Bff Census

[southernyahoo]

You can consider that people between the ages of 40 and 60 have their careers established and have the means and time to investigate and find their own answers to some of life's most intriguing mysteries.

Edited March 3, 2016 by southernyahoo

[SWWASAS]

Based on the age group stats, we should update our logo....   :lol:

 

bff-old-logo.png

 

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.

first

We need to realize this and do some kind of youth outreach to get kids interested... 

I had a laugh at your posting.    I did not even start field work until I was older than 60.      If I was still working I would not have time to do it and would be out of state most of the time.   I had a real quandary with the first question having retired from two different categories.      When I can no longer climb mountains, I will resort to sitting in camp and waiting for contact.    So I cannot see stopping field work any time soon.     Unless I get eaten in the process.   

 

I was not aware of the P/G when it was first available.   Not even sure when I first saw it.   Had to have been on some TV special years later.    The youth outreach thing might be a good idea but you have to get past the parents thinking bigfooters are nut jobs.     I had some kids present Thanksgiving and they heard me talking to someone about bigfoot.   They were all ears and it was very interesting to them.    So the interest is there.   I mentioned something to my son about wanting to use my grandson as bait and you should have seen his expression.   But you can be sure a boy or girl of a certain age would be very interested in BF.   

Edited March 3, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[ShadowBorn]

Based on the age group stats, we should update our logo....   :lol:

 

bff-old-logo.png

 

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... 

We do need to make this fun for kids, instead of what is happening now in our world. It was spooky for me when I was young and that was what made it fun now.

[Redbone]

I don't think it's that all young people are disinterested in Bigfoot, but disinterested in the forums.

 

My son will be going on his third expedition in two months and has experiences 1000% more interesting than my own. He might have three real sightings, but I tried to talk him out of the first two...bad dad!

 

At 15/16 he has not been the youngest. There was a younger kid at our expeditions that has experiences 3000% better than my own. While I can't speak for the other kid, I can tell you that my son couldn't care less about forums. If there were bigfoot discussion going on during his video games he'd be all over it.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

As long as your expeditions are at the tree line out in the Pacific ranges during August and you are cold camping and leaving Bigfoot treats, I predict success.

[Patterson-Gimlin]

 

 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.

 

 

I enjoy reading your posts as well.  I completely agree with everything you said.  I appreciate  the reminder.  Scientists  can be arrogant and need of  reality checks.  Thank you  for mine . 

[Bonehead74]

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.

Wes,

Facts are, by definition, objective. There are no "personal" facts such as you've presented. Instead, in your example, you are presenting a claim. If your claim is consistent with the objective facts, then corroborating evidence with prove it true.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

 

 

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.

Wes,

Facts are, by definition, objective. There are no "personal" facts such as you've presented. Instead, in your example, you are presenting a claim. If your claim is consistent with the objective facts, then corroborating evidence with prove it true.

 

The problem is the theory of relativity proved the facts you perceive are relative to your position.

The double slit experiment demonstrates that just the act of perception changes the facts and that the facts differ by which "slit" you are looking through.

Additional past facts can be changed in the present by the operation of the principal of awareness.

But only if the facts in the past had been a known, unknown facts did not change based on present awareness.

Edited March 4, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[ShadowBorn]

Wes,

Facts are, by definition, objective. There are no "personal" facts such as you've presented. Instead, in your example, you are presenting a claim. If your claim is consistent with the objective facts, then corroborating evidence with prove it true.

 

Bonehead74

The objective only comes to the fact to the witnesses who have not observed these creatures in the wild. The personal facts comes from the witnesses who have encountered these creatures, who have observed proof of their presence in the form of prints and broken branches, As well as well formed trails that lead to deeper woods that look crude and hard to follow. The consistencies only come after long time observation of any witness with any facts given by the witness. In my opinion this seems simple and not very hard to investigate. As long as you stay with in your own set of rules that you have set up before hand on any witness. Your own guide lines to follow to weed out the no, no's.    But I think that Wes is on Q and has his own guide lines that he follows and they seem to be right IMO.

[BobbyO]

I don't think the subject has anything to worry about, the tv show has viewing figures of seven figures, there's no issue with new blood or interest IMO.

Whether that new blood finds its way to forums is another matter entirely.

These kind of forums are not the place that younger people should be hanging out in for too long.

[gigantor]

It's not forum participation I'm worried about, it's field research...

 

The field researcher replacement rate is near zero, once our generation is physically unable to perform or dies off, there is nobody to take up the challenge. It'll happen quickly, within 10 - 15 years at the most. The community must face that fact or fade away...  we can do something about it, but time is of the essence.

 

I think the BFF can make a difference, but it will require a focused effort from the leadership and membership.

Edited March 6, 2016 by gigantor

[SWWASAS]

Day  before yesterday went out into an area I normally do not go that far to look around.       Washington State forests are being heavily logged right now which is really surprising with the present political climate.  .    That loss of habitat has to have a dramatic impact on BF survival.    Quite frankly while I am not exactly anti logging,   thinking of BF it made me sick to see all the recent clear cut.   Since all that logging has started,  an area that was active all the way back into the mid 90's has gone inactive.       My worry is that BF will get so rare that it is no longer seen and sort of drops off the radar for most people.   And an extremely rare thing makes for a difficult research subject.   

[Explorer]

Gigantor,

 

I am not worried about the BF field research area lacking younger generation initiates today or in the future.

 

There will continue to be people of all ages interested in researching BF as long as encounters (real, misidentifications, etc) continue.

 

It is the continued accumulation of eyewitness reports that keeps the flame alive and not the Patterson film.

 

If encounters stop occurring (or people stop reporting encounters), then the new generation will have no interest in pursuing the mystery.

That scenario, however, is not happening (based on meeting young people in BFRO expeditions who had their own experiences and want to learn more).

 

The subject is not that dissimilar to Ufology (another anomalous topic full of geriatric members in forums and conferences) in that its survival is mainly dependent on-going reporting of cases to keep it from dying.