Guest Crowlogic Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 See you are stuck on this proof thing. This hyper-empirical emphasis on must-have-proof is contrary to practically everything else we do in our daily existence as people. If I could show you that 99% of what you accept you have no proof for you'd get it. But then again... What you say about Skookum indicates how little you understand about it. Meldrum over you. Krantz over you. This guy over you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daris_Swindler Now if you are gonna tell me that I need to just trust you on this over them, well I need to see credentials. And EVIDENCE. (Remember: if you say it was an elk you are automatically disqualified as someone I need to take seriously. Hint: elk do not levitate.) Look. I get that some people are really really frustrated (didn't you have a sighting? You didn't answer that) that there hasn't been proof. Take it from me: it's a lot more fun to know this is probably real based on a judicious and thorough read of the evidence. LOTS more fun; and you're right to boot! Proof positive.a body you bet. Meldrum and Krantz have/had an investment in the issue. They are learned men but men with an investment and a stake in the investment. The need to believe is stronger when you've an investment. But you say it is more fun to wonder and I say the fun, the recreational value in Bigfoot far outweighs the science possibility given the evidence. Fun and recreation are the primary driving forces followed by money followed by pure science. I've said it already I don't miss Bigfoot but I hope energies are not wasted chasing shadows based on the fun factor. It could be as much fun to chase for pot of gold at the rainbows end but let's call it fun and not research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 DWA, for all the many reports you've read, what evidence have you proffered? The reports you've read? It takes more than that, my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) When reading reports I look for the key elements. Using close to three thousand separate reports as a sample, I found some interesting verbs and adjectives people articulate people utter in their excited state of mind. For me they are no fluke, they are as real in the mind of the witness as are the words that pass their lips. There is value in analyzing Bigfoot reports. If any fault can be found in a report it lies squarely with the reporter in my opinion, the seeker of fact. Some people are trained and experienced and some are not. Taking reports is not and should not be a sport taken up from a kitchen table decision to investigate these claims. Take a look at some of the more interesting verbs and adjectives used to describe their harrowing experiences: A deep growling kind of sound you can feel Ashen white and crying Badly shaken and frightened Bigfoot animals scaring the family back in the house Caused their hair to stand up Caused wife and daughter to scream in terror Children terrified Cry and vomit Extremely concerning Farm family say they have been terrorized by Bigfoot animals screaming Feel uneasiness when they hear long paralyzing vocalizations Feelings of dread Felt a cold chill down his back Felt it looking into my soul Felt like someone grabbed my insides Felt numbness in my knees Felt sheer panic Felt uneasiness as though being watched Felt very uneasy Fidget with fear Froze in fear and felt they could not move Goose bumps and shuddering horror Hair on the back of my neck tingle Hairs standing on ends Huddling in fear Immediate sense of fear causing hair to rise Left the couple startled Left them dumbfounded and confused Left very confused and puzzled Made his hair stand on end Mother and sister cried Nervous and scared Overcome with feelings of impending danger Overwhelming feeling of being watched Paralyzed in fear Scared and frightened Scared badly Scared to death Screams as loud as an elephant and they could hear it stomping thru the brush Screams like a pterodactyl Sending a cold chill down his spine Sent chills down his spine Several passengers in a car were shocked and frightened Shocked Sickened them both with fear and stink in the air Soul piercing gaze Stared open mouthed, and speechless Staring with opened mouth Stopped abruptly to make sense of the thing Strong feelings of being watched Terrified Tremendous fear Unable to make any sense of it Uneasy feeling that something watching Uneasy feelings Unnerved Witness was in shock Woman says her property has been terrorized by Bigfoot animals Young boy terrified Frightened by horrible screams High shrill screams in the night from woods causing him fear for his life Man felt paralyzed in fear Does not walk dirt roads due to Bigfoot sightings in the area Badly frightened man with feelings of being watched Strong feelings of being watched and paralyzed feeling Male to experiences shivers down his spine Heard “mumbling like a man was talking or something†Left him frightened and at loss for an explanation Bad intense feelings of being watched by