Lake County Bigfooot Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) I doubt he is claiming that 9999 reports are misidentification, I think he is simply referring to those who sighted a tall upright black creature in the woods, but have not necessarily filed a report. If that were the case I doubt he would put any weight on eye witness accounts, and I know that in fact he has mentioned them as as part of the evidence he sees for it's existence. Undoubtedly there will be hundreds if not thousands of sightings of upright bears to every Sasquatch sighting, but many of the circumstances of Sasquatch sightings distinguish them immediately from a bear. Take for example any road crossing that involves an upright creature crossing the road at a fast pace using long strides, show me a bear that can pull that off and I'll get him signed with Barnum and Baily pronto!!! Edited October 10, 2014 by Lake County Bigfooot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1980squatch Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 I call all members who have had a sighting to please come forward and answer DMaker's questions so he can satisfy himself that you're not crazy, lying or an idiot. I'm not sure I can help gig, I now have over 600 posts here on the BFF so DM can rightly point out I must be crazy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Somebody with the time to do it might want to see what Dr. Meldrum has to say about his quote. For me, who didn't take his literal pill this morning, I'm fairly convinced now this was hyperbole in the cause of emphasizing scientific skepticism. Not everything the good Dr. encounters is attributed to Sasquatch, I'm sure. I'm also pretty sure a lot of the people he meets believe everything IS. I am also reminded of a roommate of mine who was of the opinion that at least 90% of the people walking around daily were certifiably crazy. I argued that that the number must be lower. His reply was to note that I was not disputing the premise, only the probability. Might apply here too. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) His quote is about tracks, not sightings or reports. If you find 10,000 human like tracks, 9,999 will be from bears. IMO An anatomy professor, he presented the conference with an analysis of human, bear and Bigfoot tracks. He has told numerous hunters and Bigfoot reporters that they were looking at tracks made by a bear, a human or a hoax. Bears are most likely to be mistaken for a man-like creature, he said. But very rarely, perhaps one in 10,000 sightings is a Sasquatch. Edited October 10, 2014 by indiefoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Since you brought it up, only 26% of the US population suffer from some form of mental illness. That means 1 out of 4 people have issues ranging from a modd disorder or ADHD to the more dibilitating mental health problems. One out of 17 have severe mental health diagnoses which averages out to about 6% of the population. That means almost 2 million U.S. citizens have the potential to hallucinate or suffer from delusions related to mental health issues. I guess 10-20,000 reports are just a drop in the bucket if you assume all sources of bigfoot sightings are from those afflicted with mental health problems, which we know isn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Thank you Indifoot for setting that straight. Never mind. Divergent 1: Be careful there. Just because you have an IDCM condition does not necessarily equate to a predisposition to be deluded or hallucinate. (I should also add: Alcohol is not an hallucinogen, as some dismissers of sighting reports suggest...and I've tested that many times) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) (I should also add: Alcohol is not an hallucinogen..... Oh yeah? Explain beer goggles! Edited October 10, 2014 by Cotter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Hello WSA, As far as alcohol not being a hallucinogen? I think tequila is the exception to that rule...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted October 10, 2014 Author Share Posted October 10, 2014 People have been doing it for years anyway and there's various examples all over this forum, but no one should specifically do it just to satisfy one individual poster who is as closed minded as he/she is, it's just a complete waste of time. To be clear, I'm not asking either.. His quote is about tracks, not sightings or reports. If you find 10,000 human like tracks, 9,999 will be from bears. IMO Not so sure about that. He said 1 in 10,000 sightings, not tracks. His words, not mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuyInIndiana Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 I guess what has me puzzled is why anyone would want to accept the good Dr.'s thesis on statistics and what-not regarding this topic, and by implication the OP wants 'believers' to defend him one way or another, yet fails to accept the conclusions Dr. Meldrum has seemingly reached that the creature IS real: at least based on all the evidence and study HE'S put into it. If I'm going to have to accept the 99.99% theory is correct because the guy who said it has a PhD, then I better be accepting his conclusions as well, that there really IS a creature out there generally referred to as "bigfoot". Wouldn't doing anything LESS be disingenuous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) Hello GuyInIndiana, Well said. To be clear on the quote Dr Meldrum said: "Bears are more likely to be mistaken for a man-like creature, perhaps one in 10,000 is a Sasquatch". (My bold and underline) So there is some wiggle room on the figure he places on the probability of the creature sighted being a Sasquatch, but from the same quote one can see there's no denying that he thinks they're real; small as the chances are for any given witness sighting. Edited October 10, 2014 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Hello WSA, As far as alcohol not being a hallucinogen? I think tequila is the exception to that rule...... Mescal might be, yes. I do recall one unfortunate incident in my 18th year when I downed an entire bottle at one sitting, and wound up walking on the peak of the steep-as-horse's-face roof of the school administration building (five stories up). Not sure what that was about, but fools and drunks have divine protection, and I was both. On second thought, I think it might be the tequilla hangovers that cause hallucinations...I could have sworn I saw my life pass before my eyes the next morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Hello WSA, ...I could have sworn I saw my life pass before my eyes the next morning. In that I have no doubt. Good that you're still around, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted October 10, 2014 Moderator Share Posted October 10, 2014 You know , once you are up close and see these creatures for what they are numbers do not mean a thing. Numbers are just a way to settle one's own doubt if they are real or not. For those of us who have seen them this means nothing nor will it change what we all have seen or even believe (if you want to use that as terminology) for some thing that has been seen as flesh and blood. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) Hello Shadowborn, We haven't exchanged much recently so I hope you're doing well. You know , once you are up close and see these creatures for what they are numbers do not mean a thing. Numbers are just a way to settle one's own doubt if they are real or not....... If I may respectfully comment? Yours is quite a subjective point of view. I think I can understand how that may occur as a result a personal experience but in being subjective it doesn't address what could be a very important issue. That being the population according to estimates by Dr. Meldrum is only 500-750 individuals. IMO it's a seriously low number by sustainability standards. So I disagree that numbers don't mean anything. I wish I could find a breakdown of the clans somewhere. Dr. Meldrum said he estimated around 60 were in Idaho. If conservation and habitat are the sensitive issues that many say they are then waiting for a type specimen to move on those issues may not be the smart thing to do. I've not heard the Professor express much concern environmentally but I'm still not that comfortable with the low estimated population count. I think numbers are very important and when presented in this manner I think you may agree? Edited October 10, 2014 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts