A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Branco]

I find the whole notion of finding Bigfoot while reading fan fiction quite humorous. The "You skeptics need to read" mantra repeated over and over makes no sense to me. Wouldn't it be more productive to look for Bigfoot outside. Since I moved up North I have spent close to twenty years living, working, and playing in the vast northern forest; you would think that would trump any amount of time spent reading Bigfoot reports counting the times someone wrote "peeked around a tree".

Wow! Nearly "twenty years living, working and playing in the vast northern forest". Why, I bet you covered nearly 0.00001 % of it. Spend any time looking for BF tracks or sign of one? Would you have recognized it? Lots of Bigfoot out there. Not that many out this way; took me nearly 40 years to see the first one. Had a little better score in the last 40. 

[Martin]

Branco,

What ever happened to the type 3 bigfoot you saw with the bright orange tracking collar around its neck?

[Guest DWA]

I find the whole notion of finding Bigfoot while reading fan fiction quite humorous. The "You skeptics need to read" mantra repeated over and over makes no sense to me.

 

Wow, I'm trying to imagine a scientist saying that.  "No, I'm right, and the evidence makes no diff.  Stop telling me I have to read and get up to speed and learn stuff."  Getting *you* to consider the certainty that you are wrong about this would, of course, make no sense to you; you are too invested to be bothered with the evidence.

 

Wouldn't it be more productive to look for Bigfoot outside. Since I moved up North I have spent close to twenty years living, working, and playing in the vast northern forest; you would think that would trump any amount of time spent reading Bigfoot reports counting the times someone wrote "peeked around a tree".

 

You're kidding, right?  You honestly think I think you have seen close to 2% of what is up there...and that only once over?  THAT is your response to ...your need to read?  You read that word "vast," right?  You typed it.  Did you *read* it?  Do you know what it means?  It means "I don't know what I'm talking about."

 

You're here for the entertainment, pal.

 

Ours.

Edited July 17, 2015 by DWA

[Guest Crowlogic]

He does not say that.   You seem to have selective hearing and understanding.     He says he has not found a DNA result that suggests unknown primate.       If you listen, he also says he gets samples he is not sure of, and sends them to other labs to test and see what they think.  Or some samples do not sequence out.      He says he does test samples sent to him by Meldrum and others he trusts.      It is right there on the pod cast that you wanted me to listen to.     But  he made the point, he does not tell other labs that it might be BF DNA because then the lab would refuse to test it.     Why would he say that?    Because most labs would not want to be involved in the same sort of controversy that Melba Ketchum created and declare they have found an unknown species.       It also means that sometimes he has tested things he is not sure about and wants a second opinion.    Why would an expert like him need to do that?.   Because some things are strange and he has no idea if the sample is simply contaminated or is something unknown.    He wants a second opinion.        Because as he details in the pod cast, if he ever does test out something that might be an unknown species he wants independent verification.   That is what Ketchum did not do along with the other things she did that were not traditional with a new species announcement.     He also casts doubt on her hybrid interpretation because if time factors and family tree issues.     But that is only addressing her findings, not the subject of BF in general.   It is all there in the pod cast.  

 

You listed him as your reference then you purposely mischaracterize what Disotell said.    Unlike you he allows for the possibility of existence like any scientist should.     If Disotell did not believe BF was possible why would he test DNA samples at all?     Anyone can listen to the pod cast and I suggest they do.   If they do they will realize you are the one that either cannot understand the material or are so caught up in denial you cannot listen and hear what is said.     As you said about me, why should anyone believe anything you say?    Let them listen to what you provide as a reference (Episose 43) and decide for themselves what is said and who should be listen too.            

Denial of historical facts with regards to the statement about bones found in North America.    There are numerous Native American bones found throughout North America displaying signs of giant-ism.     This and associated reports have been previously presented many times on this forum.     The only question about the bones is if they are human or something else, not that they have been found.   

I never said that giants could not exist. But an entire race of giants no we don't find enough bones to support that.  We find a few things bigger and smaller but the bulk of what we find fits the normal human scale.

Please read the entire document before you respond. Pay special attention to the fact that some of the giants have been on public display in parts of the Americas for many years. Also note the background of many of the people involved in finding and examining the giants unearthed in North America and be "surprised immensely". Remember that all this occurred long before the government controlled the Smithsonian. 

 

http://www.genesis6giants.com/index.php?s=389

Fairy tale.

[Guest DWA]

And who is expecting us to believe *him* on that "fairy tale"?  I'd sooner believe the Brahs Grimm.

[Guest]

I find the whole notion of finding Bigfoot while reading fan fiction quite humorous. The "You skeptics need to read" mantra repeated over and over makes no sense to me. Wouldn't it be more productive to look for Bigfoot outside. Since I moved up North I have spent close to twenty years living, working, and playing in the vast northern forest; you would think that would trump any amount of time spent reading Bigfoot reports counting the times someone wrote "peeked around a tree".

 

Another addition to the growing list of logical fallacies offered as a statement of fact but has no basis for fact and it was answered beautifully and rightly so five posts ahead of mine.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Bodhi]

Hey there Gum, where do you stand on Branco's giants?

[Guest Crowlogic]

And who is expecting us to believe *him* on that "fairy tale"?  I'd sooner believe the Brahs Grimm.

The giant proponent also had to incorporate a conspiracy element by implying that the Smithsonian is no longer trustworthy due to government intervention.  To further discuss the issue of the article link might violate forum rules as it mentions Genesis.

Hey there Gum, where do you stand on Branco's giants?

Don't know about anyone else but personally I prefer standing on the shoulders of giants...........  

Edited July 17, 2015 by Crowlogic

[Guest]

Hey there Gum, where do you stand on Branco's giants?

 

Well I believe absolutely there were beings of great proportions long before I made it here. I know what my teachings tell me but we cannot discuss that due to strict BFF Forum rules prohibiting any discussion of that area and I will honor that, as I know everyone here will too, so yes I do.  

 

You’ve made your 75 posts support this forum and pay your $25.00 for a 1 year Premium Membership and enjoy another side to this forum where threads tread into waters unbreached here. That goes for everybody!

 

Second sentence up above yes.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Bodhi]

Well I believe absolutely there were beings of great proportions long before I made it here. I know what my teachings tell me but we cannot discuss that due to strict BFF Forum rules prohibiting any discussion of that area and I will honor that, as I know everyone here will too, so yes I do.  You’ve made your 75 posts support this forum and pay your $25.00 for a 1 year Premium Membership and enjoy another side to this forum where threads tread into waters unbreached here. That goes for everybody!

so that's a yes then?

[Guest DWA]

^^^^Yes, yes, absolutely, so bigfoot isn't real.  Now.  Go debunk unicorns.

[Branco]

I never said that giants could not exist. But an entire race of giants no we don't find enough bones to support that.  We find a few things bigger and smaller but the bulk of what we find fits the normal human scale.

Fairy tale.

That would be "fairy tales" then. There have been  many such giants found in various states within the U.S. The bodies were seen by most of the residents of the areas in which they were found. They were inspected and described by the most credible and well educated people available and their findings were made available to the press of the day.

 

If you believe they are nothing but fairy tales, I'll take that as an endorsement of the truth of the reports and just consider that you know less about them than you do about the hairy giants of today. (H'mmm.... a negative nothing?)

Branco,

What ever happened to the type 3 bigfoot you saw with the bright orange tracking collar around its neck?

Never saw what you described. That was reported to me. Could never confirm the details.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Branco

[Guest]

Wow! Nearly "twenty years living, working and playing in the vast northern forest". Why, I bet you covered nearly 0.00001 % of it. Spend any time looking for BF tracks or sign of one? Would you have recognized it? Lots of Bigfoot out there. Not that many out this way; took me nearly 40 years to see the first one. Had a little better score in the last 40. 

I will try and elaborate a bit for you. When I first came here I ran chainsaw cutting trails in the mountains for seismic exploration. We would cut a grid pattern in the forest over the mountains, with each line roughly 200 meters/yards apart. Then when we finished that, a few crews of 2 would walk all of the lines cutting 5m x 5m drop zones every 60m. We would be flown in and out with helicopters every day. Chevron discovered one of the largest gas deposits in north America, setting off a frenzy of Oil&Gas companies to find another, and as a result I was able to explore every mountain and valley from the Franklin range west to the Yukon, on foot and by helicopter.

After that the work moved a bit south to flatter ground we still did the same job but used quads and snowmobiles to travel around. Now a days the seismic work has slowed down, the Oil&Gas companies are pretty much done looking around. For the past 7 or 8 years I've been mostly working on infrastructure (leases, roads, etc) but I don't mind it keeps me outdoors and its always something and somewhere new.

"Play" is kinda misleading, although I do jump on my quad or snowmobile for a joy ride every now and then, what we do for play is hunt. There isn't a regulated hunting season up here if you are a local so I am always hunting. We hunt strictly for food and we rarely miss an opportunity to put some meat in the freezer(moose, elk, duck, goose, beaver, porcupine, chicken or rabbit). When fall comes my wife and I spend about a month and a half up river at our cabin. She is relentless and we don't stop looking around until we have three Moose. That means a lot of days boating around, walking trails, checking licks. All day looking and listening.

I have been interested in the Sasquatch legend since I was a young lad and always wondered if it was true. I have used and use the opportunities provided to me, to look for this mighty beast and found nothing.

I would've replied sooner but my wife and I spent the day harvesting birch bark and there was no internet in the bush. Aside from the usual bugs and birds, we saw a dead beaver (well, just his head), some Bear tracks, Moose tracks (cow and calf), Buffalo tracks as well as Buffalo, Bear, Wolf , and moose turds. All sign from actual animals that live in the forest, but nothing from a Bigfoot.

Another addition to the growing list of logical fallacies offered as a statement of fact but has no basis for fact and it was answered beautifully and rightly so five posts ahead of mine.

With a mystery to solve does a detective hit the streets or sit at his desk reading Nancy Drew novels?

[Guest DWA]

See any wolverines?  Any lynx?  Never saw a bear, eh?

 

Does not sound even close to what I'd call a "comprehensive survey"...never mind not knowing what to look for.  (Sure all those bear turds were bear?  Once saw a bear turd do a perfect imitation of a cow pie; turds are not exactly the best ID mechanism.  And as our "bones" thread shows...that ain't the only one.)

 

Then we have all the people who have seen them; describe them clearly and consistently; describe tracks which many others not seeing the animal have found (raises hand; only one species known to exist could have made them...and it didn't); ...and a film that couldn't tie the two strains of evidence together more compellingly.

 

I know what I am going with; and that is what makes sense in science to go with.

Edited July 18, 2015 by DWA

[Martin]

It was a one day trip he discribed...

Wow.....