something Left scared and badly shaken in fear Left confused by the size of the animal and volume of scream Paralyzing twinge of fear during eye to eye contact Left frightened and chilled to their core Startled by screams Caused my eyes to water Hysterical Felt a nerve tickle down his spine Unsettled Hairs on the back of the neck were standing straight up Feelings and thoughts that something there was “going to get him†Fled in panic near point of crying Left them feeling paralyzed in a dream state It was unlike any animal they had ever seen Caused fits of screams and terror Intense uneasiness as though being watched Left them numb with fear Caused a nervous breakdown Overcome by a sensation of spine tingling fear of being watched Chased from bone piles in woods and felt herded by two bi-pedal creatures Shiver in fear Bone chilling screams of Bigfoot made her skin crawl Screams and laugh that scared him so badly he refused to talk about it Scared senseless Edited November 14, 2014 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted November 14, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) Thanks David. There were no headings on it and the subject was deer and elk. With all due respect TM it wasn't, the subject at that time given the context of what i was writing was the City of Colorado Springs. Thermalman the boil down of the post was that thru analyzing report data Bobbyo found a pattern of big increase in human population where they were a lot of reports before the human population growth. The sightings in the area dropped but the sightings moved progressively to a new area where there were not that many sightings of Sasquatch before and the new area also coincided with migration routes of deer and elk that were being tracked by hunting groups. A pattern with connections that should not be lining up like that if the reports were faked/ hoaxed etc. Exactly this. You explained it in a manner far easier for people to understand in a minute than i've tried to in the last 3 years, thank you David.. When reading reports I look for the key elements. Using close to three thousand separate reports as a sample, I found some interesting verbs and adjectives people articulate people utter in their excited state of mind. For me they are no fluke, they are as real in the mind of the witness as are the words that pass their lips. There is value in analyzing Bigfoot reports. If any fault can be found in a report it lies squarely with the reporter in my opinion, the seeker of fact. Some people are trained and experienced and some are not. Taking reports is not and should not be a sport taken up from a kitchen table decision to investigate these claims. Take a look at some of the more interesting verbs and adjectives used to describe their harrowing experiences: A deep growling kind of sound you can feel Ashen white and crying Badly shaken and frightened Bigfoot animals scaring the family back in the house Caused their hair to stand up...[snip] And would i be right in saying that all of which Gumshoe would boil down to the same thing and one of the most basic instincts that human beings actually have which is fear and instinctive fear that we are all born with and if we didn't have that fear in us, we wouldn't be around for so long as one of the planet's most successful animals ? When you break that down further, those us us who feared the things that really needed to be feared lived on and survived and ultimately reproduced including reproducing those same genes. Those of us that didn't, died. Basic and important human instinct. Edited November 14, 2014 by salubrious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) I am more curious than ever now- do you think I misidentified the creatures I saw? Just as a reminder, I saw them from no more than 10 feet in the brights of my headlights, and that was with the truck fully stopped. I had plenty of time to observe them before coming to the conclusion that, due to their size, maybe hanging around was not exactly the best move. What I saw had no snout and so was not a bear. Nor could I see its ears- they were beneath the hair on its head. The pose was particularly striking- a dog, cat, buffalo, bear, porcupine- what have you- could not sit in that pose. I could clearly make out its torso, the diameter of its thighs, the length of its 'arms' (it was pretty obvious they were not legs, being no-where near as powerful nor the same length). So- mis-identification? Or am I lying about this? Hallucinating? Because those are really the only options, that is if you can't allow for their existence. The 4th option is of course that I am telling the truth. Which do you think it is? If you don't want to answer its no worries, and I won't be offended by your response whatever it is. I wasn't there so I won't comment on the truthfulness of your sighting. Once again we are left with only a report. We have no Bigfoot, only reports of Bigfoot and in 200 years no reports have produced a Bigfoot only Bigfoot sightings. You have described an encounter that fits the description of other encounters but your encounter has not produced a Bigfoot any more than the encounters of the last 200 years. I'm reminded of original Alice In Wonderland where the Mad Hatter suggests putting butter on a broken watch as a means of getting it to run again. The Hatter is told that it's useless to put butter on a watch to make it run. The Hatter replies "But it's the best butter." as if that makes the difference. The best Bigfoot reports do not produce Bigfoot and there is what exactly to be gained from them in pure research terms? I agree it is therapeutic to get it off one's chest though. I'll ask the question of why all these sightings haven't been tabulated into computer program that can predict/guide a researcher to a sighting/capture. We have all manner of reports of time, place, season, weather, corroborated by consistent sightings. Unless Bigfoot is breaking all known biological rules and imperatives or is supernatural then modern programming should able to get a bead on one for specimen. That is if Bigfoot is here at all. If I sound callous well science requires a certain callousness about when to call it a day. Random sightings will continue but the expectation of them leading to the fulfillment of discovery get slimmer with every sighting. The math has yet to work out in the researcher's favor. When reading reports I look for the key elements. Using close to three thousand separate reports as a sample, I found some interesting verbs and adjectives people articulate people utter in their excited state of mind. For me they are no fluke, they are as real in the mind of the witness as are the words that pass their lips. There is value in analyzing Bigfoot reports. If any fault can be found in a report it lies squarely with the reporter in my opinion, the seeker of fact. Some people are trained and experienced and some are not. Taking reports is not and should not be a sport taken up from a kitchen table decision to investigate these claims. Take a look at some of the more interesting verbs and adjectives used to describe their harrowing experiences: A deep growling kind of sound you can feel Ashen white and crying Badly shaken and frightened Bigfoot animals scaring the family back in the house Caused their hair to stand up Caused wife and daughter to scream in terror Children terrified Cry and vomit Extremely concerning Farm family say they have been terrorized by Bigfoot animals screaming Feel uneasiness when they hear long paralyzing vocalizations Feelings of dread Felt a cold chill down his back Felt it looking into my soul Felt like someone grabbed my insides Felt numbness in my knees Felt sheer panic Felt uneasiness as though being watched Felt very uneasy Fidget with fear Froze in fear and felt they could not move Goose bumps and shuddering horror Hair on the back of my neck tingle Hairs standing on ends Huddling in fear Immediate sense of fear causing hair to rise Left the couple startled Left them dumbfounded and confused Left very confused and puzzled Made his hair stand on end Mother and sister cried Nervous and scared Overcome with feelings of impending danger Overwhelming feeling of being watched Paralyzed in fear Scared and frightened Scared badly Scared to death Screams as loud as an elephant and they could hear it stomping thru the brush Screams like a pterodactyl Sending a cold chill down his spine Sent chills down his spine Several passengers in a car were shocked and frightened Shocked Sickened them both with fear and stink in the air Soul piercing gaze Stared open mouthed, and speechless Staring with opened mouth Stopped abruptly to make sense of the thing Strong feelings of being watched Terrified Tremendous fear Unable to make any sense of it Uneasy feeling that something watching Uneasy feelings Unnerved Witness was in shock Woman says her property has been terrorized by Bigfoot animals Young boy terrified Frightened by horrible screams High shrill screams in the night from woods causing him fear for his life Man felt paralyzed in fear Does not walk dirt roads due to Bigfoot sightings in the area Badly frightened man with feelings of being watched Strong feelings of being watched and paralyzed feeling Male to experiences shivers down his spine Heard “mumbling like a man was talking or something†Left him frightened and at loss for an explanation Bad intense feelings of being watched by something Left scared and badly shaken in fear Left confused by the size of the animal and volume of scream Paralyzing twinge of fear during eye to eye contact Left frightened and chilled to their core Startled by screams Caused my eyes to water Hysterical Felt a nerve tickle down his spine Unsettled Hairs on the back of the neck were standing straight up Feelings and thoughts that something there was “going to get him†Fled in panic near point of crying Left them feeling paralyzed in a dream state It was unlike any animal they had ever seen Caused fits of screams and terror Intense uneasiness as though being watched Left them numb with fear Caused a nervous breakdown Overcome by a sensation