gigantor Posted February 27, 2016 Admin Author Share Posted February 27, 2016 The age stats begs the question, will BF die with our generation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC witness Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 The age stats begs the question, will BF die with our generation? I don't think so, Gigantor, as I know of a few in their 20's who are carrying the torch. There's Nathanfooter, not currently active on the board, and a very enthusiastic young man that posts to our own local board here in BC. There was also a father & 12 year old son at the FB townhall last spring with experiences to share. It looks like I'm the "old guy" in the bunch so far, the only one in the 71-80 category. Lets get this done before I kick the bucket, guys! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WesT Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Now that you guys mention it, I didn't get interested in this subject until I was 55, 5 years ago. A compelling report from my immediate area is what got me interested in the subject. At least we all know who Johnny Carson and Ed Sullivan are,,,, lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted February 27, 2016 SSR Team Share Posted February 27, 2016 The age stats begs the question, will BF die with our generation? No, you've still got me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Explorer Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 I think most 20 and 30 year olds prefer Facebook and Twitter and other types of social media. Anonymous Forums, where you have to post long sentences, go back to the mid-nineties (maybe dated media?). Hey, I saw one 20-30 year old in the stats, so there is hope. Maybe that is not Nathan? Most young men in their 20's are chasing women, not BF. In their 30-40's, they are into career/job/making money and not chasing mythological creatures. Granted, all this changes with one close encounter. Once life settles in the 50's, we get more free time and the few curious ones will check on those anomalies that bothered us that remain unexplained. I wonder if there is a correlation between the # of posts by BFF members and their age? Premise being that retired folks have more free time to spend in the internet and post. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted February 28, 2016 SSR Team Share Posted February 28, 2016 I think most 20 and 30 year olds prefer Facebook and Twitter and other types of social media. Anonymous Forums, where you have to post long sentences, go back to the mid-nineties (maybe dated media?). Hey, I saw one 20-30 year old in the stats, so there is hope. Maybe that is not Nathan? Most young men in their 20's are chasing women, not BF. In their 30-40's, they are into career/job/making money and not chasing mythological creatures. Granted, all this changes with one close encounter. . I'm in the second age group but was a proud member of this forum (well BFF 1.0 to be precise) in the first age group stage too and all because of the reason you give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 Bell curve, I wonder if it is because they height if the curve were around the teenage years when the Patterson film came out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teegunn Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 Bell curve, I wonder if it is because they height if the curve were around the teenage years when the Patterson film came out? I noticed the same thing, and am pretty sure that is a big variable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted February 29, 2016 Moderator Share Posted February 29, 2016 I'd read about bigfoot before I was 10 and found my first evidence (track line) not long after. However, I wasn't "interested" until quite a bit later because I was threatened with bodily harm by elder family members (who'd proven they did indeed "mean it") 'til a couple decades later. I'd guess my active interest started when I was in my mid 40s. I didn't know about the Patterson film 'til I was into my 40s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Owl Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 A very interesting poll for sure! Until the "What in the heck was that!!???" moments stop happening to ordinary folks minding their own business, I don't think the Bigfoot/Sasquatch interest will ever vanish. I am surprised many times at the stories people keep to themselves until they feel safe and accepted on sharing. Well rounded people already know what the general public thinks of anyone believing the Big Guys are out there, yet they will discreetly follow this line of interest for their own answers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Thank you for the poll. I rather enjoy them . I found it quite revealing that I was in the majority in all three categories. Nice to know I am not the only old person on here I would like to add that all the proponents I know including my daughter are younger than me. The skeptics like me are closer to my age. So, there is still hope for you more mature members. The young are a curious lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WesT Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 ^The problem is that one cannot undo mind changing life events. Therefore it is my opinion that age has little to do with which side of the debate you may fall into. At least here in this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I understand what you are saying. I do disagree. Belief and visual belief are much different than hope and wishful thinking. I am a scientist , I deal in facts. The younger generation I speak of deal in hope and fantasy. The supposed creature is abundant and everywhere. My friends have compared the discovery to the Panda, Not a logical comparison at all. A region of discovery compared to a purported creature that is simply everywhere. I think my signature explains it well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted March 3, 2016 Admin Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) Based on the age group stats, we should update our logo.... :lol: Seriously though, any kind of research efforts will die with our generation. I give it 10 - 15 years at most. There is no new blood where it matters most, out in the field. Unless a type specimen is obtained soon, it'll all become just folklore. We need to realize this and do some kind of youth outreach to get kids interested... Edited March 3, 2016 by gigantor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WesT Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I am a scientist , I deal in facts. As a mature individual then you surely understand that in certain instances my facts aren't your facts and vice versa. As an example, I know for a fact what car I drive. I can post a pic and say "this is my car". To you, the observer, it's allegedly my car. If you're looking for some kind of proof, you'll have to get that on your own. Keep at it, I'm confident you'll have your "you've gotta be kiddin me" moment like a lot of us have who've set out into the wilds and checked it out for ourselves. The facts say that there were archaic humans living in Asia as recently as 12,000 yo. A land bridge covered in tall grass existed between Asia and NA that appeared and disappeared several times during the Pleistocene Epoch. People are reporting seeing and describing an archaic type of human in the woods. No fantasy or wishful thinking needed as those are the facts. And yes, I know the rest. No body, no bones.... as of yet. Glad your on board with us here though, I always enjoy reading your posts and pov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts