Bigfoot Is Nearly Everywhere Is An Untenable Pretense

[Guest DWA]

Don't know how many times it needs to be pointed out to the Crows of the world.  But the OP is irrelevant; no one serious about this topic believes the "untenable pretense."  That's why it's an "untenable pretense."  It's untenable to keep putttng that up as if it's a serious item of discussion.  It isn't.

[Guest]

Don't know how many times it needs to be pointed out to the Crows of the world.  But the OP is irrelevant; no one serious about this topic believes the "untenable pretense."  That's why it's an "untenable pretense."  It's untenable to keep putttng that up as if it's a serious item of discussion.  It isn't.

 

You have that figured out … J

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

It's only an untenable pretense if you've made up your mind on what Bigfoot is like. One thing every denialist has in common is they've mapped out in detail for themselves what this animal is like and they ignore the actual anecdotes that suggests they're wrong. 

[Guest DWA]

Actually, what the denialists have mapped out is that there's no animal but us, fooling ourselves.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Why would anyone over 10 report a Santa sighting when they're standing at every door of the mall at Christmas time? ;-)

Crow, you asked two questions.

First, People get run over by cars so why not bigfoot?

People get run over by cars because they are oblivious to their surroundings or they are too trusting of others. The first thing they teach you in any safety class is that accidents are preventable. How is this possible? By always being aware of your surroundings.

Second, What special dispensation precludes this from happening? Easy, bigfoot are more aware of their surroundings and they don't trust anyone.

And they do make mistakes, just different ones. Otherwise there wouldn't be any sightings.

Argue all you want but this is just as good of way to look at it as any.

In a way you've given bigfoot the special dispensation of a super cognitive power on it's surroundings.  They make mistakes and get seen?  That's all a bigfoot mistake produces getting seen by us?  Consider hawks have some of the best eyesight in the animal world and they are superb flyers and hunters.  Yet they make mistakes and fly into barbed wire fences while on the hunt.  It's usually a fatal error on the hawks part and the results are dead hawks in fences.  What about a death by lightning where a hunter finds a dead bigfoot? Fatal accidents happen to all that lives and moves.  There is no proof of bigtoot's super awareness outside of the fact that they are reportedly seen rarely but there are way simpler explanations for not seeing bigfoot.  I don't think it's a valid case you've made.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Actually, what the denialists have mapped out is that there's no animal but us, fooling ourselves.

 

Yeah, I worded my post wrong. I meant to say they're claim of Bigfoot not being real is based on their flawed idea of what Bigfoot would be like if it was real. 

[Guest Crowlogic]

Actually, what the denialists have mapped out is that there's no animal but us, fooling ourselves.

Indeed you have unwittingly nailed it down pretty well.  However denialist mappings are not responsible for how the self kidding manifests itself.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

These kind of presumptions:

 

"Bigfoot would have been hit by a car by now"

"Someone would have found a body by now"

"We should have DNA by now" ect. 

 

 are based on what skeptics assume this animal would be like if it were real. 

[BigTreeWalker]

Well Crow, if they didn't have that so called special dispensation they would have been proven by now!

Yes, assumptions and presumptions.

[Faenor]

Its not even a misrake bigfoot has avoided making while snooping around our homes, roads, trails, etc. Somehow they have cheated biology in avoiding a physical malady that would leave them helpless or dead around humans. No heart attack, strokes, lung clot, brain aneurysm, broken back/legs/neck, rabies, massive bleeding event, herpes, etc. Super stealth why not super health as well.

[Guest Stan Norton]

In my 40 plus years of living in human society, surrounded by many many thousands of other humans, I have not witnessed first-hand any of the maladies you list. That must mean they don't exist right?

[Guest]

Its not even a misrake bigfoot has avoided making while snooping around our homes, roads, trails, etc. Somehow they have cheated biology in avoiding a physical malady that would leave them helpless or dead around humans.

How do you know that? Bigfoot might well have been 'officially' discovered. I very much doubt any authorities would reveal it before knowing more about the species. I can't see an official reveal to the public about scary looking 8ft tall ape men wandering the forests of North America happening until a lot more study has been done. Are they dangerous? Have they occasionally been responsible for kidnapping and killing human beings in National Parks etc? What are their behaviour patterns? Are they endangered? Would a reveal of a species be detriment to them? You know, people rushing to the areas near to where one was found? Would this impact on them? How about the logging industry? Is that going to be affected? There are going to be a lot of difficulties and variables. It's not going to be like anything else. There is not going to be "oh we found bigfoot but we don't know anything about it yet. Oh well nevermind carry on to the woods folks!"

[JDL]

Its not even a misrake bigfoot has avoided making while snooping around our homes, roads, trails, etc. Somehow they have cheated biology in avoiding a physical malady that would leave them helpless or dead around humans. No heart attack, strokes, lung clot, brain aneurysm, broken back/legs/neck, rabies, massive bleeding event, herpes, etc. Super stealth why not super health as well.

 

You should consider looking up the older threads on aging, arthritic, and geriatric bigfoot.

[guyzonthropus]

Perhaps if we were fast enough run along side a car, we wouldnt get hit by them so often ourselves. The point about hawks with their eyesight accuity still having traumatic/fatal interactions with barbed wire is a good example for the beneifts of sentient cognition in arapidly shifting environment, which may easily prove a distinct advantage in terms of dealing with/surviving the selective factors of any given environment, for it would seem that hawks as a group have yet to fully grasp the concept of the wire, possibly due to the probability that most individuals that encounter it in such a manner dont survive too long and therefore dont pass on the knowledge to others, assuming they have the communicational capacity to do so(yet another feature of sentient cognition, and why it is such a game changer in this context) where as such fencing proves less a threat to creatures that a)are relatively larger, so damage will prove less apt to be lethal b)most likely have extended period of child rearing where learned knowledge may .be taught, if not merely demonstrated, to subsequent generations, further reducing the likelihood of injury, c) have the cognitive ability to understand what it is, who put it there and how to circumvent its presence, and d)are better equiped(thanks to that sentient cognition) to adjust and adapt to a rapidly and dramatically shifting habitat.

I would imagine that once the process of cognitive awareness and development gets up and running in a species, it .is selected for on an expanding basis in nearly every aspects of the creatures existence, eventually snowballing along its pathway until one finds the likes of global industrialization or always looking blurry in photographs.......

[guyzonthropus]

In regards to the seemingly sudden expansion of not only the reported range, but also of public interest/awareness, one might consider the state of information delivery and its relative evolution and progressive effectiveness over the period of time in question (1950's to present) as this may well play a significant role in understanding the dynamics of the phenomenon. Television was just warming up, few national networks, papers were largley local in relation to todays(well..newspapers...yeah)and the internet was but a glimmer in its daddy's eye...

There was little means for people in a given region to hear reports of these creatures in distant locales, if the locals were even relating such experiences to media outlets, more likely they kept mum due to potential ridicule, thereby preventing accumulation of sighting data and development of more comprehensive grasp of possible habitat viability and range.

As we all know, the first nationally reported account was the bluff creek/jerry crew event, and that was in part due to a set of circumstances that lead to the article being pick up by the national press. Maybe by making up a new name, along with no image of the creature, widespread recognition, that "hey! Thats kinda like the quarry trolls we used to see when we were kids" or "wow! That looks just like the footprints out by the petting zoo..." was hindered, as each region had its own names, local lore and superstitions for these creatures that few chose to speak about openly in the first place. But that hardly means they werent there in the various regions and habitats before becoming known in the mainstream, the info just wasnt getting out, gathered, or put together as representing a single actual type of creature, but rather folklore to keep the kids in at night, or to scare the smug city dwellers that arrive on occasion, thus discredited and dismissed.

But over the years technology advanced, media coverage became more comprehensive, accessible,widespread, pervasive, influencial, cohesive/consistent in terms of content presentation and selection, and controlled by progressively fewer individuals/groups. This sallowed for the discussion of sasquatch to develop from thinking of them as only existing in the PNW, to realizing that allthese regional monsters and boogers all across the continent may actually be the same critter. Then the first brave few began telling of their experiences, and despite the ridicule, others then spoke out. And the media ran with it, and over the decades, transformed the image in the eyes of the public, all the while never actually confirming its existence.

There is a parallel in what might be seen as a rise in domestic abuse or child molestation within our society. However, i'd bet its more a case of media coverage/discussion coupled with those who broke the silence and dared to speak openly about these horrible aspects of our lives. You never saw june cleaver talking to the boys about rape from the woman's perspective, but over time these issues entered the national dialog, despite ingrained beliefs that one simply didnt talk of such things. Now days these topics are addressed 24/7 in our media in virtually every context and format. Now is sally jessie raphael responsible for rape being so prevalent? .org course not! These things have most likely been with us since before we thought the first floor (ie the savannah...out of the trees..)might be an ok place to raise a family, and only relatively recently have they been addressed openly on both personal and national levels.

This may be a similar situation as the sasquatch explosion that you seem to think disproves their existence, when it is indeed a gradual acknowledgement of at least the possibility that there may still be substantially significant elements of our planet that we have yet to grasp or come to know, one of which is our closest extant relative,(who never calls.... or writes...)sasquatch.