of spine tingling fear of being watched Chased from bone piles in woods and felt herded by two bi-pedal creatures Shiver in fear Bone chilling screams of Bigfoot made her skin crawl Screams and laugh that scared him so badly he refused to talk about it Scared senseless Except some claim that a well detailed report is likely a false report. Hmmm what does a pterodactyl sound like anyway? But excellent conclusion that these reactions are deeply ingrained and fear driven. It points strongly that the Bigfoot issue is internal to us and gets assigned either randomly or onto known event inhabitants when the internal and or external circumstances converge in a certain way. Edited November 14, 2014 by Crowlogic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted November 14, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 14, 2014 I wasn't there so I won't comment on the truthfulness of your sighting. Once again we are left with only a report. We have no Bigfoot, only reports of Bigfoot and in 200 years no reports have produced a Bigfoot only Bigfoot sightings. You have described an encounter that fits the description of other encounters but your encounter has not produced a Bigfoot any more than the encounters of the last 200 years. I'm reminded of original Alice In Wonderland where the Mad Hatter suggests putting butter on a broken watch as a means of getting it to run again. The Hatter is told that it's useless to put butter on a watch to make it run. The Hatter replies "But it's the best butter." as if that makes the difference. The best Bigfoot reports do not produce Bigfoot and there is what exactly to be gained from them in pure research terms? I agree it is therapeutic to get it off one's chest though. I'll ask the question of why all these sightings haven't been tabulated into computer program that can predict/guide a researcher to a sighting/capture. We have all manner of reports of time, place, season, weather, corroborated by consistent sightings. Unless Bigfoot is breaking all known biological rules and imperatives or is supernatural then modern programming should able to get a bead on one for specimen. That is if Bigfoot is here at all. If I sound callous well science requires a certain callousness about when to call it a day. Random sightings will continue but the expectation of them leading to the fulfillment of discovery get slimmer with every sighting. The math has yet to work out in the researcher's favor. Crow, thanks for your response. Just a personal opinion, based on some much more recent experiences; I think one reason why its hard to get a bead on one is that (IMO) they don't stay put in one area all the time like a herd of deer. We've had some experiences at a friend's cabin in Wisconsin, but they only seem to happen at certain times of the year, and as far as that goes, maybe its easier to say that we *don't* have experiences at certain other times of the year. IOW they seem to be in the area some years in spring, other years in summer. Its as if they are just moving through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) CL – You made a very good point, “How does a pterodactyl sound like any way?†I get it. I suppose the same way people know they don't take a bite of a “Uh Ooh†sandwich between two slices of bread, you just know. Some things in life don’t require much imagination or common sense. If that wasn’t true people would be eating it all the time and there would less starvation in the world. Some may but I don’t. Edited November 14, 2014 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted November 14, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted November 14, 2014 I wasn't there so I won't comment on the truthfulness of your sighting. Once again we are left with only a report. We have no Bigfoot, only reports of Bigfoot and in 200 years no reports have produced a Bigfoot only Bigfoot sightings. You have described an encounter that fits the description of other encounters but your encounter has not produced a Bigfoot any more than the encounters of the last 200 years. I'm reminded of original Alice In Wonderland where the Mad Hatter suggests putting butter on a broken watch as a means of getting it to run again. The Hatter is told that it's useless to put butter on a watch to make it run. The Hatter replies "But it's the best butter." as if that makes the difference. The best Bigfoot reports do not produce Bigfoot and there is what exactly to be gained from them in pure research terms? I agree it is therapeutic to get it off one's chest though. I'll ask the question of why all these sightings haven't been tabulated into computer program that can predict/guide a researcher to a sighting/capture. We have all manner of reports of time, place, season, weather, corroborated by consistent sightings. Unless Bigfoot is breaking all known biological rules and imperatives or is supernatural then modern programming should able to get a bead on one for specimen. That is if Bigfoot is here at all. If I sound callous well science requires a certain callousness