A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Guest Crowlogic]

I just love these posts that start with something like, "Aside from Patty....".

 

So let's, shall we, just acknowledge the most astounding piece of film in the last 100 years, and then dismiss it in the next breath? So that, ummmm, ain't bat guano crazy to you?

 

'kay.

 

It has got folks like Crow so twisted up it results in bizarre statements like, "They've gone extinct."  (Talk about a baseless leap of non-logic if ever there was one)

 

Do you guys practice this nonsense in front of a mirror or in chat sessions? It seriously gives rational people the urge to sidle away from you and spin a finger around one ear. Really.

The beast is not on a slab in a lab.  Not a single legitimate scientific discipline will have anything to do with it and the community supporting it's existence has a 100% failure rate after half a century.  I find strange that believers seem to think that nonbelievers are fuming and banging fists on tables screaming about the craziness of bigfooting.  Actually I've sensed more fumes coming from the bigfooting side.  Questions and questioning are healthy.  Did you read the article or is this a case of eyes wide shut? 

[MIB]

Are you all so invested in this that you cannot even consider that a campfire story is all that it has EVER been?

 

Are you not paying attention?   I mean ... really?   Are you seriously suggesting I should consider my own personal experience a freakin' campfire story?   Geez o pete ...

 

MIB

Edited June 18, 2015 by MIB

[norseman]

For the quick parade of people casting stones at Crow; where is the unambiguous evidence? 50 years post patty and it's all campfire stories, blobsquatches, casts. Does the lack a single piece of scat, bone, hair, blood clear film or photo after 50 years not give anyone pause?

Are you all so invested in this that you cannot even consider that a campfire story is all that it has EVER been?

i can, it doesnt destroy my world if Sasquatch doesnt exist. With that said ive seen something i cannot explain. i realize others do not share that with me....... Edited June 18, 2015 by norseman

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

The evidence that I've looked at has convinced me beyond a shadow of doubt that they exist. IMO, they aren't what anyone thinks they are, but they're out there. It's elusive, but there's film of it, there's thousands of investigated sightings, hair samples, geographical and seasonal patterns ect. All that's left is getting a type specimen to get a DNA sample from directly. Anything less than that won't prove its existence. 

[Guest]

Are you not paying attention?   I mean ... really?   Are you seriously suggesting I should consider my own personal experience a freakin' campfire story?   Geez o pete ...

 

MIB

You can consider your own experiences however you like. Without proof, it's just a campfire story to everyone else.

[Bodhi]

Are you not paying attention?   I mean ... really?   Are you seriously suggesting I should consider my own personal experience a freakin' campfire story?   Geez o pete ...

 

MIB

yes, unless you collected some evidence that can be verified. It's just your story, like all the others. Sorry if that hurts but it's just another story.

[MarkGlasgow]

Another thread Crow? Really?

More tedious jousting we've all seen so so many times before.

If you were looking for answers I'd understand why you were so busy on here.

Alas however, it seems you think you have all the answers you need.

[Guest diana swampbooger]

yes, unless you collected some evidence that can be verified. It's just your story, like all the others. Sorry if that hurts but it's just another story.

 

Say there, Bodhi, how much are you paid to talk trash?

[Guest Crowlogic]

Another thread Crow? Really?

More tedious jousting we've all seen so so many times before.

If you were looking for answers I'd understand why you were so busy on here.

Alas however, it seems you think you have all the answers you need.

Actually there are only questions,  supposition and opinion concerning bigfoot.  I have to laugh when people suggest that looking for answers is what the skeptic/nonbeliever needs to do.  It's as if the idea of bigfoot arrived only last week and is a new concept.  Most every item in the bigfoot evidence parade is old news, hair sounds, tracks and graphics.  A few new items have entered the show like tree breaks and rock stacking and clacking but the question begs to be asked why are they such a modern invention.  The obvious one is it's good for show and tell.  The game has gotten more clever but the end results are the same.  Now feel free to supply any answers that aren't the tired shopworn ones.  Sure bigfoot is stealthy and highly intelligent and never makes a false move that allows himself to fall into the hands of the smartest most sinister most diabolical  beings on the planet...homo sapiens sapiens and maybe it'll have some legs.

