Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[hiflier]

On ‎7‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 11:46 AM, DWA said:

Bigfoot science isn't nonexistent.  I know that Bindernagel and Meldrum are doing it...and their conclusions didn't *drive* the assessments of such as WSA and myself, to name just two, so much as it *complemented* them.  My primary experience, reading ^^^those two and people like them, was "EXACTLY!  This is exactly what I've been thinking!" I was already there; they *corroborated* my own research and thought.  Their expertise in directly relevant fields provided me with additional technical data...that dovetailed with what I was thinking perfectly.

 

The information is out there, and all public.  As a scientist said not long ago:  science is nothing but careful thinking.  But folk gotta do it.

 

On ‎7‎/‎7‎/‎2016 at 1:48 PM, Cryptic Megafauna said:

Deductive and inductive reasoning, not semantics and sophistry, within field of logical philosophy based on reproducible results and evidence that results in a body of knowledge so as to increase our understanding.

This kind of thinking is exactly what I do! The pieces of the puzzle are available. It's all in how one logically reasons them together and looks at things from different angles that makes it work. The pinch point question is a case in point. Why Patterson and Gimlin didn't have plaster with them is a case in point. Why more footage of "Patty" as a hoax wasn't taken for later hoaxing is a case in point. These are things that come up when one thinks about  what's already in the box and arranges its contents when thinking outside of it. It's what scientists do- they problem solve by using the things that are available to them. Can they be wrong? Sure they can but they don't stop thinking and working toward the truth.

We have a lot of information but get lost when arguing the details sometimes. Seemingly illogical things are sometimes just as important as logical ones when it comes to gaining a clearer picture of the subject. And what people and animals did, and do, and how they acted is part of that picture.     

[Lake County Bigfooot]

If I could do one thing different it would have been to run immediately down the stairs and into my backyard and toward the marsh the very first time I heard these creatures conversing with whoops, I have responded, whether intelligently or not, in such fashion at a known sound such as wood knocks since then. Just last week I bolted from bed at 5am and thru a small thicket into my cattail marsh in order to try and provoke an escape and possible sighting. These creatures are intelligent to stay put and not be seen, or to slide off into some area that defies human ability to approach, including climbing a tree. All I know is that even when you know they are present beyond reasonable doubts, they still can elude detection. The only way to really confront these creatures is to provoke them by somehow finding them in a remote area, annoying them, or peaking their curiosity, and then deal with whatever they bring on. If you catch one by surprise you might see one, but to actually catch one that is trying to avoid you already is nearly an impossible situation, much like a cougar, which is why the vast majority of sightings seem to be a surprise encounter, or perhaps the sasquatch reacting to provocation in its own territory. If you hike into a sasquatches territory in some remote area you stand a reasonable chance of it responding to your presence, because that sasquatch does not generally have to avoid humans in such a remote place, on the other hand many of these creatures spend all their time near humans and thus spend all their energy to avoid them. So to move the science forward we need people spending extraordinary effort in remote places.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Lake County Bigfooot

[hiflier]

21 minutes ago, Lake County Bigfooot said:

...The only way to really confront these creatures is to provoke them by somehow finding them in a remote area, annoying them, or peaking their curiosity, and then deal with whatever they bring on...

^^THIS!

There are others who hold this kind of thinking as well. I've only seen four Moose in the nearly 16 years I've been in Maine. Not being a hunter has a lot to do with it I'm sure but nonetheless I do go into the wilderness- sometimes fairly deep into the wilderness. There are 20-30,000 Black Bears here too and I've yet to see one. Maine only has less than 30 known BF reports in all of its history so imagine the likelihood of ever seeing one of them. If they are here, and recent sightings suggest that they are, thee can't be more than 60-100 of them and that's a high figure IMHO. But I still go- knowing that it will probably be the most remote and hard to access areas that could hold them. I think so much logging history has more than likely driven them deep into their habitat.

Edited July 11, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

40 minutes ago, hiflier said:

^^THIS!

There are others who hold this kind of thinking as well. I've only seen four Moose in the nearly 16 years I've been in Maine. Not being a hunter has a lot to do with it I'm sure but nonetheless I do go into the wilderness- sometimes fairly deep into the wilderness. There are 20-30,000 Black Bears here too and I've yet to see one. Maine only has less than 30 known BF reports in all of its history so imagine the likelihood of ever seeing one of them. If they are here, and recent sightings suggest that they are, thee can't be more than 60-100 of them and that's a high figure IMHO. But I still go- knowing that it will probably be the most remote and hard to access areas that could hold them. I think so much logging history has more than likely driven them deep into their habitat.

In NH I've seen at least 4 moose already this year. All up close within 15-40 feet. I almost hit or was charged by or ran over everyone I saw. Lucky we understand each other.

Go up to the Rangeley lakes and drive around at night very sloooow. They like swamps, wetlands, and dense sprucy rainforesty woods.

I've also seen 8 bears this year.

Might have even found an abandoned cryptid dwelling.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[hiflier]

I'm going to the Rangeley Lakes area this Thursday for 6 days. And thanks, I already know they like the swamps and wetlands. Lakes too. It's not like I don't get out ya know. In the past three weeks I've spent a week in VT, and a week on the "Bold Coast" of Downeast Maine. Now off for almost a week in Rangeley then five days at the end of the month back in VT. Then in September two weeks in a tent and the week after that four days in a tent. That will get me to the middle of October. So yeah, I'm out as often as I can be and as you can see not just as a day tripper.

You must think I don't know what I'm doing and just sit in my little armchair tapping keys.

Edited July 11, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

20 minutes ago, hiflier said:

I'm going to the Rangeley Lakes area this Thursday for 6 days. And thanks, I already know they like the swamps and wetlands. Lakes too. It's not like I don't get out ya know. In the past three weeks I've spent a week in VT, and a week on the "Bold Coast" of Downeast Maine. Now off for almost a week in Rangeley then five days at the end of the month back in VT. Then in September two weeks in a tent and the week after that four days in a tent. That will get me to the middle of October. So yeah, I'm out as often as I can be and as you can see not just as a day tripper.

You must think I don't know what I'm doing and just sit in my little armchair tapping keys.

Thats all I do.

[Bodhi]

16 hours ago, Lake County Bigfooot said:

If I could do one thing different it would have been to run immediately down the stairs and into my backyard and toward the marsh the very first time I heard these creatures conversing with whoops, I have responded, whether intelligently or not, in such fashion at a known sound such as wood knocks since then. Just last week I bolted from bed at 5am and thru a small thicket into my cattail marsh in order to try and provoke an escape and possible sighting. These creatures are intelligent to stay put and not be seen, or to slide off into some area that defies human ability to approach, including climbing a tree. All I know is that even when you know they are present beyond reasonable doubts, they still can elude detection. The only way to really confront these creatures is to provoke them by somehow finding them in a remote area, annoying them, or peaking their curiosity, and then deal with whatever they bring on. If you catch one by surprise you might see one, but to actually catch one that is trying to avoid you already is nearly an impossible situation, much like a cougar, which is why the vast majority of sightings seem to be a surprise encounter, or perhaps the sasquatch reacting to provocation in its own territory. If you hike into a sasquatches territory in some remote area you stand a reasonable chance of it responding to your presence, because that sasquatch does not generally have to avoid humans in such a remote place, on the other hand many of these creatures spend all their time near humans and thus spend all their energy to avoid them. So to move the science forward we need people spending extraordinary effort in remote places.

Orrrrrr..... this might be an indication that they are only inside your head. Not trying to turn this into another "existence" thing but do you fellas ever look at the paucity of evidence and consider the obvious reason? 

Edited July 12, 2016 by Bodhi

[WSA]

So here Mssr. Bodhi gives us the crux of the gist as to why we beat against the door of official scientific interest while nobody answers. Note, in this post, LCB describes whoops and wood knocks, coupled with a long and consistent history of much more going on in the immediate environs. The reaction solicited, is not: Might we  want to look into this further? No, apparently we do not. Instead, it seems, we want to ignore the evidence there is, and emphasize the evidence we'd like to see, but don't. And of course, he is wrong about the evidence he'd like to see as well.  

[SWWASAS]

22 hours ago, Cryptic Megafauna said:

In NH I've seen at least 4 moose already this year. All up close within 15-40 feet. I almost hit or was charged by or ran over everyone I saw. Lucky we understand each other.

Go up to the Rangeley lakes and drive around at night very sloooow. They like swamps, wetlands, and dense sprucy rainforesty woods.

I've also seen 8 bears this year.

Might have even found an abandoned cryptid dwelling.

I was reading Hifliers lack of moose and wondering about Maine and moose.   Thinking of when I was in NH a total of three days and saw 2 moose.    I have only spent a week in Maine about 15 years ago with no moose and I think the difference is amount of meadows and tree cover difference in the two states.   More meadows in NH and more thick tree stands in Maine?   I have no idea about the relative numbers of moose in each state.     Perhaps the same thing applies to BF?   More cover and thicker tree density the less likely you see a moose or BF for that matter.     Bears are way more likely to avoid humans than moose.    Moose in Anchorage are so used to humans that they pretty much ignore you unless you get too close so I have seen several while never seeing a bear in town even though I know they are present there at least in the summer.    

[hiflier]

I know that there is in fact a LOT of Moose in Maine. I probably will see more now that I have more time to be in their habitats. They keep quite regular schedules which is why there are Moose tours that one can take on some of the lakes. I've never done that but I have seen many tracks both in Summer and Winter. I just haven't really seen the animal itself which could be 15' away in the scrub and few would know it. For a very large animal they can be quite invisible. Sasquatch? the same..... 

I understand that there are estimated to be over 70,000 Moose in Maine.

Edited July 13, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

I know that there is in fact a LOT of Moose in Maine. I probably will see more now that I have more time to be in their habitats. They keep quite regular schedules which is why there are Moose tours that one can take on some of the lakes. I've never done that but I have seen many tracks both in Summer and Winter. I just haven't really seen the animal itself which could be 15' away in the scrub and few would know it. For a very large animal they can be quite invisible. Sasquatch? the same..... 

I understand that there are estimated to be over 70,000 Moose in Maine.

The problem is at night you don't see them until you hit them, they don't reflect any light, and they are very unpredictable.

The Mooselookmeguntic scenic overlook driving south from Oquossoc in the Rangeley lakes on 17 especially after sundown and you may see many cows with calfs but if you aren't careful you may become a statistic.

I took a friend up and it scared her so bad she does not want to see a moose again.

I talked to a person up there and her husband had to drive to NH at night for work at a military base along 16 and one night he saw over 50 moose.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Well I have little doubt that these creatures can and do frequent more populated areas, and you might still run across one by some extremely rare luck, but if you are not struck by lightning once a month do not count on it. As a storm chaser I recall how few people had ever seen a tornado, excepting areas where they were extremely common, say Kansas or Oklahoma. This is sort of the case with Sasquatch, where there are clusters of sightings you know they are present in some numbers, other sightings suggest transient creatures moving through. While I think they all move within a territory, I think where food is very concentrated that area may be smaller, and therefore they might be more predictably in an area.

[Guest Crowlogic]

On 7/12/2016 at 11:24 AM, Bodhi said:

Orrrrrr..... this might be an indication that they are only inside your head. Not trying to turn this into another "existence" thing but do you fellas ever look at the paucity of evidence and consider the obvious reason? 

Nope they do not.  That is not how the game is played.

 

Looks like the second half of 2016 is going to be a might fine time for bigfoot science.  There's a nice young man up  in Utah hikin' and grinnin' his way to all kinds of bigfoot stuff and a once acerbic skeptic in Maine has gone into full woo mode.  It'll help to fill seats at the conventions no doubt.

Edited July 19, 2016 by Crowlogic

[Guest DWA]

^^^^In no other field is ignorance like this - what stuff?  we keep being told about it, but do we have to do something? No! What stuff? - not only tolerated but flat encouraged.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

There will always be the flash in pan researches who change the tune, as well as their fiddle, on a regular basis. The John Green's have not all passed, there are plenty who follow int those steps, methodically analyzing data, and hoping to gain an understanding sufficient to reliably locate these creatures. While you may laugh at those such as Coonbo and Bear who make such claims, you cannot deny that they are true. Such individuals have long since lost interest in proving to skeptics their claims, because once you see a whale you no longer have to prove to anyone you have seen it, you know it exists and that is that. I have not seen one as of yet, therefore I still have the interest in proving they exist, and that will pass if I happen to see one, which given my circumstances very well may happen at any time. Actually it is simply a matter of being at the right place at the right time, some science perhaps, but mostly luck, and perhaps allot of blind courage as when I bolted from bed and into the marsh after hearing wood knocks, if I could have seen what had made them I might not have been so bold.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Lake County Bigfooot