about when to call it a day. Random sightings will continue but the expectation of them leading to the fulfillment of discovery get slimmer with every sighting. The math has yet to work out in the researcher's favor. You're killing me Crow. What math ? There is no math, nobody's done it. No Scientist has ever gone near Sasquatch reports collectively, they've only ever just given their opinion about x or y which to me, means nothing. I don't see anyone at all even attempting to look in to what you're talking about, except us, and we've all got full time jobs and families to feed. You ask another question about why all these sightings have never been tabulated and put into a centralized system and i'll ask you, have you ever read anything at all that i've written ? Are you serious when you say that more reports lead to a slimmer chance of the expectation of discovery ? And again i'll ask you, have you not read anything at all that i've wrote ? Great questions, fabulous, you just sit there though and ignore what i write, ignore what we're trying to do, ignore the amount of hours ( 3 years now ) that myself and other volunteers have put in to ADDING THOUSANDS OF REPORTS A CENTRALIZED SYSTEM THAT CAN PREDICT/GUIDE A RESEARCHER TO A SIGHTING/CAPTURE. You carry on ignoring all of that, and just asking these same kind of questions and checking in every now and then, without contributing anything positive to what you're talking about whatsoever. Poor form, thumbs down.. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) crowlogic: Of course the proponent scientists have an investment and a stake. They have examined the evidence and it leads them to an inescapable conclusion. Capisch? Other scientists have not examined it. That's why they say things that make that screamingly obvious. Trust logic. It is your friend. Once again! Anyone who has examined this topic anywhere near thoroughly understands, perfectly, why there is no proof yet. It is utterly logical. Animal's real. And there are totally logical understandable reasons why that isn't confirmed yet. These have been discussed thoroughly here; no need to rehash, so I won't. Other than that: I'm with BobbyO. Come on. Like the mainstream scientists, the bigfoot skeptics here on BFF have to start paying attention and stop continually derailing the conversation by bringing up "points" that stopped being points long ago. Edited November 14, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted November 14, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted November 14, 2014 Sal where was your Sighting again and when ? Colorado ? If so, roughly where abouts ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 You're killing me Crow. What math ? There is no math, nobody's done it. No Scientist has ever gone near Sasquatch reports collectively, they've only ever just given their opinion about x or y which to me, means nothing. I don't see anyone at all even attempting to look in to what you're talking about, except us, and we've all got full time jobs and families to feed. You ask another question about why all these sightings have never been tabulated and put into a centralized system and i'll ask you, have you ever read anything at all that i've written ? Are you serious when you say that more reports lead to a slimmer chance of the expectation of discovery ? And again i'll ask you, have you not read anything at all that i've wrote ? Great questions, fabulous, you just sit there though and ignore what i write, ignore what we're trying to do, ignore the amount of hours ( 3 years now ) that myself and other volunteers have put in to ADDING THOUSANDS OF REPORTS A CENTRALIZED SYSTEM THAT CAN PREDICT/GUIDE A RESEARCHER TO A SIGHTING/CAPTURE. You carry on ignoring all of that, and just asking these same kind of questions and checking in every now and then, without contributing anything positive to what you're talking about whatsoever. Poor form, thumbs down.. Hold it! You mean to say that there isn't a single competent computer programmer in all of Bigfootery?: There is a huge sighting base, maps have been made from it. But not a single proactive program can be made from all that weight of sightings? Another blow against the value of sightings. So then perhaps Bigfooters are on the dim side of bright? They use modern equipment but not a single one of them or their cohorts can take the sighting evidence and create a program based on probability based on the reports? Virtually all animals have patterns, even humans have them. So Bigfoot is the exception? If so then we've got supernatural or mythology going on. We have thousands of sightings but we know nothing about the creature there is something wrong with the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) Wrong. It's the mainstream of modern science, who should be doing the stuff you are saying do, that is, when it comes to this topic, far far on the dim side of bright, and all one needs to assert this - for the 1,000th time, while we're on that topic - is what they say. And what they - harrumph! - continue