Sasquatch 2014- Status

[salubrious]

Hiflier, good to see you posting.

 

It does seem that if you are going to solve this that you will have to do it yourself. IMO that is the only way to resolve the existence thing unless you just encounter dumb luck that tips you off.

 

I had an encounter in Colorado a long time ago and it told me several things: 1) there are things that exist that we are told do not  2) here's one that should be in California or the PNW, but instead here it is in Colorado.

 

Thinking back, when I was a kid I heard of a sighting of a white BF in northern Minnesota, the only detail being that it was taller than the stop sign beside it. The Colorado experience allowed me to accept that they could possibly be in the area. Once I allowed for that things started to click. Turns out I have friends with cabins that must have BF neighbors at least part of the year.

 

There is a lot of information on this site regarding habituation. I think quite a lot of it is useful. As you can probably ascertain, proving their existence is not important to me. Right now I am a lot more curious about who and what they really are (other than being a physical bipedal being with a lot of smarts that also knows how to use them).

 

The Indians say that once you know they are there, then its a lot easier to find them/see them (it might be best approached as 'you don't find BF, BF finds you'). If you arrive at the point where existence is no longer the question, you will immediately encounter a bigger issue: being skeptical enough so that every sound and event in the forest does not become BF activity. All I can say there is you will know actual phenomena when you encounter it- when it happens its likely that sometimes there will be alternative explanations but that won't work all the time. Its those other times that you find you are on to something. 

 

IMO its best to treat the whole thing as amusement and a hobby. Go for a camping trip in a Squatchy area- usually such places are really nice all by themselves. If you have an encounter, just be respectful. No cameras, no nothing just you and BF. Maybe scary, maybe not, certainly awesome.

[Guest]

"The Indians say that once you know they are there, then its a lot easier to find them/see them (it might be best approached as 'you don't find BF, BF finds you')."

 

If you expect to find something you will find evidence for it everywhere you turn. This is no different than what the witch hunters did.

[Guest DWA]

If you expect to find something and follow the evidence that got you to that point, you will find it. 

 

There, fixed.

[MIB]

If you believe something is real, they you are a lot more likely to accept the evidence that clubs you over the head for what it is rather than continuing in denial insisting it must be something else even if it can't be.

 

MIB

[Guest DWA]

Right.  If scientists thought along the lines that antfoot's proposing, nothing would get discovered.  Science wouldn't advance.

 

And isn't that relevant in a certain field.

[Guest]

Oh science would never progress following scientific principles. good one

[hiflier]

Hello salubrious,

Thanks, good to be here. yeah, I've been "out there" in a couple of areas that have historically anyway had some activity. back in April with a foot of packed snow and night temps at 20F. And last June when the weather was much better LOL. And your right if I want one go get one for myself but hey, it ain't easy

And the gist of this thread isn't about existence although some apparently want the debate to spill into here of all places just like everywhere else. I don't need the debate, and I don't want the debate.

DWA, why do you do that? This isn't just another stage for you to use for your condescending pro-existence arguments. I would respectfully ask that you PLEASE take it somewhere else, ANYWHERE else but here.

This thread is mostly one for ideas for reinvigorating, mostly myself maybe, into that reality check that, when looked at, sees again the impact of what something like what the PGF is demonstrating. This is not to set the stage for hoax/no hoax discussions; but for proponents to really take another hard look at that film and again absorb the impact of such a Creature as that actually existing. It's still a mind blowing thought and even though we may be quite used to the idea the power of what that film clip shows is off the scale.

Having those in the field check in with the Community on their searches for such a Creature I think is good for the members and the forum so as to keep the subject fresh. Being on the hunt for ANOTHER animal like what's on that clip is no small task. Nor is it a small thought when considering what an impact such an encounter would produce. Running into "Patty" in the wild far from a road......I couldn't imagine such an experience. Moose, bear, elk? Big animals; sometimes unpredictable and always a bit of a shock to see in the wild. But a "Patty"? Or a "Patrick"? Unfathomable.

