Secrecy And The Myth Of Protection.

[Guest DWA]

It did occur to you, I'm sure, that they aren't going out there to get proof, but to get money that can help with their research; to introduce people to what they're doing; to further interest in the topic that might help the field over the longer term; and various other I'm sure salutary things.  And I'm sure the ones that guarantee proof don't wind up doing this for long, unless they have an incredible track record of luring the gullible.

 

Beyond that, don't care.  As I said.  I separate the human circus from the evidence.

 

Now I don't think that anyone leading greenhorns into the woods is doing serious research (note NAWAC doesn't do it and apparently intends never to do it).  They may get a little of that in the bargain; but when one is focusing on the greenhorns one is not focusing on the research.  And yes I'm including ANY scientific excursion that includes greenhorns (and I know people will chime in about archaeological digs etc.)  The primary focus of those trips is NOT furthering the research, but furthering general interest in the topic.  Period.

 

From what I've read of the trips BFRO conducts (to name the only one of these I've even given more than a passing glance), they aren't misleading anybody who isn't coming in with a devout desire to be misled.  Which is of course that person's personal issue.

[dmaker]

Didn't you go on a NAWAC visit in the past?

[Guest DWA]

The 2009 Texas Bigfoot Conference.  It was what those things are.  There's good stuff and dross; one has to simply separate.  It was great to spend half a day with Bob Gimlin (he has as much chance of having been involved in Pattyfake as I have of being the Pillsbury Doughboy); sit next to Peter Matthiessen at dinner (surprising how much serious thought he'd done about this); and meet some of the NAWAC researchers.  (Alton Higgins's general look and carriage would scream 'very serious scientist' across a Wal-Mart parking lot.)   It was fun to drive around Tyler, TX with Mionczynski and Bindernagel, just the three of us, getting lost and talking bigfoot.  It was cool to go birding with those guys; to hear an eyewitness recount his report without any deviations, while Matthiessen took careful notes in the audience; to pull an all-nighter on TX backroads; to find out how serious the serious people in this field are.

 

As long as one knows what it is, one should do at least one of them.  Fun.

Edited July 25, 2014 by DWA

[dmaker]

I thought you had mentioned somewhere you had visited Area X.   I guess I was wrong and was simply recalling you mentioning having met some of them.

 

Dang, I'm robbed of my opportunity to say "I guess they do take greenhorns after all"  

Edited July 25, 2014 by dmaker

[Guest DWA]

Well, that's one way to go about it.  Makes the world markedly less interesting, some of us think, but that may be just us.

Edited July 25, 2014 by DWA

[norseman]

According to Dr. Fahrenbach's estimates, they can move at 40+ MPH which is quite a bit faster than any homo sapien and the aforementioned demonstration of physical strength is (IMO), self-evident.

Where have I referred to them as a forest shaman?

I never said they were more intelligent than homo sapiens (as a group) although, there may be some exceptions.

I'd wager it takes them less than 10 years to kill an elk.

Finally, seeing that we've basically nothing to show for ~47 years of effort in the "discovery/proving" department, it is no leap in logic to say they may well own the planet (at least, they've owned us thus far) in some respects.

Yes, Iam very well versed in this misguided mindset.

The malevolent all knowing forest giant that by CHOICE, chooses to commune with nature.

*Insert monk chanting here*

They leave habbers intricate knot figurines, and try to communicate their wisdom to us about the planet.

Of course? We won't know that until we shoot one and study it, measure it's brain case and study it's DNA.

All roads lead back to proof, everything else is conjecture.

It's too bad you have left the path of truth and got lost in the forest of Mumbo jumbo.

[Guest Crowlogic]

I have observed bipedal entities in the field (in multiple instances) for which there currently exists no mainstream scientific explanation/classification. In one instance (cookout incident) within ~25 minutes of observing one of these intities (for the third time that evening) a 14' wooden structure towerstand (weighing ~1200#) located ~75 yards NNE of our location was slammed over, as a child would a tinkertoy. It took 4 men and a 1500# ATV winch to later right it.  Whatever this was then followed us up out of the bottoms to hurl a softball size stone from a distance of ~80 yards into the landowner's front yard, apparently as a signal to us about the efforts we had employed that evening in an attempt to get a shot at it.

 

My reasons for mentioning this include:

 

Whatever this is, possesses a much higher degree of intelligence, than we had previously thought.

 

Whatever this is, possesses incredible physical strength.

 

Whatever this is, exercised considerable forebearance by simply not coming in and terminating our existence(s) on this planet.

