Guest DWA Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) Nope, didn't think so. Those Big Science communities respect the intelligence of smart amateurs like this one: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=45958 Zoology, anthropology and primatology could learn much from them. But they aren't. It is really and basically that simple. Again with the over-over-too-way-over emphasis on proof. As the man says, below in blue. Edited November 14, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David NC Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Crowlogic. Your post #146, have you not been reading anything that Bobbyo has been writing? He has been saying over and over that he and several others are trying to create the type of analyzable database you are talking about. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) Crow, not to put you on the spot, but heck, this is the BFF and we're all good friends- My story can't really be proven out at all, forum or no. I can tell you this though (not that its worth anything either): my friends believe me, but that is only because they know me. I've never question your sighting, or others for that matter, because I was not there. I do approach all accounts with an open mind, and I've only stated, matter of factly, that errors can be made in the big scheme of sightings, as is prone to human nature. But for some to categorically state that they can conclude, without being there themselves and supporting evidence, that a high percentage of reports are undeniably accurate, is total conjecture. There are many reports from eyewitnesses where it has been proven they were inaccurate in their observation. The Olympic Thermal is one good example, as they did provide thermal evidence, which has not proven to support their conclusion. Edited November 14, 2014 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) Since nobody else will say it I will... It is called *The Report Classification Project* and it is part of the Premium Area. BobbyO and many others have worked tirelessly to put this together and they continue to do so. I applaud them for their efforts and really enjoy what I read regarding this issue in the Premium area. One can easily read their findings/classifications if you are a Premium member. Well worth the $20.00 annual fee IMO. Edited November 14, 2014 by HRPuffnstuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 It's Humans TM, in Colorado Springs. Edit : David beat me to it, thanks, and sorry for not being clearer. Np Bobby. Just wanted to be clear in my own mind. All good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted November 14, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted November 14, 2014 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. I guess the answer to my " Have you ever read anything at all that i've wrote " is no then. I give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjeti Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) 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. They are mobile enough they can move around a bit, but they don't seem to do seasonal annual migrations to different regions of the country. Sometimes too much human activity will cause them to move. Recently the Sasquatch Research Association held two expeditions and on one they had difficulty interacting with them and moving around to different spots they couldn't find them in their usual haunts, except a few that went down near a bog had activity. It was later surmised that they knew hunters didn't go into the bog. This was hunting season and they likely realized this and their strategy was to relocate to an area that had proved more isolated during this time. I've read other accounts of human activity causing their troops to go elsewhere. Edited November 14, 2014 by jayjeti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I guess the answer to my " Have you ever read anything at all that i've wrote " is no then. I give up. Giving up is fine BobbyO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted November 14, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted November 14, 2014 Haha good one Crow yeah. You've summed yourself up completely over the past 24 hours. Big thumbs down on more than one occasion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted November 14, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 14, 2014 Sal where was your Sighting again and when ? Colorado ? If so, roughly where abouts ? Dallas Divide, at the summit, on hiway 62, SW Colorado, on my way to Telluride, 2nd weekend of September of 1990. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/29115-colorado-sighting-of-two-bf-in-the-road/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted November 14, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted November 14, 2014 Ah ok thanks Sal. That's quite a way southwest than where i was looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted November 15, 2014 Share Posted November 15, 2014 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. Sounds like something tailor-made for a guy like Henry Franzoni. Of course, mainstream bigfootery ran him out of town on the proverbial rail years ago for not getting (or more accurately, keeping) his mind right. That being said, BobbyO and his cohorts are to be commended for their current efforts. It seems that it is not that it can't be done, but that it hasn't been done yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeZimmer Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 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... There seems to be an inadequate understanding of what it means to prove something, in mathematics, in science, in jurisprudence, in life. Instead, we get this somehow Platonic notion of "Proof." Sasquatch has been proven to me to exist, (generating a psychological state), and to many others (DWA for instance). The evidence and arguments used to prove it to us are varied. Most pass scientific muster, are logical, are statistical, are the most parsimonious, and would be publishable if the scientific process were not so dysfunctional. The work that a number of folks have been involved with around ratio of bone lengths is hard science, and can be justified based on basic anthopological, anatomcal, and statistical grounds. It alone should prove to anyone with the basic scientific understanding, and a willingness to examine evidence in an open minded fashion, that Sasquatch is a real animal. Not all will accept the extent proofs, and come up with far from believable alternative explanations for the evidence. As I like to day, "evidence free" assertions - some quite fanciful. Not all will even review the existing evidence carefully enough, with an open enough mind, to understand it. Fanciful stuff: a legion of costumed hoaxers a legion of fake track makers, in the most absurd places for a hoaxer multiple witnesses all sharing the same hallucination collaboration amongst thousands of story tellers on obscure details to get consistency stilts impossible limb extensions belief that such an animal could not exist belief that such an animal could not stay hidden (surprise, they don't, all of the time) belief that it is easy to find hidden animals in the woods belief that the terrain could not support a large omnivore belief that bones, and bodies of rare animals are easy to find belief that it must have been a bear belief that thermal images throwing nightime rock throwing are not compelling evidence .... You can even be a fence sitter on the Skookum Cast and still be blessed with vast amounts of compelling evidence. There is only one explanation which really honors the evidence, and makes sense - Sasquatch is a real animal. Parsimony and logic! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted December 30, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 30, 2014 belief that such an animal could not stay hidden (surprise, they don't, all of the time) +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 .... 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..... .... 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. 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?.... CL, I'll second what Bobby O said - I'm working on my slice of the northeast (w/a separate database & mapping system) around 4 hours of commuting and 9 hours of work most days. Then there are family obligations, work to catch up on around the house, and other requirements that preclude me turning in 40-60 hours of work on this a week. Would you be willing to fund a grant for myself or BobbyO so we can do what you claim is necessary? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts