanding, that someone else - who has presented cogent and lucid argument showing significant breadth of experience, depth of understanding, and a truly impressive grasp of the application of the scientific method to the unknown...is making "carbon copy" posts.

 

If words on a page confront one as a blank wall, maybe one needs to change one's glasses, n'est-ce pas?

[Incorrigible1]

Like clockwork.

[Guest DWA]

You are impressive that way.  But the things you say are not persuasive nor convincing.  Nor for some reason particularly interesting.  You could up that game and you know that.

 

One could engage.  But sometimes one simply chooses not to. Six thousand five hundred seventy-seven times.

 

You know I'm not talking to you, right?  I'm pointing out what you're doing to budding (and current, and hopefully wanting to live up to that better) scientists who need to know how to think about stuff, and are at least getting that assistance from one of us.

Edited August 15, 2014 by DWA