So Why Won't The Habituators Come Forward And Lend Bigfoot Science A Real Hand?

March 15, 2016

My position is very simple in that if habituators claim regular activity they should be able to provide the evidence to back that up. How can they expect to be taken seriously when they make extraordinary claims with no evidence or withold evidence. If they didn't want people to know for fear of mockery, then how come they seem to be continually telling people who forward this information on to all and sundry? Don't you think something is off with this scenario? If they are that desperate to avoid publicity and interest then don't tell anyone at all.

Your statement is understandable, and yes in a perfect world, you may get loads evidence including lie detector tests. For now, we need to accept some imperfections. Some habituators may want to collect evidence but not all. My opinion is let them describe their experiences without evidence, and make up your own mind based on what they are saying. Being angry with a 'habituator' because they have no desire to keep evidence is foul play in my opinion. This should be reported imho. This attitude also drives them from the forum. You may be driving a true habituator from the forum that hurts all of us and who is a valuable resource.

Keep in mind some are telling the truth and some are not. Make your mind up by what little descriptions are presented. If they are fabricating, things they say will begin to not ring true with experienced investigators. Question but do no accuse someone of being untruthful. When you are done reading, ask yourself how much do you believe. We need to let them talk with the understanding some are truthful and some may not be. This is a reality of bigfoot research in a flawed world where common sense rules.

I'm not in the least bit angry..........apologies if I gave that impression.

Of course, everyone is entitled to speak freely and relay their stories and experiences, some of which are very interesting. However, you would have to be incredibly naive if you thought relaying a tale of truly amazing scope with nothing to back it up would go unquestioned and just be swallowed and believed by all. It's a choice, the proponent of the story could if they wished produce something to back it up but if they choose not to they have to realise some people will question and be skeptical of this.

Again, I'd just like to reiterate that while I would question a story from an habituator I would not condone threats or blatant ridicule and so on. I've read threads where people claim to communicate telepathically with sasquatch, I don't believe that to be true but have not mocked anyone for saying this. Of course, we live in the real world and it is harsh on times, It's just human nature that some people would make fun and the proponent should be mindful of that to begin with.

March 15, 2016

^The only way a habber can be telling the truth is if they are experiencing things they suspect are bigfoot on a regular basis but never actually confirm that it is bigfoot causing the experiences. But the history of bigfoot evidence in all it's forms adds up to essentially nothing to confirm the random occurrence of a real animal which is remote possible in some minds. However repeat performances where the reportage is undeniably said to have been bigfoot is for all intents and purposes false. It is patently false by the refusal of each and every habber's unwillingness and or inability to back up their claims and or to at least avail the services of the sympathetic science community to aid in the furthering of the knowledge base concerning these proposed creatures. We have a case where the emperor is not wearing clothes but in this case the tailors who have woven the clothes are preventing the the emperor to even make the public appearance. Stop and ask yourselves the question does it make sense that each and every habber that has ever come down the pike has been somehow adverse and or unable to document their incredible experiences in some way other than stories, idiotic videos and cute sketches? Some of the habbers showing sketches just happen to have video cameras and youtube channels to put the stuff up on. They can even tell you the size and number of bigfoot they are habbing with. Oh come on are people really that starved for a relief from the tedium of their existences to accept this stuff?

Edited March 15, 2016 by Crowlogic

March 15, 2016

In Crowlogic's black and white world refusal to provide what Crow wants means you are lying. There are other motivations in the world than pleasing Crow. However, I have privately contacted habituators and offered to furnish technical equipment free and advice and in every case have been turned down. That these people will be forum members and want to share share their experiences but refuse to try to get supporting pictures, video or audio is troublesome to me. Most of this was on another forum that was less insistent on supporting claims. Fine keep your location secret, but why blab about your experiences on a forum then turn around and be so coy about pictures or any evidence to support your assertions? The answer to this is often that the BF don't like it and will avoid the cameras anyway. Not if they are hidden well enough. Or they do not want to prove existence of BF. Pictures won't do that anyway. The excuses to suggestions are many and well thought out. The assertion that habber's have been driven off the forum is also suspect. If they have been banned it is because they don't follow the rules. Most likely they leave because people do not buy what they are saying without evidence they could easily provide.

March 15, 2016

Hello Crowlogic,

You are missing the bigger point. Ethics. This is a Bigfoot Forum. Menebers that are proponents are here looking for answers and trying to solve the mystery by searching for ways to provide proof to back up what the evidence has been pointing to.

Generally. and I say generally, across the board the Habituators all know why proponents and skeptical proponents alike are here which is verification of Bigfoot existence. Knowing that then I find it unethical to come here waving carrots and claiming contact in front of the noses of those believers and skeptical proponents and not expect some kind of backlash.

The pattern is virtually consistent- come to the Forum, claim contact, claim the need for secrecy, and then guilt the members when they complain. The mechanism is unethical and the Habituators in retrospect and all honesty should have never said anything if their secrecy was so important to them.

How could any intelligent Human not know and understand the ripples such claims and ambiguity would cause. If I was a Habituator I would first come here to see if there were others. If I my privacy in all matters Bigfoot was that important I would try PM's and reach out to others to establish some kind of network outside the Forum.

I would do this because I would know that to practice baiting the members with something I had no intention of backing up would be highly unethical. Period. So it really isn't a Bigfoot issue, it's a socio-psychological one that questions basic intent when one come here and plays the Habitution card.

Edited March 15, 2016 by hiflier

March 15, 2016

The dilemma that each describes is understandable and frustrating. If someone comes on the forum to tell a story like Albert Ostman or the Native American that witnessed bigfoots in their tribe and returned home to never leave his village again, we have a choice. My choice is to listen to the story and understand it may be false. If I hear it from others a few times, it has a ring of truth. We need to listen to the ring sound. Sure, ask polite noncondeming questions without fouling and say nothing after you make up your own mind....... just listen or don't listen now. You may never get to know. This is bigfootery at the present time, regardless of how frustrating.

March 15, 2016

Hello Crowlogic,

You are missing the bigger point. Ethics. This is a Bigfoot Forum. Menebers that are proponents are here looking for answers and trying to solve the mystery by searching for ways to provide proof to back up what the evidence has been pointing to.

Generally. and I say generally, across the board the Habituators all know why proponents and skeptical proponents alike are here which is verification of Bigfoot existence. Knowing that then I find it unethical to come here waving carrots and claiming contact in front of the noses of those believers and skeptical proponents and not expect some kind of backlash.

The pattern is virtually consistent- come to the Forum, claim contact, claim the need for secrecy, and then guilt the members when they complain. The mechanism is unethical and the Habituators in retrospect and all honesty should have never said anything if their secrecy was so important to them.

How could any intelligent Human not know and understand the ripples such claims and ambiguity would cause. If I was a Habituator I would first come here to see if there were others. If I my privacy in all matters Bigfoot was that important I would try PM's and reach out to others to establish some kind of network outside the Forum.

I would do this because I would know that to practice baiting the members with something I had no intention of backing up would be highly unethical. Period. So it really isn't a Bigfoot issue, it's a socio-psychological one that questions basic intent when one come here and plays the Habitution card.

QFT

March 15, 2016

You do raise some good points. But, the bolded absolutely does not prove anything. It is my opinion (and experience) that most people who positively reinforce a statement in the way that was done above are usually fabricating the story, at the least it is a very well known warning sign in some circles!

My position is very simple in that if habituators claim regular activity they should be able to provide the evidence to back that up. How can they expect to be taken seriously when they make extraordinary claims with no evidence or withold evidence. If they didn't want people to know for fear of mockery, then how come they seem to be continually telling people who forward this information on to all and sundry? Don't you think something is off with this scenario? If they are that desperate to avoid publicity and interest then don't tell anyone at all.

We'll have to just disagree on the 'benefits' thing as there seems to be an impasse

Your opinion does count because it's shared by others.

Okay, so Mr. Abee Cee, the hypothetical habituator, comes forward with photos of his BFs. What happens? Some folks will make the effort to authenticate them. Others will knee-jerk "It's Photoshopped!" . And once these pics have been labelled (libeled?) as Photoshopped, those pics and Mr. Abee Cee will be filed under "Fraud" in the BF cabinet, forever and ever and ever. (Don't believe me? The authenticity of the PG film is still questioned today.) Same thing would happen if he submits a video (CGI, you know). And heaven forbid if he actually brings in tissue samples and the genetic testing reveals a human genome. Mr. Abee Cee would then be accused of fraud or, worse, accused of masterminding all the disappearances/abductions/assaults in a 20 mile radius. So again, what's in it for Mr. Abee Cee other than a lifetime of mockery and headache? (Answer: absolutely nothing.)

Regarding the RN and her surgeon husband.....I'll have to read up on that but if it is true, then it supports my rationale that habituators get absolutely nothing but trouble and headaches when they come forward.

Edited March 15, 2016 by ChasingRabbits

March 15, 2016

In Crowlogic's black and white world refusal to provide what Crow wants means you are lying. There are other motivations in the world than pleasing Crow. However, I have privately contacted habituators and offered to furnish technical equipment free and advice and in every case have been turned down. That these people will be forum members and want to share share their experiences but refuse to try to get supporting pictures, video or audio is troublesome to me. Most of this was on another forum that was less insistent on supporting claims. Fine keep your location secret, but why blab about your experiences on a forum then turn around and be so coy about pictures or any evidence to support your assertions? The answer to this is often that the BF don't like it and will avoid the cameras anyway. Not if they are hidden well enough. Or they do not want to prove existence of BF. Pictures won't do that anyway. The excuses to suggestions are many and well thought out. The assertion that habber's have been driven off the forum is also suspect. If they have been banned it is because they don't follow the rules. Most likely they leave because people do not buy what they are saying without evidence they could easily provide.

Hello Crowlogic,

You are missing the bigger point. Ethics. This is a Bigfoot Forum. Menebers that are proponents are here looking for answers and trying to solve the mystery by searching for ways to provide proof to back up what the evidence has been pointing to.

Generally. and I say generally, across the board the Habituators all know why proponents and skeptical proponents alike are here which is verification of Bigfoot existence. Knowing that then I find it unethical to come here waving carrots and claiming contact in front of the noses of those believers and skeptical proponents and not expect some kind of backlash.

The pattern is virtually consistent- come to the Forum, claim contact, claim the need for secrecy, and then guilt the members when they complain. The mechanism is unethical and the Habituators in retrospect and all honesty should have never said anything if their secrecy was so important to them.

How could any intelligent Human not know and understand the ripples such claims and ambiguity would cause. If I was a Habituator I would first come here to see if there were others. If I my privacy in all matters Bigfoot was that important I would try PM's and reach out to others to establish some kind of network outside the Forum.

I would do this because I would know that to practice baiting the members with something I had no intention of backing up would be highly unethical. Period. So it really isn't a Bigfoot issue, it's a socio-psychological one that questions basic intent when one come here and plays the Habitution card.

Excellent posts both

March 15, 2016

Your opinion does count because it's shared by others.

Okay, so Mr. Abee Cee, the hypothetical habituator, comes forward with photos of his BFs. What happens? Some folks will make the effort to authenticate them. Others will knee-jerk "It's Photoshopped!" . And once these pics have been labelled (libeled?) as Photoshopped, those pics and Mr. Abee Cee will be filed under "Fraud" in the BF cabinet, forever and ever and ever. (Don't believe me? The authenticity of the PG film is still questioned today.) Same thing would happen if he submits a video (CGI, you know). And heaven forbid if he actually brings in tissue samples and the genetic testing reveals a human genome. Mr. Abee Cee would then be accused of fraud or, worse, accused of masterminding all the disappearances/abductions/assaults in a 20 mile radius. So again, what's in it for Mr. Abee Cee other than a lifetime of mockery and headache? (Answer: absolutely nothing.)

Regarding the RN and her surgeon husband.....I'll have to read up on that but if it is true, then it supports my rationale that habituators get absolutely nothing but trouble and headaches when they come forward.

This makes no sense to me and just seems like excuses: If HD film was obtained and good clear photos taken, they shouldn't be presented as they may be called fakes by some people?

In a previous post I presented evidence that gorilla tourism makes a big positive impact on local areas in Rwanda. You've looked at that and dismissed it, that's your prerogative. I'm not insulted though the dismissal is an indication you think I have presented errant data or am outright lying - neither should a bigfoot proponent be if some people aren't convinced by their evidence. There are a few hard core 'skeptics' that wouldn't be swayed by any evidence beyond a body but I would think the vast majority of people in the middle grounds would definitely be influenced by evidence such as a clear, unambiguous photos or clear HD film. It would definitely appeal to the intellectually honest.

March 15, 2016

Chasing Rabbits states "Okay, so Mr. Abee Cee, the hypothetical habituator, comes forward with photos of his BFs. What happens? Some folks will make the effort to authenticate them. Others will knee-jerk "It's Photoshopped!" . And once these pics have been labelled (libeled?) as Photoshopped, those pics and Mr. Abee Cee will be filed under "Fraud" in the BF cabinet, forever and ever and ever. (Don't believe me? The authenticity of the PG film is still questioned today.) Same thing would happen if he submits a video (CGI, you know). And heaven forbid if he actually brings in tissue samples and the genetic testing reveals a human genome. Mr. Abee Cee would then be accused of fraud or, worse, accused of masterminding all the disappearances/abductions/assaults in a 20 mile radius. So again, what's in it for Mr. Abee Cee other than a lifetime of mockery and headache? (Answer: absolutely nothing.)"

Not so, photo/video proof can provide credible evidence. The problem is we are so short on credible photo and video evidence that it has become the assumption that all bigfoot graphics are going to be poor. Currently they are poor because the vast majority of them are fakes. But a real animal stands the same chances of getting quality graphic documentation as the quality documentation that we see all around us of other real animals. In fact most real animal photos no matter how bad are still better than the bigfoot hoaxing no matter where the real animal was photographed or video recorded. All we need to do is look at photos of the other great apes in the wild to know what is possible to graphic document animals that live in forested cover. Barbra Shupe posted a recent video where she shows sketches of some of her habituated bigfoot. She's equipped obviously with a video camera and claims to have seen them enough to have sketches and size descriptions. When a habber points the camera to the exact spot they saw bigfoot why do they see bigfoot well enough to make drawings of yet never enough to video? She's been at this a long time and has incorporated about everything except the bigfoot and the kitchen sink in the videos. I'm sure everyone on this forum is savvy enough to know a good video from a poor video and savvy enough to recognize solid unambiguous graphic evidence. I'm reminded of Rocky Mountain Sasquatch Org. The have great video cameras and very powerful zoom. As often as not they include some great wildlife shots from their outings and sometimes rare secretive animals. So it still comes down to if you can encounter anything enough you can record it well enough to present it and remain credible.

March 15, 2016

The dispositive answer to the question is: Why submit evidence for the scrutiny of those with a demonstrated positive talent for not being able to discern good evidence from bad? Period. (Aaaaaaand done...)

March 15, 2016

The three (3) long-term witnesses (aka, "habituators") I'm aware of came forward in an attempt to share their experiences with the larger community. One of them is a R.N. and her husband is a successful surgeon so (IMO) the financial angle was not in play. What these people received was a barrage of scorn followed by harassment of a level that would make most anyone paranoid. When two of these people back away from those that were engaged in gross exploitation (when at first, they came on as sincere facilitators) the vitriol went viral in that Google Earth photo's of their homes were posted online, even on a particular BF website.

That's among the reasons why my advice to a long-term witness is to appreciate what you are experiencing and enjoy the time but in no way expect anything but borrowed trouble from sharing this with the so-called BF Community.

Did these witnesses share their stories on this forum or somewhere else? Tried a quick search here and didn't find anything that looked like it pertained to the details you mention. If you could share a link or PM me, it would be appreciated; I'm interested as this is the first I've heard of it.

March 15, 2016

^^RN and Surgeon husband? Unlikely. Let me tell you about professional people. Professional people know other professional people and had this couple done any research at all they would have skipped the little people and public forums and got to the top. If they were the real deal and Meldrum gets a call from Dr so and so who sends him bigfoot evidence bet Meldrum would bite and bite hard and bet the affair would be handled professionally. However this is bigfootism and people can say they are anything they like and be anything they like. They don't fit the profile.