 

And, in doing so, indicated (to us) that, it was doing rather well w/o our assistance in "discovering" it via killing one for physical evidence purposes.

 

The watershed nature of this event is when my egocentricity began to be replaced with an understanding predicated upon empathy and common sense.

 

If/when they are "discovered" IMO, there will be far more negative consequences (for them) than anyone imagined as the motivational forces driving those to do so (vanity/greed) are malignant (..."None of this bantering will make the beast appear"...) such as attempts demonize them in an effort to validate the position.

 

But then again, homo sapiens are the most homicidal and viscous critters on this planet.

No level of forbearance is perfect.  But it seems it is only perfect when a crucial real element comes into play.  That is a red flag, we only get to see but never to catch........?

Well, that's one way to go about it.  Makes the world markedly less interesting, some of us think, but that may be just us.

It is that thirst for wonder and enjoyable that keeps the game going.  As long as it is recognized as a game than sure batter up.

The 2009 Texas Bigfoot Conference.  It was what those things are.  There's good stuff and dross; one has to simply separate.  It was great to spend half a day with Bob Gimlin (he has as much chance of having been involved in Pattyfake as I have of being the Pillsbury Doughboy); sit next to Peter Matthiessen at dinner (surprising how much serious thought he'd done about this); and meet some of the NAWAC researchers.  (Alton Higgins's general look and carriage would scream 'very serious scientist' across a Wal-Mart parking lot.)   It was fun to drive around Tyler, TX with Mionczynski and Bindernagel, just the three of us, getting lost and talking bigfoot.  It was cool to go birding with those guys; to hear an eyewitness recount his report without any deviations, while Matthiessen took careful notes in the audience; to pull an all-nighter on TX backroads; to find out how serious the serious people in this field are.

 

As long as one knows what it is, one should do at least one of them.  Fun.

I never discount the PGF.  I maintain that the species was in steep decline at that point.  I do and I will continue to discount the current state of the art as being entertainment.

Yes, Iam very well versed in this misguided mindset.

The malevolent all knowing forest giant that by CHOICE, chooses to commune with nature.

*Insert monk chanting here*

They leave habbers intricate knot figurines, and try to communicate their wisdom to us about the planet.

Of course? We won't know that until we shoot one and study it, measure it's brain case and study it's DNA.

All roads lead back to proof, everything else is conjecture.

It's too bad you have left the path of truth and got lost in the forest of Mumbo jumbo.

So why has the good Dr never given the world the proof the issue demands?  It is because the issue is the null set.

It did occur to you, I'm sure, that they aren't going out there to get proof, but to get money that can help with their research; to introduce people to what they're doing; to further interest in the topic that might help the field over the longer term; and various other I'm sure salutary things.  And I'm sure the ones that guarantee proof don't wind up doing this for long, unless they have an incredible track record of luring the gullible.

 

Beyond that, don't care.  As I said.  I separate the human circus from the evidence.

 

Now I don't think that anyone leading greenhorns into the woods is doing serious research (note NAWAC doesn't do it and apparently intends never to do it).  They may get a little of that in the bargain; but when one is focusing on the greenhorns one is not focusing on the research.  And yes I'm including ANY scientific excursion that includes greenhorns (and I know people will chime in about archaeological digs etc.)  The primary focus of those trips is NOT furthering the research, but furthering general interest in the topic.  Period.

 

From what I've read of the trips BFRO conducts (to name the only one of these I've even given more than a passing glance), they aren't misleading anybody who isn't coming in with a devout desire to be misled.  Which is of course that person's personal issue.

The one recent expedition video I saw was in some ways laughable.  The researchers were making so much noise that no wonder the forest went silent.  It wasn't because of Bigfoot in the area it was because a half a dozen humans were clambering up the trail.  Yet in their wake was a nice pile of stones Bigfoot placed for them to see on their way back down.  Yet this kind of proximity and familiarity yields nothing more than noises in the brush and piles of stones?  This type of thing to me at least typifies the decent into entertainment that the modern era has become.  

 

BFRO is essentially exercising it's capitalistic right to separate people from their money LOL.  If there were real beings under their watchfulness Jane Goodall would have already had a seat of honor at the unveiling to science.  It's show biz now.

[Guest LarryP]

 People see all kinds of things, seeing is not proof unless it is verifiable and repeatable!

 

It is proof to the person who has had the experience. Which often involves a lot more than just seeing them.

 

Verifiable and repeatable to whom?

[Guest LarryP]

Yes, Iam very well versed in this misguided mindset.

The malevolent all knowing forest giant that by CHOICE, chooses to commune with nature.

*Insert monk chanting here*

They leave habbers intricate knot figurines, and try to communicate their wisdom to us about the planet.

Of course? We won't know that until we shoot one and study it, measure it's brain case and study it's DNA.

All roads lead back to proof, everything else is conjecture.

It's too bad you have left the path of truth and got lost in the forest of Mumbo jumbo.

 

Hey Norse, I hate to be the bearer of bad news. But until you succeed at killing one, you're the one who's lost in the forest of mumbo jumbo, both literally and figuratively and they're the ones who look like "Forest Shamans".

 

Let's be honest. If Vegas oddsmakers were willing to take bets on whether or not Project Grendel will be successful at harvesting a BF in the next 5 years, they'd be giving 1000 to 1 odds that at the end of 5 years you've got nothing.

 

That's not intended as an insult. It's just based on overall past performance by many others who have tried to achieve the same goal.

 

The other problem with your approach is your definition of "intelligence". You're laboring under the laughably false impression that hunan intelligence represents the pinnacle on this planet. That is simply not the case.  

[Yuchi1]

^^^ Plussed + 

 

CrowLogic,

 

Forebearance?  I would like to think that because I'm still here, typing away is compelling evidence thereof.  Besides, remember, we were very focused (at that time) on killing one however, in lieu of spraying lead all over the woods (as some people apparently are prone), we were striving for a clean kill shot and thankfully, did not get the opportunity.

[Sasfooty]

Another plus, Larry!

 

I'd like to see some of the people who think BFs are of "limited intelligence", go out in the woods & live their entire lives without even  a pair of boots or a dull knife. They might not feel so much more intelligent then.

 

(I do have a theory about the tools however.)

[Guest DWA]

Just so we know, Crowlogic:  if it's a null set you have to prove it.  Otherwise, we're looking for an animal.  How science works.

 

And remember this:  if you've seen one it's proven to you.  Thousands have and their reports are consistent; track finds dovetail perfectly with the conjectured sizes and weights of the animal people are seeing; there is no reason to directly question any of it.

 

In other words:  everything says you're wrong.  You got some uphill sledging my friend.

Edited July 25, 2014 by DWA

[Guest Crowlogic]

It is proof to the person who has had the experience. Which often involves a lot more than just seeing them.

 

Verifiable and repeatable to whom?

To anyone who happens to have the desire to see it of course.  Repeatable is one of the cornerstones of science.  Dreams are studied by science at times but dreamscapes are in the metaphysical and that is not on the scientific agenda.  Sorry to say the singular internal proof derived by the dreamer is not science.  We can all dream of the magical and strange but it does not translate into the practical realm of the day to day.

Hey Norse, I hate to be the bearer of bad news. But until you succeed at killing one, you're the one who's lost in the forest of mumbo jumbo, both literally and figuratively and they're the ones who look like "Forest Shamans".

 

Let's be honest. If Vegas oddsmakers were willing to take bets on whether or not Project Grendel will be successful at harvesting a BF in the next 5 years, they'd be giving 1000 to 1 odds that at the end of 5 years you've got nothing.

 

That's not intended as an insult. It's just based on overall past performance by many others who have tried to achieve the same goal.

 

The other problem with your approach is your definition of "intelligence". You're laboring under the laughably false impression that hunan intelligence represents the pinnacle on this planet. That is simply not the case.  

Until otherwise proven humans are at the top of the intelligence chain.

[Guest DWA]

BTW, Crowlogic, I meant to say something about your friend in the Six Rivers National Forest.  He was there for a year and saw nothing.  I was there for a week and found tracks.  Oh, they were sasquatch all right.  No bear is leaving tracks that look human, but are about twice as big, clearly left right left right, and going 3/4 of an inch deep into soil my girlfriend and I couldn't dent with heavy packs and lug boots.  Now given what he was doing, I'm pretty sure I was in country more remote than anything he ever saw there.  But that doesn't even matter.  Going about one's daily business and seeing nothing for a week, two years or fifty means nothing, if one's daily business isn't looking for animals.  Way it is.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Just so we know, Crowlogic:  if it's a null set you have to prove it.  Otherwise, we're looking for an animal.  How science works.

 

And remember this:  if you've seen one it's proven to you.  Thousands have and their reports are consistent; track finds dovetail perfectly with the conjectured sizes and weights of the animal people are seeing; there is no reason to directly question any of it.

 

In other words:  everything says you're wrong.  You got some uphill sledging my friend.

 

 

The null set is the set containing the hard scientifically proven evidence.  We have none therefore the null set has been and is still being demonstrated.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Crowlogic