to say, when the error of their ways has been pointed out to them times beyond counting. The people who are paid to do this, and oh yes they are, should be doing this, with full time and full-time money. That they are not is their shame and their dimness. Period. We know a lot about this animal, from what competent programmers - you contradict yourself within two sentences! - have done with the data. Competent programmers who aren't able to spend close to full time on something that it doesn't pay them a penny to do. Who does not understand this does not understand science and its charge. Period. Get.With.Program.Here. As BobbyO says: Poor form. Beyond poor. You are trying to win an argument you long ago lost. You chide people who have labored long and effectively for inadequate skill and application when it is plain that is your lack, not theirs, and you just aren't getting things that are being spoonfed to you. It's just getting unseemly. Edited November 14, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 crowlogic: Of course the proponent scientists have an investment and a stake. They have examined the evidence and it leads them to an inescapable conclusion. Capisch? Other scientists have not examined it. That's why they say things that make that screamingly obvious. Trust logic. It is your friend. Once again! Anyone who has examined this topic anywhere near thoroughly understands, perfectly, why there is no proof yet. It is utterly logical. Animal's real. And there are totally logical understandable reasons why that isn't confirmed yet. These have been discussed thoroughly here; no need to rehash, so I won't. Other than that: I'm with BobbyO. Come on. Like the mainstream scientists, the bigfoot skeptics here on BFF have to start paying attention and stop continually derailing the conversation by bringing up "points" that stopped being points long ago. Many totally logical reasons for no proof positive and many more totally logical reasons for no proof positive. The conversation as far as I'm concerned gets on the rails when there is a body. The rails would be taking the issue to a conclusive explanation as to what the body is and where it fits in biology. In a way a skeptic needs to consume a certain amount of cool aid and look past a few serious hurdles. So since this thread is about consistency of sightings what has that consistency done to deliver a body? It hasn't produced a method of prediction or tracking and capture. So what does it do except add to a body of information that goes nowhere. Wrong. It's the mainstream of modern science, who should be doing the stuff you are saying do, that is, when it comes to this topic, far far on the dim side of bright, and all one needs to assert this - for the 1,000th time, while we're on that topic - is what they say. And what they - harrumph! - continue to say, when the error of their ways has been pointed out to them times beyond counting. The people who are paid to do this, and oh yes they are, should be doing this, with full time and full-time money. That they are not is their shame and their dimness. Period. We know a lot about this animal, from what competent programmers - you contradict yourself within two sentences! - have done with the data. Competent programmers who aren't able to spend close to full time on something that it doesn't pay them a penny to do. Who does not understand this does not understand science and its charge. Period. Get.With.Program.Here. As BobbyO says: Poor form. Beyond poor. You are trying to win an argument you long ago lost. You chide people who have labored long and effectively for inadequate skill and application when it is plain that is your lack, not theirs, and you just aren't getting things that are being spoonfed to you. It's just getting unseemly. True it would be nice if main stream science got serious about Bigfoot. But it's the old whining that the layperson can't effect true science? There is an amateur astronomy community and an amateur comet hunting community that has been discovering comets and asteroids for decades without big science and big astronomy. The we need big science does not hold water. We need something that's actually on the other end of the search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 You don't know why those amateur communities are so successful, now do you? No. Didn't think so. I'll let you think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 You don't know why those amateur communities are so successful, now do you? No. Didn't think so. I'll let you think about it. Well of course I know why. They have been able to learn what is in the sky and when it is there. This is based on a body of observation built up over centuries. Then there is the time spent observing. It is always said that Researchers can't spend the time in the field to find/capture Bigfoot. Why then do the Bigfoot scam artists all seem to manage to get the time out into the find and make videos and claims? There is something wrong with the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts