Bigfoot: Does It Exist? Or Not?

[roguefooter]

^It's amazing how similar your argument sounds to the average Bigfoot denialist. Just replace a few words.

 

'There's nothing there, accept it. You have your head in the sand. No government cover up, all hoaxes, disinformation, lies..'

 

I have a nephew in the government who tells me every time he sees me that there is no Bigfoot. Are you willing to accept that as easily as this?

 

This happens every time someone brings in a comparison. I understand- you guys don't like Bigfoot to be compared with whatever you feel is fake. Unfortunately these fields have the same kind of people, same kind of evidence, same arguments- they are very comparable.

Edited September 10, 2015 by roguefooter

[roguefooter]

 You's be agreeing with me instead of keeping your head in the sand. The UFO side of the argument is dead. Accept it.

 

I'm not debating my own personal beliefs of Aliens or Bigfoot. I'm just comparing two different fields of belief that have a lot of similar comparisons.

 

If I were one to just give in to rational thinking and probabilities like you're asking me to, then I wouldn't be here. The Bigfoot field would have been dead to me a long time ago. Do you consider being open to things beyond rationality to be "keeping your head in the sand"? Because I can tell you a lot of denialists would agree with you.

 

That's not what I'm about.

[Guest DWA]

If you think connecting the dots from Bigfoot or Yeti or any cryptid hominid to the fossil record of extinct hominids is on PAR with claiming fossil evidence of Alien hybrids?

I cannot help you, this is silly.

When you have proof of Aliens at some point in Earth's history? Like we do with upright bipedal homonids?

Get back to us!

 

See, this is the main reason why I've simply stopped talking to the thin blue lines I see on every page now.  They just don't allow a crack of light in when it comes to this topic.  They do all kinds of dances around simple fact; they presume a phenomenon - mankind's greatest self-deception is a bipedal hominid? - that is defying everything we know about the way the world works.

 

One just can't have a conversation with them.  For a while it was fun lifting the Ignore veil to bash 'em over the head.  Not anymore.

[hiflier]

Hello roguefooter,

But the UFO evidence WAS real. It was misinterpreted and that misinterpretation was promoted by government and it's agencies.

So would that be the case for Bigfoot? And if so what would be the point? A fair question.

[Cotter]

OK, not to derail even farther, but hiflier, are you saying the reports of crafts showing up over nuclear sites and shutting them down were done by government aircraft?

[norseman]

^I'm not connecting any dots. I already told you that my argument is based on the evidence- from anecdotal to tangible. One field versus another.

Since you don't see Aliens on any level of reality, are all of those people and reports wrong? Would you say that it could all be attributed to misidentifications, hoaxes, and delusions?

Unidentified Flying Object (Is by definition a misidentification)

I would say that in the case of UFO's they absolutely exist, people are seeing real experimental aircraft flown by the US military. I would also say that the whole Alien phenom is partially perpetuated by the US government as a misinformation campaign.

It goes like this, Edna sees a top secret craft fly over her house while raking the back yard, it looks foriegn and exhibits flight characteristics she has never seen before. She on the basis of popular culture immediately attributes the craft to Aliens, and reports it as such. The local authorities can then berate her and tell her she saw swamp gas or whatever silly mundane explanation they have cooked up.

Which then conveniently suppresses peoples desire to make any official report about trillions of their tax dollars flying over head in some secret program like Aurora or whatever. When we still are forced to fly around in 1960's technology like the clunky 747, and eat bad food and take 20x as long to get there.

And since we are on the subject this is why I see extreme skepticism as dangerous. You guys everytime just wave your hand, make broad assessments of the situation, convince people they are just seeing things and move on. Instead of downplaying the evidence? Dig into it! You may find things do not fit into the neat tidy box you have drawn out for the world. And in the process you could be hitting a home run for humanity.

And I completely leave the door open that Aliens COULD BE visiting Earth. I think its impossible that in all of the universe that Earth is somehow special and life only exists here. I just think that if a type 3 civilization found Earth that from discovery to eradication would not take very long.

Again this is a apples and oranges comparison.

If Bigfoot exists it is a flesh and blood primate. We cannot attribute an animal that lives in the forest with Aliens or top secret military programs.

Edited September 10, 2015 by norseman

[Guest DWA]

I've got this one going somewhere else:  http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52164-for-those-of-us-who-dont-think-sasquatch-is-genus-homo/

 

It is chock brimming full of cautionary tales for anyone whose approach to a topic is "that can't be."

[hiflier]

Hello Cotter,

No. But only because I don't know if government aircraft of that day had that kind of ability. But it was after all the Cold War which made the UFO ruse all the more important. If rumor could be generated regarding back engineering and captured Alien craft then we'd have a leg up on the Russians who couldn't prove we weren't working on the death ray. government is like an onion in that the layers over the truth become more and more obtuse. Take truth and make it bazaar.

If that's the case with Sasquatch then it opens the door to what's behind people like Crew and his footprints in the 1950's. So, create a phenomenon, deny it and then promote a conspiracy to keep the public at a distance by neither confirming or denying. In the case of BF it seems to be all denying. But the groundwork for belief was already laid.

If anyone is of this opinion it begs the question of why set this up in the first place. And what would be the point of the BFRO and MUFON and Finding Bigfoot? If there is a pattern to be had between UFO's and Bigfoot then I can see where roguefooter is coming from. But roguefooter needs to take it that next step and look at the pattern. Setting up everything as described takes tax dollars. Then subsidizing the wood and oil industry is more tax dollars.

We are a planet all by ourselves and it looks like we have a real (as in reality) problem on our hands. If the point of promoting Sasquatch belief and then pulling the rug out results in most of the public being fearful to be in the woods then would are no on-site public watchdogs witnessing gross clear cutting of the 1970's until after the fact. But hey, it's just how I think. It's been a long time since I've trusted authority to in it for my own good. Take the petroleum out of my public land, take the trees that belongto me, subsidized by me, and then sell it all back to me- taxed. What a racket.

Existence or non-existence. Sorry, I just need more information before I can make that call! Someone has that information and I WANT IT.

Edited September 10, 2015 by hiflier

[roguefooter]

Hello roguefooter,

But the UFO evidence WAS real. It was misinterpreted and that misinterpretation was promoted by government and it's agencies.

So would that be the case for Bigfoot? And if so what would be the point? A fair question.

 

The Government explanation only accounts for a portion of UFO sightings. I think it's always been obvious that many people were seeing military craft because the descriptions match what the military eventually released. There is still the issue of Alien beings which is what I've been talking about.

 

I don't view UFO's and Aliens as being one in the same. UFO's cover the entire spectrum of anything up in the sky that can't be identified- balloons, planes, kites, drones, whatever. Aliens are a connected but whole different ballgame- loads of encounters with weird beings in people's homes, being shot and killed, having paranormal abilities, etc. THIS is what I'm comparing to the Bigfoot field- not any craft flying around.

Edited September 11, 2015 by roguefooter

[hiflier]

Hello roguefooter,

 

There are no Alien fossils. There are hominid fossils- all over the place. There have been large hominid (Human) skeletons reportedly found in North America. Were some completely hairy? Who knows. Were they tall? Yep. So where are these bones now? Got me, ask a conspiracist.

 

So, no physical evidence od Aliens and physical evidence of hominids do not equate. And for the record I obviously separate anything UFO from Alien as well. IMO the Alien question doesn't bear consideration. Why? As I said no remnants. hominids have remnants. I did not call mike Rugg in Santa Cruz, California today. I'll call tomorrow regarding the fossil tooth. Does it belong to the Western Camelops? Seems likely. A half dozen dentists who visited the Bigfoot Discovery Museum said Human but larger. But they were not paleontologists so can't go there. The Curator of the Capitola Historical Museum seemed intrigued but since the tooth has been apparently stolen then right now it's a dead end until I hear differently. Dr. Brian Sykes has been petitioned to return the tooth pulp sample sent to him which he didn't test as he says he only does hair. IMO the tooth will be something common but for now it is- or WAS- a piece of physical evidence though evidence of what remains to be seen. It could very well end up that we'll never know the way things stand.

 

I do see your point about the two Para subjects having similar issues though just so you know. And I'm betting that you see what I've said as well. 

[roguefooter]

So, no physical evidence od Aliens and physical evidence of hominids do not equate.

 

 

For this to even work you would first have to show proof that Bigfoot is absolutely a part of that category. Until that happens they are both unconnected to anything and they do equate.

 

Like I told Norseman- the Bigfoot/apeman link is a guess, not a fact. So adding a fossil record to Bigfoot is done purely on speculation.

Edited September 11, 2015 by roguefooter

[norseman]

Ok, lets try this another way.

Which hypothesis is the more plausible one concerning the fossil record.

A )North America has a bipedal ape undiscovered to science.

B )Earth is being visited aliens.

[Patterson-Gimlin]

Neither one has solid evidence of being anything more than  folklore , myth and wishful thinking.  Now, having said that in my  honest opinion aliens are more likely to exist beyond . ,It is naive and ludicrious to think that  a vast universe  has only one insignificant planet  with  abundant life Your questiion was here on this planet.  therefore the bipedal ape  wins hands down.  No reason for space visitors.  Too far . Apemen if they exist are  of a local variety . it is more than plausible  that they thrive in the darkness  of our undiscovered  forests. I am counting on you to bag the proof. 

[Guest Crowlogic]

The UFO issue has been  as much of a farce as bigfoot.  All one needs to do is take an inventory of UFO craft photos and descriptions since the beginning to appreciate it.  Kenneth Arnold didn't see flying saucers.  He saw odd crescent shaped craft that moved in the air the way a saucer might skip across water.  But in typical pop culture fashion and typical media misrepresenting the proper details it became Kenneth Arnold saw flying saucer shaped craft.  He likely did see something odd.  We had a flying wing program in those days that was active.  A classic flying wing seen at a distance with atmospheric blurring can appear not unlike a crescent.  However those classic flying saucers of the 50's and 60's are playing on the Arnold press reporting misinformation and misunderstanding of what he actually saw.  Today there are hundreds if not thousands sightings of UFO and many are on good video.  But when you see the modern UFO on video it is never doing what the classic reports are said to have been doing.  In most cases the UFO moves lazily acrioss the screen until the video ends or fades.  We never see the craft shoot away or move erratically as in the classic reports.  So it's either fake or capture of an otherwise constructed device that is incapable of demonstrating truly strange flight behavior.  

 

 

The thing that goes against UFO is the very thing that works in favor of bigfoot.  Consistancy.  The very thing that works for UFO's is the very thing that works against bigfoot lots of good video and photos.  Neither however has delivered the goods to take it out of the belief fringes.

Edited September 12, 2015 by Crowlogic

[norseman]

Just sayin....