Encounters That Go Unreported

[MIB]

Yes, people do lie sometimes.  But, why would thousands of people lie?

 

The thing that bothers me about the lying aspect ... is statistics.   I'm painfully familiar with liars.  I've got a couple family members who seem to work from the notion that you shouldn't tell the truth if a lie will do.  I wish I were joking.   The thing I know about liars from that context is that they are attentions ... "hounds."  (Yep, I almost used a different word.)   As such, each tries to outdo the others.  The pattern of lies is a pattern of escalation.   

 

That's not what we see in the bigfoot report data.   What we get are various bell curves.   Look at Henner Fahrenbach's graphs of height, weight, foot size, stride, etc.  

 

The reports fit the pattern for a real biological species, not the pattern for lies.    The only way I can see lies accounting for the reports is if the liars are coordinated, working together, deliberately.   And that gets us into that whole 400 or 1000+ year conspiracy thing which is necessary if it's all lies.   Even if I hadn't seen a bigfoot, the idea that you could have a conspiracy of lies crossing hundreds of years without someone breaking rank, knowing what I know about liars, is totally unbelievable.  

 

Edit to add: there ARE some anomalies in the patterns in the midwest - northeast data that point to something "different" ... what I call "bug eyed monster reports."     Call it ... beyond one standard deviation.   There are few enough of them it is hard to see whether they fall along a 'scatter plot' suggesting a real biological thing or whether they fit that pattern of escalation that seems to suggest lies / hoaxing / attention "hounding."  

 

If I'm somehow mistaken about what I saw ... which I absolutely don't believe ... there's still something going on.   Any counter explanation that can produce the same sort of data pattern as a real biological thing points to a real fundamentally serious problem.   We better HOPE it is "merely" bigfoot.

 

MIB

Edited December 23, 2015 by MIB

[Terry]

^

Is your encounter posted MIB?  

 

t.

[coffee2go]

I would also like to read the BFRO report MIB.

 

It sounds like you have done some analysis of data.  With the cold weather upon us I will have more time to look at data and focus on the midwest.  I have used statistical software in a work environment but have not used it to look at bf data.

[JDL]

 

Yes, people do lie sometimes.  But, why would thousands of people lie? Some who never heard of a bigfoot and have nothing to gain? 

As for the large percentage of unreported sightings, the majority of people who report want to remain anonymous to avoid the risk to their reputation and sometimes their career.  Others won't even file a report anonymously out of fear their identity will be discovered.

 

Why would someone on this forum report their sighting knowing that skeptics on this site will post remarks questioning their truthfulness or sanity?  There are people who are deeply affected by name calling and ridicule and those people will never report a sighting or activity, not here or anywhere. 

 

Staying on topic, I think I have just relisted a couple of reasons why a large percentage of encounters are unreported.

Why? Because people like attention.

 

You know they say that people often attribute to others the same motivations the drive themselves.

[Guest WesT]

^ I call it judging others by your own standards.

 

As far as lying goes, it's a bad habit, and like all habits, hard to kick. I've seen em lie when they didn't even have to, but they do it anyways because it's become a habit.

[dmaker]

Yes, people do lie sometimes.  But, why would thousands of people lie? Some who never heard of a bigfoot and have nothing to gain? 

As for the large percentage of unreported sightings, the majority of people who report want to remain anonymous to avoid the risk to their reputation and sometimes their career.  Others won't even file a report anonymously out of fear their identity will be discovered.

 

Why would someone on this forum report their sighting knowing that skeptics on this site will post remarks questioning their truthfulness or sanity?  There are people who are deeply affected by name calling and ridicule and those people will never report a sighting or activity, not here or anywhere. 

 

Staying on topic, I think I have just relisted a couple of reasons why a large percentage of encounters are unreported.

Why? Because people like attention.

You know they say that people often attribute to others the same motivations the drive themselves.

I have also seen it said that people will make up fake backgrounds in an attempt to appear more significant than their true selves when participating on Internet forums.

[coffee2go]

And I have heard it said that people who are anonymous on the internet will say things to people that they would never say in person.

[MIB]

The "encounters" (that seems awfully adversarial ... and they were not) have not been reported officially, no.   My BFRO report was regarding a track line find.   I may have misspoken or ambiguously spoken because someone else asked the same thing recently by PM.    If so, I apologize for the confusion.   

 

MIB

[JDL]

 

 

 

Yes, people do lie sometimes.  But, why would thousands of people lie? Some who never heard of a bigfoot and have nothing to gain? 

As for the large percentage of unreported sightings, the majority of people who report want to remain anonymous to avoid the risk to their reputation and sometimes their career.  Others won't even file a report anonymously out of fear their identity will be discovered.

 

Why would someone on this forum report their sighting knowing that skeptics on this site will post remarks questioning their truthfulness or sanity?  There are people who are deeply affected by name calling and ridicule and those people will never report a sighting or activity, not here or anywhere. 

 

Staying on topic, I think I have just relisted a couple of reasons why a large percentage of encounters are unreported.

Why? Because people like attention.

You know they say that people often attribute to others the same motivations the drive themselves.

I have also seen it said that people will make up fake backgrounds in an attempt to appear more significant than their true selves when participating on Internet forums.

 

So you claim.

The "encounters" (that seems awfully adversarial ... and they were not) have not been reported officially, no.   My BFRO report was regarding a track line find.   I may have misspoken or ambiguously spoken because someone else asked the same thing recently by PM.    If so, I apologize for the confusion.   

 

MIB

 

An "encounter" need not be adversarial.  I don't know if there is a discrete definition in this context, but I would define it as a situation in which each party is knowledgeable of the other's presence and reacts to the other in some way.

Perhaps an attempt to communicate, or to interact, or to in some way influence the behavior of the other.  It could also result in both parties immediately heading in opposite directions.  Or occasionally result in threat or violence.