[beerhunter]

I am not conceited enough to think I know all the answers of the mysteries in life. I had a paranormal experience once  - you can call it "just a story", but tell that to the two other people that were there with me and witnessed the exact same thing. We didn't go looking for that experience, but it happened. I have seen how expansive, remote, and wild many places are in the USA. I surely don't know what is out there in every square inch of land - but naysayers apparently do. I applaud those who go out looking for answers - even if I decided BF was fake, I would never condemn folks for looking for answers - each person has their own journey in life and who am I to interfere with that and belittle them for it.

[Bodhi]

I can accept the possibility of an 8 - 12 ft, bipedal, animal of some type whose territory is apparently all of North America but which, through whatever means, has never been documented by science nor has any physical trace of said animal been positively identified. There is a possibility.

 

But, the majority of the posters here seem unable or unwilling to accept the other side of the argument. The possibility that it's all a myth. To me, that is unacceptable. It is more likely to be a myth than it is to be real. It just is.

 

I know the arguments for existence what I'm asking is can you not accept the stronger possibility, given the time/lack of evidence/claimed range of habitation, that this animal does NOT exist?

[Guest WesT]

I know I've walked in your shoes.

Then your shoes went where mine didn't. If they had, you would have walked away with new knowledge from an unknown source. And it cannot be undone.

[WSA]

Crow...this is where you go off the rails, in my opinion. If nothing else (and boy, there is plenty else...but let's just start here) the PG film has to be addressed or everything coming afterwards that you're collectively dismissing as "bigfootery"  has, or at least some portion of it, some probability of being of a kind. You've weaseled-worded your way out of this obvious intellectual conflict with your "they went extinct" hypothesis, and that really speaks volumes to me of just how bent out of shape you really are on this point.  If you can't face up to, or explain what is on the PG film, fine. Many boggle at the very idea, and you'll have lots of company. But, if so, at least have the intellectual honesty to admit it and stop with all this apostate grandstanding. It gets wearisome and most here are not really that interested in your dark night of the Bigfoot soul posturing. I know I'm not. 

[Bodhi]

Not to step on your question to Crow re: the PGF but is the PGF universally seen as authentic? It was my impression that it is still a very active question within the sasquatch research community. I know the the members of the NAWAC disagree on whether it is authentic. Sincere question.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Crow...this is where you go off the rails, in my opinion. If nothing else (and boy, there is plenty else...but let's just start here) the PG film has to be addressed or everything coming afterwards that you're collectively dismissing as "bigfootery"  has, or at least some portion of it, some probability of being of a kind. You've weaseled-worded your way out of this obvious intellectual conflict with your "they went extinct" hypothesis, and that really speaks volumes to me of just how bent out of shape you really are on this point.  If you can't face up to, or explain what is on the PG film, fine. Many boggle at the very idea, and you'll have lots of company. But, if so, at least have the intellectual honesty to admit it and stop with all this apostate grandstanding. It gets wearisome and most here are not really that interested in your dark night of the Bigfoot soul posturing. I know I'm not. 

The post PGF extinction was a kind way of letting bigfootery off the hook.  It was a kind way of letting myself off the hook of my beliefs.  The less kind approach is to say the entire thing lock stock and barrel was a contrivance and bigfootery is built on a clever hoax constructed from tall tales.  Think about it what is there before the PGF and the Jerry Crew/Wallace tracks that has any substance?  

Not to step on your question to Crow re: the PGF but is the PGF universally seen as authentic? It was my impression that it is still a very active question within the sasquatch research community. I know the the members of the NAWAC disagree on whether it is authentic. Sincere question.

The sasquatch community seems to be able to recycle exposed frauds back into being real.. Not to say that the PGF is a fraud but recently and still floating around was a video of the best bigfoot photos of 2015.  More than a few had been discredited long ago.  While we're on the subject of the PGF just look at MK Davis did with creating his bigfoot massacre.  Here was a talented film analyst that produced the first stabilization of the PGF and then he goes bonkers into the ozone.  Kind of tells me something about prominent bigfoot authorities.