Cascades Carnivore Project - How Do They Miss The Bigfoots?

[dmaker]

^^^Understanding what I do about this requires the same sort of street sense that gets one through an average day in any large city ...but that the vast majority of people simply don't apply to topics like this one.  Shame, that.

 

The CCP would love to tell what they know, I'm sure.  If, you know, they knew their livelihoods, relationships and friendships would be OK after they did it.

 

OK, I don't know that.  Do you know that's not the case?  Do you in fact have a shred of evidence that that's not the case?

 

No, you don't. 

 

Street sense always says:  reserve judgment on any matter for which you aren't in posession of direct evidence.  Useful, that.

Sorry, but this whole post is nonsense. How in the world would one furnish proof that some third party did, in fact, see something but are withholding that information? It is nonsensical to suggest that evidence can be provided of such a thing. What would be acceptable evidence for this? An empty filing cabinet that has no super secret bigfoot folder? 

 

Basically, your street sense comes down to anyone who tells you that they didn't see a bigfoot is probably lying. But if they did tell you they saw a bigfoot, then they are absolutely telling the truth.

 

And you call this a serious position on this topic?   

[Guest DWA]

So you won't accept any study until it gives you the answer you want and believe in?  

 

If bigfoot isn't showing up on game cams in several locations, groups, years why is that not evidence pointing to no bigfoot existence?

 

Well, I was presuming you understood how science works, but guess not.

 

Are you just trusting people whose mommies told them bigfoot isn't real and who have been getting that reinforced pretty much their whole lives?  How do you, personally, know what's on those cams?  Do you?  Share.

 

This is a subject about which anyone in close acquaintance with the evidence knows the society's in denial.  But you aren't, so you don't.  Know what denial does to everybody, scientists included?

 

Exact to the jot parallel. 

 

We all know leopards are real, correct?

 

You meet somebody who tells you they aren't, and you ask him why he thinks that, and he tells you his mommy told him.  Believe now that leopards aren't real, do ya?

 

I'd hope not, because you know the state of the evidence.

 

Well, knowing the state of the evidence, I'm not just gonna believe that somebody who isn't seeing them invalidates it.  That would fly in the face of logic; and a person acting that way about his everyday experience wouldn't leave his house if I told him it was at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

[dmaker]

By your own words, are you in possession of direct evidence to support the existence of bigfoot? You have certainly not reserved your judgment on this matter, so you must then be in possession of direct evidence. It says so right in your street sense manifesto .  And by direct evidence in this case I take to be biological confirmation of the alleged creature. I would not call a mountain of anecdotes "direct evidence". 

Edited January 10, 2014 by dmaker

[WSA]

I knew this guy once, and he had a pretty good expression I think about a lot: There are an infinite number of very clever ways to stay ignorant.  

 

(I should add, there are also an equal amount of clever ways to get smart.) 

 

Who is clever, and who is ignorant, is always up for grabs, and I make no accusations here.  Time is always going to be the revelator though, and if you think the universe has a statute of limitations on knowledge it might pay to ask if yourself which end your cleverness is serving. 

 

And so too, looks I'm seeing concession on this treefrog issue. YESSSSSS!!!!!

[kitakaze]

^^^Yes, but you need people to take you seriously who don't.

 

I can't take someone seriously who cites 16 cameras capturing three clear images after only three months of an animal that wasn't being looked for and not thought to be there as a meaningful comparison to forty cameras and five years in a place where the animal is not only thought to be but regularly reported to be seen and encountered, yet refuses to qualify it in any meaningful way and when asked to do so gets into this...

 

 

40 cameras, 5 years, constant reports, zero images...

 

 

 

vs 16 cameras, three months, three recordings including video...

 

 

 

 

You're right.  It pays to be informed.

 

 

 

 

 

I have said it many times and history says I'm right:  long-term field insertion brings results.  Before Endurance, there was P/G.  Period.

 

 

 

 

 

Here you have an animal that no full-time effort has ever been devoted to bringing back for a period longer than three weeks.

 

 

 

DWA, on 08 Jan 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

P and G went in ready....and look what they got.  Nobody else, not even NAWAC, has put the effort into actively hunting for the animal that P and G did to get that film.  You could look it up.

 

 

"Bob Gimlin, a friend of mine, and myself had been in the area a little over a week." - Roger Patterson

Last Saturday they arrived to look for the tracks themselves and to take some films of these, riding over the mountainous terrain on horseback by day and motoring over the roads and trails by night. - Roger Patterson interview, October 20th, 1967.

http://www.bigfooten...es/firstpgf.htm

 

Far longer at Bluff Creek than one week and starting seven years earlier, with a far better tracker...

 

 

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/bluff-creek1960.htm

 

Far longer at Mt. St. Helens than one week...

 

[Guest DWA]

I love the conspiracy-theory thing going on.  "The CCP Are A Pack Of Raving Liars, Say Bigfooters."

 

How many of your friends and colleagues know anything about your [lack of, expressed in a weird way] interest in this topic?

 

Point made?  To those who like to think, I'd hazard at least maybe.

[bigbear]

DWA, sooooooo full of holes I can't believe I am even going to try and address any of it.

 

"we all know leopards are real, correct?"  Do we?  not necessarily.  (assumption)

 

if someone tells me they are not real I can cite numerous validated references, one of which being a confirmation of species existence which requires a physical specimen and heck, if that does not work even take them to a zoo or Africa or Asia where they can see one... in real life.  I would like to see them refute that. 

I know they exist because I have seen one, in real life.  If perhaps I never have I might question it and then do some digging, then go see one, IN REAL LIFE if I did not find the literature convincing enough. 

 

By your rational the Boogie Man is just as real as BF.  Stories that go back decades, adults and children to this day see him on a regular basis.  Books written about said Boogie Man.  Things mysteriously move in my closet, must be him! Blurry photos that resemble a boogie man, There are skeptics that will tell you he isn't real, no definitive pictures of him right? no body?  Must be a cover up, people don't want to lose their jobs and all, public security, no one will sleep again!!

[Guest DWA]

So, come on, let's get this thing back on topic.

 

• Independent interviews - anonymity assured - of CCP researchers?  Up or down?
• What does Meldrum think about this?  Mionczynski?  Bindernagel? If you knew, would Matter and Antimatter Collide?
• If you got read up on this, would the same thing happen?  How about the trains in NYC not running on time anymore?  Need to fear THAT...!?!??!
• What's the harm in getting that Meldrum guide in researchers' packs?  They skeeeeered?  You skeeeeeered?
• If I said you weren't real because I haven't seen you how would that affect your life?

Serious questions for serious people.   WSA is right:  many clever ways, and you all are goooo-ooood. 

Edited January 10, 2014 by DWA

[dmaker]

Independent interviews? Sure, why not? Do you, however, personally conduct independent interviews with bigfoot eye witnesses? No, you just take those at their word.

 

What does Meldrum et al think? Beats me. Ask them if you care. 

 

You love to ignore that some of us are very well read up on this, we just don't share your opinion. I've read most of the relevant monographs available and many witness reports etc. Unless there is some super secret bigfoot archive somewhere that the rest of us do not have access to, then I'm pretty sure I've read enough to validate my opinion as more than a drive by.

 

The harm in getting Meldrums guide into researchers packs? I'm sure that researchers are free to put whatever they want into their packs. Convincing them that this item is worthwhile is a whole other conversation.  Having it standard issue for the USFS ( something that you have advocated here) is laughable. Why this over other crypto-lit? 

 

Your last question is ridiculous and does not merit a response.

[kitakaze]

 Time is always going to be the revelator though, 

 

"The lack of any bit or piece of Bigfoot after so many hundreds of years is extremely powerful and meaningful evidence of its nonexistence. A kind of evidence that trumps. It's like a big hammer that pounds on all the stuff that the believers put forth." - William Parcher

[Guest DWA]

^^^Better than taking mommy at her word and not working to expand that knowledge base.

 

I had a better logical approach to this topic, by age 11, than I have ever seen from a bigfoot skeptic.

 

But as WSA says:  that could just be them being clever. 

[dmaker]

Pretty sure my parents never once mentioned bigfoot. 

" had a better logical approach to this topic, by age 11, than I have ever seen from a bigfoot skeptic."  DWA

 

Yes, it's always recommended to approach a scientific topic with the mindset of an 11 yr old.

Edited January 10, 2014 by dmaker

[bigbear]

independent interviews?  As I said before, reports do very little for me, I can not confirm or disprove so I must treat all reports the same no matter the source or outlook they have.

 

Why do I care what Meldrum thinks?  What makes his point of view more valuable than anyone else's say a former poster on this form that was an expert habituator with a large body of "evidence", should their thoughts and opinions be weighed the same, they are both proponents right?

 

I am not sure I understand 3rd question, and I am not familiar with NYC trains so I am unable to comment on the matter, however I know people who live in NYC and take these things call trains everyday, they can also provide pictures of said trains with time stamps of locations and themselves in picture for good measure and I can then form an opinion on the matter with hard evidence, that is if I felt inclined to do so.

 

No harm in getting guide, you going to pay for it? Can't imagine project manager or PI would have an easy time explaining that one.  Perhaps you could contact Meldrum and get him to donate several copies for them.

 

I would understand if you questioned my physical existence as of right now you have no hard evidence of it and it would not bother me in any shape or form. 

 

 

So how does any of that help?

 

 

So how about this one,  Melanistic puma's?  Tons of reports right? Pictures to, right?  But no camera trap photo's, or specimen ever harvested.  Must be a cover-up, the "evidence" is there to support existence,  I"M A BELIEVER!!

[WSA]

Kitikaze...sidestepping the whole difference of opinion between you and me as to what constitutes "evidence", I'll just say that the more years you put in on this planet, the more even a 100 years is going to seem increasingly like not long at all.  On nature's scale too, that is a fraction of a blink of an eye.  Haul yourself down to the basement of the planet some day to that place some call the Grand Canyon. If you've never spent a day or more there, alone, I would recommend it to anyone. (I personally favor the Bass Trail if you can't get over to the N. rim)  When you do, and you think about what you can't help but think about when you are down there, you'll come out with a pretty profound humility and contempt for what we humans consider "a long time." 

 

Check this out too: The strata known as The Great Non-Conformity. I mean, crap, who can even wrap his head around THAT? 

Edited January 10, 2014 by WSA

[Guest DWA]

What amuses me more than anything else is how much of what we now consider standard knowledge once stood in far worse contempt in society than sasquatch.

 

To spend one's time coming here and coming here and coming here to do stuff like I see the folks on the other side of this argument doing is just about the most resounding statement of ignorance of history (and repeating it) that I can come up with.  Offhand, I mean.

 

To say nothing of the apparent inability to use the sussing software that most of us get as part of the package, but too few of us use on anything about which we've already made up our minds.

Edited January 10, 2014 by DWA