So those in the field are the life's blood here. So let's hear from them is all I'm saying.

Edited July 24, 2014 by hiflier

[WSA]

I think you guys bring up a good point, I think that mankind has touted our superiority over animals and one of the few differences we still have is that we are the only one walking upright. Some people might not have a problem with it but I think the majority of people want to hang on to that and the thought of another upright walking creature on this planet just rubs them the wrong way. I would suggest also that if anyone finds anything significant in the field should not put all their eggs in one basket. Like a large bone or significant amount of tissue or a whole body, separate it, do not keep it together send it to several trustworthy people for analysis and learn ahead of time how to store said material safely without destroying its DNA or such and keep some in reserve under lock and key. I say this because their are a lot of "stories" of missing samples and such, can't prove them but you would hate to have the "proof" and send it all somewhere just to have it disappear, you could never prove that either.

Right, I think. It is the unavoidable two-leggedness of the creature, which  is always going to make it a little tooooooo close to me, is what I think generates the weirdness for many. A chimp or gorilla knuckle-walking or up on two legs, waving its arms around and waddling, just doesn't do the same. I've seen dogs do better. One thing you have to give Patty...she was a cool cruiser. That studied nonchalance is it right there.

[Guest DWA]

Oh science would never progress following scientific principles. good one

Scientific principles include:  assess the evidence.  Follow it where it appears to lead.

 

I am still waiting for the very very first scientist pronouncing negatively on this to show me how that has happened here.  It has not.  

[Guest DWA]

I think you guys bring up a good point, I think that mankind has touted our superiority over animals and one of the few differences we still have is that we are the only one walking upright. Some people might not have a problem with it but I think the majority of people want to hang on to that and the thought of another upright walking creature on this planet just rubs them the wrong way.

 

 I don't think any skeptic understands this;  it's why they can't see how thoroughly denial has stifled the evidence.  It hits at a level most people never bother to consciously access.  It robs us of a uniqueness we have carefully constructed.  Well, it doesn't, except to people who aren't thinking about this enough.

 

I would suggest also that if anyone finds anything significant in the field should not put all their eggs in one basket. Like a large bone or significant amount of tissue or a whole body, separate it, do not keep it together send it to several trustworthy people for analysis and learn ahead of time how to store said material safely without destroying its DNA or such and keep some in reserve under lock and key. I say this because their are a lot of "stories" of missing samples and such, can't prove them but you would hate to have the "proof" and send it all somewhere just to have it disappear, you could never prove that either.

 

Denisova?  That teenytiny fingerbone was divided.  One part went to Svante Paabo's team.  The other?  Another lab.  Disappeared.

[dmaker]

Scientific principles include:  assess the evidence.  Follow it where it appears to lead.

 

I am still waiting for the very very first scientist pronouncing negatively on this to show me how that has happened here.  It has not.  

Sykes assessed the evidence, it lead to bears, dogs, horses, etc. He assessed the evidence properly and scientifically. He subjected the evidence to testing and verification as is proper with the scientific method. Or by evidence did you mean anecdotes? Well, one cannot test an anecdote using the scientific method, so not sure what assessing means to you in your context. Reading stories? Stories have got bigfoot discovery nowhere so far.

[Guest DWA]

Sykes did so indeed.  A teenytiny fragment of the evidence and probably the least compelling of all of it.  Throwaway.  Next...?

 

Know why stories haven't gotten us anywhere?  Peek again at the sentence in that quote that starts with the word "follow."

[Guest]

Scientific principles include:  assess the evidence.  Follow it where it appears to lead.

 

I am still waiting for the very very first scientist pronouncing negatively on this to show me how that has happened here.  It has not.  

Science has not declared bigfoot to be real because, so far, the evidence does not lead to bigfoot.

[Guest DWA]

No, that's because science hasn't followed it.

 

Some very well-qualified scientists say the evidence leads right to it.  Their counsel is unaddressed.

Edited July 24, 2014 by DWA

[Guest]

Science has not followed it because the "evidence" does not meet science's exacting standards.