March 16, 2016

While I do not consider myself a skeptic, I'm also not a hardcore proponent, I am open to finding the truth. I am in talks with ShadowBorn about his area of activity. If we can set up some kind of timeline then I am very capable and willing to come to him and spend 5-6 days camping out ( solo or alongside him ). Unfortunately he has not logged in since the 10th to give some idea of what the area and timeline would be. Hopefully he finds the time to get on the site soon so we can set this up before the window of activity passes us by. I look forward to the possibility of having another possible encounter in my lifetime, if that happens I will be sure to report back here and share what I experienced. If not, I'd be willing to keep trying, you know, for the sake of science ( not my personal love for camping ).

On that note, I do already have a planned trip, mostly for camping, to spend 7 days out in the Manistee National forest ruffing it, maybe there is a possibility there as well, I always have my eyes and ears open!

March 16, 2016

You do raise some good points. But, the bolded absolutely does not prove anything. It is my opinion (and experience) that most people who positively reinforce a statement in the way that was done above are usually fabricating the story, at the least it is a very well known warning sign in some circles!

My position is very simple in that if habituators claim regular activity they should be able to provide the evidence to back that up. How can they expect to be taken seriously when they make extraordinary claims with no evidence or withold evidence. If they didn't want people to know for fear of mockery, then how come they seem to be continually telling people who forward this information on to all and sundry? Don't you think something is off with this scenario? If they are that desperate to avoid publicity and interest then don't tell anyone at all.

We'll have to just disagree on the 'benefits' thing as there seems to be an impasse

Your opinion does count because it's shared by others.

Okay, so Mr. Abee Cee, the hypothetical habituator, comes forward with photos of his BFs. What happens? Some folks will make the effort to authenticate them. Others will knee-jerk "It's Photoshopped!" . And once these pics have been labelled (libeled?) as Photoshopped, those pics and Mr. Abee Cee will be filed under "Fraud" in the BF cabinet, forever and ever and ever. (Don't believe me? The authenticity of the PG film is still questioned today.) Same thing would happen if he submits a video (CGI, you know). And heaven forbid if he actually brings in tissue samples and the genetic testing reveals a human genome. Mr. Abee Cee would then be accused of fraud or, worse, accused of masterminding all the disappearances/abductions/assaults in a 20 mile radius. So again, what's in it for Mr. Abee Cee other than a lifetime of mockery and headache? (Answer: absolutely nothing.)

Regarding the RN and her surgeon husband.....I'll have to read up on that but if it is true, then it supports my rationale that habituators get absolutely nothing but trouble and headaches when they come forward.

Quite frankly while I agree the skeptics will pretty much do as they do to your hypothetical habituation person, I think it would be very constructive to have something in the way of a video made in this half century to argue over and analyze. The P/G film is nearly a half century old. CGI is detectable from what I am told. If something is authentic it cannot be immediately dismissed and will be a new challenge for the skeptics to debunk. Certainly HD video would provide video without reproduction artifacts and the other issues that have plagued study of the P/G film. Should I get something similar, I will engage multiple witnesses at the encounter location, and carefully document the encounter, so as to head off much of criticism I know will be coming. The when, where, etc all seem to be issues with skeptics. The camera will be taken out of use and stored securely. In a way I hope it will not happen. I have seen the pain in Bob Gimlins eyes when he talks about his experience following the public showings of the films. Most of my neighbors do not know what I do out in the woods. The one that does, has all but called me a nut job already. It would get much worse should I get important video.

Sign In

So Why Won't The Habituators Come Forward And Lend Bigfoot Science A Real Hand?

Recommended Posts

Celtic Raider

Guest Crowlogic

SWWASAS

hiflier

georgerm

Incorrigible1

Guest ChasingRabbits

Celtic Raider

Celtic Raider

Guest Crowlogic

WSA

MichaelX

Guest Crowlogic

Twist

SWWASAS

Browse

SSR

Policies

Activity