Yuchi1 Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 IMO, anyone that hasn't lived through a personal encounter is not qualified to make any judgemental statements about Sasquatch or those people having had such experiences. They are living in a state of ignorance and would be better served to refrain from putting such upon public display. To illustrate, some of the recent postings by the "Ignorant Ones" have clearly reinforced the above statements. The real shame is the legions of lurkers with real insights that could have been shared have forever been silenced because of the current culture in existence hereabouts.
Rockape Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, Yuchi1 said: IMO, anyone that hasn't lived through a personal encounter is not qualified to make any judgemental statements about Sasquatch or those people having had such experiences. They are living in a state of ignorance and would be better served to refrain from putting such upon public display. To illustrate, some of the recent postings by the "Ignorant Ones" have clearly reinforced the above statements. The real shame is the legions of lurkers with real insights that could have been shared have forever been silenced because of the current culture in existence hereabouts. Nope, ain't happening. You don't get to run something up a flagpole and expect us to salute it. We will question everything, and we usually ferret out the liars.
norseman Posted August 20, 2016 Admin Posted August 20, 2016 In other words.....we don't need no stinking proof! silence! Its funny that the loudest howlers are the ones with just stories. I very much enjoy looking at looking at davedoe, bcwitness and others field trip pics. I enjoy Big Tree Walkers bone study. Bipedalist studies. Yanno? Guys that get out into the woods and share their findings with us. 1
Lake County Bigfooot Posted August 20, 2016 Author Posted August 20, 2016 Don't get me wrong, I am certainly not bored in life, and my bigfoot research, if I can call it that, is alive and well. I cannot go an hour of the day without my thoughts drifting toward the possibility of an encounter, or something else related. I can listen to eyewitnesses for hours and never grow the least bit bored. When it comes to bigfoot reality, boredom is not the issue, but when it come to discussing that reality it leads to beating a dead horse. Not to say that all discussion concerning the creatures leads to boredom, just the ever droning arguments over this reality. I think that skepticism is healthy, but at the same time once your reality has been adjusted you care little for arguing that fact. Though I have done my share of that here, my real object of being here is to learn something concerning the creatures. I know that if we could plan some expeditions together we could all learn much, that has almost happened for me on occasion here. I hope that in the future I can branch out to some other parts of the country and actually research with other researchers, or should I simply refer to them as hobbyists, either way I am game. Boredom comes with too much idle time not engaging in the real purpose for which you exist.
david75090 Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 Haven't had a personal encounter, but after seeing the Patterson film, I became a believer. I don't believe that was faked. However, I reserve the right to doubt unsubstantiated evidence or call BS when I believe I'm seeing/hearing it. 1
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 (edited) 9 hours ago, Twist said: Ummm....thats a story to relieve boredom? lol. I guess I got one too..... A guy saw something and I think it saw him. I think the guy's father had a pocket knife on him. I'm just jesting here, good effort CM. Oh, I thought you said testing Well, it's real, or as real as it gets, absent physical evidence and finding the other witness. The person had Down's syndrome but was high functioning if that is relevant. Not sure if he had the motivation to be dishonest or not though. Was a resident of that general area. Just reported the details I can be sure of and the guy did not elaborate. There was a bit more to it but that was the gist and I would have had to elaborate or embellish to make a better story. Should be good enough for the BFRO class A I wager. I didn't say something something. It was juvenile Bigfoot. I believe the father was also watching the activity from the ridge with the binoculars. But I don't remember what he was seeing. I also believe that the juvenile was showing an interest in them but disappeared before they got around the small pond to check it out. The implication is that there was obviously adults around as well. Hope that fleshed out out more to your satisfaction. And now I'm bored again, time for work anyway. Edited August 20, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
Guest DWA Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 One surefire cure for boredom? Acquaint oneself with the evidence. Just finished a three-thousand-mile road trip, and I can assure you that when the woods blocked out the civilization, or under cover of darkness, I big-time had my eyes on the roadsides. We don't need the skeptics to argue anything. An argument requires evidence, and they have none. Safety Tip: when someone is constantly asking you for proof, instead of showing you why you are wrong, they have no evidence for what they are saying, and yes, they need that. THE PROPONENTS HAVE ALL THE EVIDENCE. In science, the game is over, but for showing the ignorant the proof.
guyzonthropus Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 DWA- what? You didn't take a scofftic with you on a 3000 mile road trip? How can you consider that unbiased outstripping? Or was it really that you did have one for the first 1500(ok...would you believe 15?) Miles before the "tragic accident"?
guyzonthropus Posted August 20, 2016 Posted August 20, 2016 "Roadtripping" as opposed to "outstripping"(!)....dang spellchecker!!
Yuchi1 Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 23 hours ago, norseman said: In other words.....we don't need no stinking proof! silence! Its funny that the loudest howlers are the ones with just stories. I very much enjoy looking at looking at davedoe, bcwitness and others field trip pics. I enjoy Big Tree Walkers bone study. Bipedalist studies. Yanno? Guys that get out into the woods and share their findings with us. What's pathetic is the loudest FE's (f...,.g experts) are those sans a personal encounter. Y'all are the principal reason the "real people" with "real stories" to tell will never come here, as long as the status quo is maintained. Perhaps, a purge of the IO's is in order?
Patterson-Gimlin Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, DWA said: One surefire cure for boredom? Acquaint oneself with the evidence. Just finished a three-thousand-mile road trip, and I can assure you that when the woods blocked out the civilization, or under cover of darkness, I big-time had my eyes on the roadsides. We don't need the skeptics to argue anything. An argument requires evidence, and they have none. Safety Tip: when someone is constantly asking you for proof, instead of showing you why you are wrong, they have no evidence for what they are saying, and yes, they need that. THE PROPONENTS HAVE ALL THE EVIDENCE. In science, the game is over, but for showing the ignorant the proof. Haha. Your typical response over 9000 times. Thanks for the consistency. I almost agree with you this time. Anecdotal evidence is just that. It is certainly not proof. Then , deep down you already knew that. You are of course wrong about skeptics not having evidence. The evidence for the creature not existing is much more sound than the evidence for. Think like a rational scientist and you can see the light. I had to throw that in. Edited August 21, 2016 by Patterson-Gimlin
norseman Posted August 21, 2016 Admin Posted August 21, 2016 Bindernagel. In order to understand DWA's dogged determination, you must study Bindernagel.
Patterson-Gimlin Posted August 21, 2016 Posted August 21, 2016 I have looked into Bindernagel. Nice fellow. Has some good points.
norseman Posted August 21, 2016 Admin Posted August 21, 2016 But the main thrust of his argument is that we have enough evidence already for a real scientific inquiry. And he likes to quote another scientist unrelated to biology to support that assertion. But science is being bias in this case for whatever the reason, Bindernagel never really says. Never seen him come right out and say shoot the bugger tho.
Recommended Posts