Guest Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 What about the poster who claimed to have viewed the "grooming" video? Yeah probably BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 I can't pick one from the large quantity of compelling reports I have read here. There is really only one way to judge this: how well does the report line up with the vast bulk of eyewitness testimony? There have been lots of those here. And no, there is no reason that makes any sense to make up a sighting report. If there is, I trust you to go into work on Monday and regale your co-workers with your made-up sighting, and come back here to tell us about it. Right, I know I'm correct. If your report lines up with what I have derived from the evidence, and you give me no other reason to distrust you...then there isn't a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 What about the poster who claimed to have viewed the "grooming" video? He was the former head Dawg around here and a good person, IMO. I have no reason to believe that he didn't see what he said he saw on that video. Now, was what he saw the real deal? He thinks so, but I don't know. I guess I would have to see it myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Pruitt Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 JDL. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 He was the former head Dawg around here and a good person, IMO. I have no reason to believe that he didn't see what he said he saw on that video. Now, was what he saw the real deal? He thinks so, but I don't know. I guess I would have to see it myself. I am quite sure the video is faked even if it exists. I doubt it even does exist. I told him so.The person you spoke of is polite and respectful .We may have not agreed on the the video , but did on other subjects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 (edited) There were some red flags with the grooming video claim. but moral of the story: evaluate claims based on the claim itself, not the person. Edited May 16, 2015 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 Just curious, as I'm new to this forum. That report always intrigued me. The poster seemed incredibly sincere. One final question on this topic: The NAWAC guys post here, right? From reading their stuff, they seem to be conducting operations over an extended period of time with consistent activity, and are lucid and forthcoming about both their evidence and lack of proofs. Is it because they're an organization which charges membership, so people believe they need to entice and tease new members? Please excuse the blunt nature of my first couple posts. I'm a NAWAC fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 Count on it: people paid for not listening when The Boy Who Cried Wolf was right. It does no good to heap opprobrium on the witness when his story scans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKBFFan Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Here's where you can read about NathanFooters sighting. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/34739-my-michigan-sighting/ I chose NathanFooter because his sighting happened during the day and he was close enough to get/give a good description of the BF's face and other physical features and to know it wasn't a person in a suit. Also his sighting happened before Finding Bigfoot. Speaking of Finding Bigfoot, NathanFooter was on Finding Bigfoot Season 3 Episode 6. Start around 27:15ish to watch NathanFooter. Do you know long I have been looking for that episode?? Thank you! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZDK9If6fpQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 NathanFooter JDL. Those two would be top of my list also. Good choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Just curious, as I'm new to this forum. That report always intrigued me. The poster seemed incredibly sincere. One final question on this topic: The NAWAC guys post here, right? From reading their stuff, they seem to be conducting operations over an extended period of time with consistent activity, and are lucid and forthcoming about both their evidence and lack of proofs. Is it because they're an organization which charges membership, so people believe they need to entice and tease new members? Please excuse the blunt nature of my first couple posts. I'm a NAWAC fan. IMO it's because they are sincerely motivated to solve this mystery and to get a type specimen once and for all. As far as I know, they release all important information and evidence publicly. If they were teasing for membership, they'd withhold the juicy stuff for paid members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Those two would be top of my list also. Good choices. Nathanfooter and JDL - yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) There are two members that I know are telling the truth, but neither of them post here anymore. The interesting thing is, both of them left because of the criticism they received. I've noticed that actual hoaxers don't leave the BFF because of criticism. They stay and continue to make claims. Rather than asking whose Bigfoot story the most believable, the central issue then becomes by what authority or special power do some have to proclaim who is most believable and who is not, especially when not physically present or scene to substantiate the claim as a witness? I was never endowed by this ability and want to know where I can purchase it. Far too many appear to know or imply some special knowledge or expertise conferred by some apparent greater authority never seen nor disclosed in their comment that allows them to state unequivocally who is believable and who is hoaxing without challenge. If truth is relative, and your version and mine are all a little different, then there is a problem of information an details. Therefore the only remedy before making such assertions is more understanding and accepting, knowledge or information and not pitting member against member. Nothing is gained by selective proclamations and tossing around claims like that do nothing but seed discord and more distrust. Edited May 18, 2015 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 ^^^I'd kind of agree; part of the reason I posted what I did. What makes the evidence compelling is the clear picture a primatologist or wildlife biologist can draw from the mass of the data, the guidebook-ready identifiers that occur over and over and over in account after account after account (I average 5 to 10 on every report I read). The "believability" of any individual account, really, is totally irrelevant. One of the very few points that bigfoot skeptics make is that anyone can make up one totally believable account. Where they fail is in assessing the probability that even a significant percentage of the accounts can be explained that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Rather than asking whose Bigfoot story the most believable, the central issue then becomes by what authority or special power do some have to proclaim who is most believable and who is not, But this isn't about proclaiming who is the most believable, it's about personal opinion on who you find most believable. I've listed Nathan and JDL, I'd add derekfoot too. But I do want to add, because I have some of the same concern as you and DWA, that I find many people here trustworthy and I don't want anyone to think I don't find them so because I did not name them here. The three I listed are just encounters that I'm more familiar with. I know many more here have had encounters, but after Nathan, JDL and Derek, I can't name anyone else who's encounter I recall. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts